IDENTITY, ETHNICITY &TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY
BY M. K. SADIGH

When we meet some one or see something, our first reaction is to identify the person or the elements that we see. This behavior is so instinctual that we do it unconsciously and effortlessly and never crosses our mind to seek a reason for it. In fact our pattern of behavior in searching the identity of a person or an object, or a place is the most important and significant motivation for gaining knowledge in the process of growth in our life. Inquiring the knowledge, for acquaintance of persons, objects, or places indeed goes back deep in to the instinct of animism, the attribution of conscious life to natural objects or to nature itself, or the belief in the existence of spiritual beings that are separable or separate from bodies. The hypothesis holding that an immaterial force animates the universe.
This animistic motivation had been evolved from the realization of the manifestation of the existence of concealed powers within the boundaries of our physical, tangible and visible world. A conceptual development that a creature has to understand his potentials, and the potential of the world around him in order to use his defense mechanism for survival accordingly. It is only by having such mechanism that the live creature will determine his territorial domain where he can ascertain his security and the appropriation for living. He has to claim a domain where he is naturally content, and biologically functional.
In essence the territorial claims, as a natural derivative of the defense mechanism are the first impulse for all the creatures to recognize their territorial limitation and create a boundary between them-selves to defend and be protected. In the historical context among human societies, the territorial claim and identity are the two most profound, complex, and intertwined issues: the territorial instinct which in human life developed to tribalism, ethnicity, and nationalism, and the identity which is indicative of physical, and intellectual domains of recognition of natural rights. These two issues could cover a vast spectrum of human activities, and certainly could not be elaborated in a short inquiry.
Underlying these two issues is the significance of their historical relevance. Within a nation of more than 6 distinct ethnic groups such as Iran, complexity of ethnicity, and the identity crisis reveal clearly in all the aspects of daily life, caused a profound undeniable social dilemma as it does in any other countries, for example, Azari - Persians, or Kurds - Persians, and others conflictions. In spite of this complexity, in the case of both cultures, neither historical assimilation nor acculturation changed their ethnicity status the way that acculturation of ethnicity happens in United States. These ethnicities are regenerated in a unified identity as, Iranian; both of these ethnics call themselves Iranian. In the course of the historical subversions whether it was an invasion or internal conflicts, this common identity was not abandoned. In spite of the fact that any ethnicity desires to have self-governing sovereignty, but such desire could not always be materialized for variety of reasons. It seems the cultural dignity of all these different ethnic in spite of such desire, did not polarized the unity we always needed to maintain under the identity of, Iranian, and some mysterious factors played its role in social justification.
The vast spectrum of the cultural diversity contributed their richness into the holistic national body and played a constructive role in the formation of Iranian nation. For this vital constructive contribution to the integrity of our cultural values, we should acknowledge their significance, rather than marginalizing them. This acknowledgment particularly is crucial when the obscurity of irrational and meaningless nationalism corrupts, compels, annihilates, and diminishes the basic human rights of ethnic as it is the case in relation between Turkish with Kurds, or Kurds with Iraqi, as the subordinated ethnics to the level of marginal and expulsive measures. Considering the roles of ethnicity within a social structure as a simple social compartmentalization, diminishes the national unity, and produces negative impacts on all phases of life: social evaluations, social relations, and variety of destructive social behaviors.
But why we raise the issue of territorial integrity, and identity? These are the two important issues that comprise the very basic ground for those of us that feel especial, distinct, and outstanding and deserve to not only be noticed, but also respected. Such selectivity and distinction only is attributed to patriots and nationalists. We raise the issue of patriotism, or nationalism assuming that our claim is backed -up by the historical prides inherited from our ancestors. We brag about the cultural achievements that being acknowledged by the world and we are proud to identify ourselves with that pride. But unfortunately this is not always the case. Most of us are repeatedly and sympathetically introduce ourselves as proud patriots or nationalist, assuming that by doing so we prove our identity to the rest of the world. But we do not realized that people looking for and waiting to see what kinds of profess we will present them with to back-up our claims. What is that identity that every one so desperately seeking to materialize, and what is its dimension in time and space historically?
To start, perhaps we can satisfy ourselves by saying that sometime in the down of history our ancestor's repeatedly substantiated ideas by some proven values that not only other did not posses, but also rather they acknowledged and learned from them. The substantiated facts that some time in the history of man kind for the first time were generated by the geniuses of our ancestors and handed in to us and we perfected it and now is a major contribution to human culture. Does this really enough to put us to the top of the humanity's list as a distinctive rank, and are we really in such position, with a great certainty proven at least to ourselves that our ancestors were the founding fathers of human civilization and we are their children?

Perhaps we are proud that our ancestors were in such a historical position that dominated a big part of the world of their time and therefore, had supremacy over the others. If this is actually the base of our pride and therefore, our motivation for patriotism and proven identity, we are definitely in the wrong truck.
Acclamation of such dimensions practically could be heard from every human being in relation to their ancestry's references. They can some how claim their ancestors created and established some cultural grounds that without that, the civilization of today's human did not existed. They say when western anthropologists are digging in their backyard, in fact, they are searching for their own, identity, and perhaps this is the answer to all those puzzling claims and counter claims. If we were absolutely sure that we found our identity and every one of us are the selected, distinct, and chosen ones, as the Jews claim God selected them to be the channel between the whole humanity and him, then there would not be room for any thing to prove. But this is not the case, not with such certainty.
The fact is that none of us could be absolutely certain of such claim, We have to accept the fact that the theological doctrine of creation which asserts the world was created in a short phase of time in six days and in six thousand years as claimed by bible, could not possibly be enough to maturate an organism that needs million of years to develop or adjust to a new environment. The transformation of human from monkeys still is halted by missing link. When we define an abstraction we do so to pause for new beginning that does not means we reached the level of conclusive perfection. The compartmentalization of historical facts are all pauses to avoid the confusions and not necessarily conclusive.
Having introduced these basic issues, now we have to demonstrate certain descriptive historical analysis of each issue in their holistic evolutionary context. Where they begun, and how far they evolved from other motivational factors, and how did they became the genesis of all the complexity of today's prejudicial problems and caused a variety of controversial outcomes? The most pragmatic method of handling these complex issues seems to be by modularity of small group.
Historical document from the primitive era does not indicate any trace of the existence of any form of, identity, neither for the people and groups, nor for individuals, or even the social elements or elements of their subsistence. It seems every recognition simply was based on instinctual response, or perceptual reaction. Beyond this level it came the human's recognition of something non-tangible or rather spiritual. This evolves from the assumption of mobility, asserting the existence of a dynamic, or, animism, which manifested in all the elements of life. As matter of fact animism was the first foundation for human spirituality and religious believe.
The general perception of animation, motion, life, spirit, and power has to become more institutionalized to motivate the human society, to be more concentrated to centralized power. The search for this centralized power could be simply any thing with a magical sophistication to hunt and fascinate the human. The, totem, came to existence to play this role, varieties of them: Totem could be a tree, a mountain, a lion, a ruptured volcano, a wild sea, a powerful man, or any thing possessing some kind of non match able force. Now the human created his own Gods and many of them, Totemism constituted the first ground for, identity, the individual who was the member of a group identified with a particular, totem, was related to that totem, whether that totem was a lion, a bear, a tree, or the strongest man of the tribe.
Some scientist profess that primitive men had a system of organized grouping for recognition of the animals, and natural organism, called, taxonomy, to categorize the world around them. However, this was not to be translated by standardized biological interpretation or definition. The concept of differentiation of human grouping started when the clans were formed, the formation of tribal structure evolved from these clans and larger and more complicated societies were developed. In a larger view a nation comprised of varieties of units, in fact formed from constituents who only bound them by political and economical relations and not necessarily by traditions, religious believes, but rather by common interest. These separate social units are, ethnicities,
The populations of all nations of the world are more or less diverse with respect to ethnicity or race. (Ethnicity here includes national, cultural, religious, linguistic, or other attributes that are perceived as characteristic of distinct groups.) Such divisions in populations often are regarded as socially important, and statistics by race and ethnic group are therefore commonly available. The extent in which evaluation of the richness of cultural values greatly depends on the diversity of ethnicities comprise of, the cultural, religious, linguistics and even the artistic expression. Within a nation possessing the constituents of different ethnicity, ethnics, refer to sizable groups of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage.
Being a member of a particular ethnic group, relating to, or distinctive of members of such a group associate every aspects of their lives to that ethnicity, such as; ethnic restaurants, ethnic arts, ethnic clubs, ethnic churches. Relating to a people not Christian or Jewish; heathen. Ethnic. A member of a particular ethnic group, especially one who maintains the language or customs of the group. [Middle English, heathen, from Late Latin ethnics, from Greek ethnics, from ethnos, people, and nation: When in a Middle English text written before 1400 it is said that a part of a temple fell down and made a great destruction of ethnykis, one wonders why ethnics were singled out for death. The word ethnic in this context, however, means gentile, coming as it does from the Greek adjective ethnics, meaning National, foreign, gentile the adjective is derived from the noun ethnos, people, nation, foreign people that in the plural phrase taethnT meant foreign nations. In translating the Hebrew Bible into Greek, this phrase was used for Hebrew gyhm gentiles; hence the sense of the noun in the Middle English quotation. The noun ethnic in this sense or the related sense Heathen is not recorded after 1728, although the related adjective sense is still used. But probably under the influence of other words going back to Greek ethnos, such as ethnography and ethnology, the adjective ethnic broadened in meaning in the 19th century. After this broadening the noun senses a member of a particular ethnic group, first recorded in 1945, came into existence.
Different group and segment of a large society that distinguishes themselves from the rest of the society, and they are bound together, because of linguistic, nationality, and race are considered as ethnicity. Within a large society which is composed of a great numbers of ethnic groups could create a great deal of diversity, this diversity is not necessarily the cause of social disorientation but rather, if channeled appropriately the best motivational factors for the cultural richness. Having said that, it is important to acknowledge the controversial reality of the social relations, social and individual encountered, and variety of contradictions among the different ethnic groups within a society. These distinct parts of a whole society could be the base for social growth, as well as social discrimination and disorientations.
Historically the genesis of the ethnicity within a society is the out come of conquests of bringing the people of different cultural backgrounds under a supreme power, unify them under one system. It is a social and historical fact that these people will remain subordinated until they will gain enough social dignity and stability. In many cases, some time they are assimilated in to the main cultural structure of the nation -state. Importing the labor forces for specific purpose or materialization of some national projects will also be the basic grounds for the manipulation of ethnicities within a nation. In decades of fifties and sixties Germany desperately compelled to rebuild the damages of the wartime. For this reason a great numbers of the labor forces were imported from Turkey. The flux of a great population of Turks created a large Turkish ethnicity in Germany that became an explosive national issue. The same pattern more or less was a common practice among the other nations. Another historical reason for the creation of ethnicities is the political and religious persecutions that drove people from their native lands.
Before 20th century the imperial powers did not have problems with the ethnicities as much as they have now, because the ultimate governing power of empire forcefully created the unity required for social stability. The basic problem is the relation between the nation-state and the ethnic groups, which always strive to create national unity. Most of the attempts from the nation-state to eliminate the diversity of ethnic group by annihilate them or by expulsion ended up with a great historical disaster. The historical expulsion of Jews by Alexander II. 1818-1881. Czar of Russia (1855-1881) who ironically also emancipated the serfs in 1861. And Nazi policy against the Jews during World War II, and many similar other incidents among other nations not only did not solve the problems of ethnicity within the nation- state but also expanded the level of controversial tensions.
In a nation of 63, millions population, Iran is one of those nation-state with the highest level of ethnic diversity. The nation so population comprised of six distinct ethnicities: Kurd, Lure, Bakhtiari, Balooch, Torkeman, and Ghashghai. Beside these ethnicities the greater diversity is between the people of Azerbaijani - Turkish speaking culture. Azerbaijan is a region of northwest Iran. It was settled by the Medes before the eighth century B.C. and was a separate kingdom after the death of Alexander. A part of it became a constituent republic of southeast European U.S.S.R. It was formed from territory relinquished to Russia by Persia in 1813 and 1828 and became a constituent republic in 1936. Baku is the capital. Population, 6,614,000,
In the course of history there had always been cultural conflicts between the Fars whom are the dominant culture and Azaris. The forceful process of acculturation by Iranian central government always created a deep controversial social and even personal distress between Azari and Persian people in their social relations. The level of social tension greatly reflected in their popular expressions, jokes, and even poetry and literature.
The other motives for ethnicity crisis, which occurred repeatedly in the history and in several countries is forceful expulsion of different ethnicity. Expulsion of the Moors and Jews from 15th - century Spain, the expulsion of the Arabs and East Indians from several newly independent African countries in the 60Õs and 70s. Massacres of 2000,000 Armenians by Turks, massacre of Kurd by Turks and Iraqis.
More common solutions to the problems of ethnicity have been assimilation or acculturation, whether forced, induced, or voluntary. Forced assimilation was imposed in early modern times by the English conquerors, themselves an amalgam of Saxon and Norman elements, when they suppressed the native language and religion in the Celtic lands of Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. Similar methods were employed by their French contemporaries as they extended their conquests into the langue d'oregion of southern Europe. Through considerably less brutal methods, the Chinese ethnic groups in Thailand and Indonesia have been legally induced to adopt the dominant culture through a process called "directed acculturation." A variant of this process has been the more or less voluntary assimilation achieved in the United States and the rubric or slogan of "Americanization."
This is largely a result of the unusual opportunities for social and economic mobility in the United States and of the fact that for the European ethnic groups, in contrast to the racial minorities, residence in the United States was a matter of individual or familial choice, not conquest or slavery. But both public policy and public opinion also contributed to American assimilation. Another way of dealing with ethnic diversity, one that holds more promise for the future, is the development of some form of pluralism, which usually rests on a combination of toleration, interdependence, and separatism. One of the most notable long-term solutions has been that of Switzerland, where the three major ethnic groups are concentrated in separate cantons, each enjoying a large measure of local control within a democratic federation. Another, less stable federal pluralism is found in Canada, where the French Catholic province of Quebec is increasingly assertive about its desire for complete independence and forced acculturation of its own ethnic minorities.
The political function of ethnicity is more important today than ever, as a result of the spread of doctrines of freedom, self-determination, and democracy throughout the world. In 19th-century Europe, these doctrines influenced various movements for the liberation of ethnic minorities from the old European empires and led to some partially successful attempts to establish nation-states along ethnic lines, as in the case of Poland and Italy. After World War II the rising tide of democratic aspirations among the colonial peoples of Asia and Africa led to the breakup of empires established by European conquerors, sometimes areas of enormous ethnic complexity, without regard to ethnic considerations. The result was a proliferation of national states, some of which experienced local conflicts with ethnic-related causes. Most of the new countries in Asia were relatively homogeneous, but the majority of those in sub-Saharan Africa were composed of many relatively small ethnic groups whose members spoke different languages.
A reference to the historical reality of ethnicity demonstrate the fact that in the course of history people are migrated to different regions where they have been subjected to a forced, or voluntary acculturation. Perhaps in many cases it took several generations to be completely assimilated in to the main culture on nation-state. As Iranian most of us, we had been subjected to the process of acculturation whether we are from one of those six constituent tribes or from Azerbaijan or Fares. This process is painfully repeated in our lives here in the forced exile or voluntary immigration. We had faced it in the past in our homeland and we are facing it now in abroad. The fact remain unchanged that we the Iranian the people whom withstood more than 2000 years of political, cultural, religious, pressure under one rubric or slogan of Persian or Iranian should not lose their site of our identity.
This is not a superficial legacy, borrowed or stolen from others. It is the status formed, created, cherished, and protected throughout the countless historical invasions from destructive and subversive invasions of Assyrian, Greeks, Romans, Mongols, Turks, and Arabs. None of them dared to convert us to themselves. Undoubtedly we learn from them if they had anything human and worthy of learning to offer, enriched our knowledge, assimilated a vast numbers of wisdom in our cultural treasures but we remain Iranian. This is not one of that self-satisfactory brag. A simple reference to the most prominent historian such as Will and Ariel Durant, and Arnold Toynbee could easily prove the historical role that our people and their cultural richness played in every outstanding human achievement throughout the human history.
It is difficult to establish the origins of racist thinking that always targeted the ethnicities, but certainly one of the most influential of such thinkers was the French writer and diplomat Joseph-Arthur, comet de Gobineau, who published his four-volume Essay on the Inequality of Human Races in the middle of the 19th century. He taught the superiority of the white race over all others, and, among the whites, of the Aryans as having reached the heights of civilization. Gobineau's most important follower was Houston Stewart Chamberlain, who published The Foundations of the 19th Century in German in 1899. An Englishman by birth, Chamberlain spent most of his life in Germany, where he was so popular with the ruling class that he became known as the Kaiser's anthropologist. He, too, insisted on the superiority of the Tautens, whom he characterized physically as being for the most part tall, fair, and dolichocephalism (longheaded), that is to say, corresponding to the Nordic type. Chamberlain regarded the Jews as alien in spirit to the favored Tautens, although he admitted the difficulty of distinguishing Jews from Germans on the basis of physical characteristics alone.
It is absurd to place us in a supreme level in order to contrast our position with the rest of the humanity, the way Gobineau and Houston Stewart Chamberlain did. The history testified the occurrence of atrocity committed by those whom really believed in their ideology to the extent that nothing prevented them of assuming the other ethnicities should be enslaved and exploited to the level of extinction. The roots of ethnic cleansing came from the idea of purification of races influenced and directed by Chamberlain's ideology and followers. The supremacy of man due to enhancement of his spirit to the highest level of perfection and purity was the basic doctrines of Mithraism, and Zoroastrianism. They never aimed at the exclusion of other human different from himself or herself, but rather applied to the holistic body of humanity. We the Iranian proudly claim that we were one of the first cultures professed the idea of purity, greatness, and supremacy of truth and justice over the evil (Aharomazda stands for ultimate goodness, purity, and perfection and Ahriman stands for evil) an undeniable dualism that was adopted extensively by all other religions as the symbols of two sides of human. Herodotus in one of his seven historical reports which mostly he wrote about the wars between Greeks and Persians reported that the manners, and behaviors of the Persians based on their religious believes was completely differed from other people especially Greeks, he said, Persians never burned or destroyed the cities, unless they were extremely forced to do so, never destroyed the cultural treasures and plundered them, or annihilate defeated or subordinated people, or their cultural establishments, and never forced their subordinate to abandon their languages, traditions or religious believes, the way the Greek habitually did,, . Liberation of Jews from Babylonian slavery by Persian king in 444 before Christ is one of the best historical examples of this claim.
Hopefully after this brief historical reference, we can deduce that we the Persians just like other people of the world had gone trough variety of historical fluctuations, our nation comprised of numbers of ethnicities which undoubtedly is the result of several invasions, annihilations, disorientations, and some painful reorientations. In spite of all these historical facts still we are a proud amalgamation of variety of ethnicities, not being annihilated by the main culture as we see in the case of European nations, remained, Persian, with a distinct identity, stronger, and more committed to maintain our, identity, The land were the genesis of our identity as a nucleus of our existence still is not being degenerated or deformed geographically to a name but rather a respectful entity.
It is promising for us, the Persian that so far we are at home, even away from home, and not homeless. Perhaps we are nostalgic of being away from our homeland, but always carry our identity with us no matter were we go. Perhaps there are more Persian poems written out sides of Iran than inside. There are more literatures being published in Persian language and about Persian cultures than any other cultures in similar international condition in abroad. It seems the real cultural domain is in our hearts and minds. When every Iranian carries all his cultural heritage and attachments with him, he treasures all his inheritance, cherish and protects them, pass it on to our younger generation to be guarded dearly. In every corner of the estrangement, we hear the Persian poetry, music, and see Persian arts modern and miniatures and carpets, even smell the Persian food, this tells us we are alive, unbeatable. We are the people whom survived the invasions of Greeks, Romans, Mongols, Turks, Arabs, and destructive foreign political conspiracies, and off course the invasion of fanaticism. We were not and will not assimilate or acculturated to something else that we are not and proudly remain, Iranian, and Persian.

M. K. SADIGH
New York, Jan. 12- 2001

This article was published in Persian heritage on Jan. 12. 2001

The sources being used for this article are:

SURVIVING IHE FUTURE ARNOLD TOYNBEE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
NEW YORK AND LONDON, 1971---THE REFORMATION WILL DURANT
THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION VI A HISTORY OF EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION FROM WYCLIF TO CALVIN: 1300-1564 SIMON AND SCHUSTER NEW YORK: 1957---ENCYCLOPEDIA OF BRITANICA CD. 1999,
AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY CD. 1999