International Society for Iranian Studies

Religious Minorities in Iran by Eliz SanasarianReview by: Mohammad HemmasiIranian Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1/3 (Winter - Summer, 2002), pp. 260-262Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of International Society for Iranian StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4311463 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 07:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

International Society for Iranian Studies and Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Iranian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.253 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:09:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

260 Reviews

The book is an informed account of a Muslim woman who wants to make sense of her faith and culture.

Fereydoun Safizadeh Boston University

Religious Minorities in Iran, Eliz Sanasarian, Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2000, xviii + 229 pp., tables, photographs, $59.95 (cloth).

In the preface of the book, the author sets the stage for writing about state-reli- gious minority relations in the Islamic Republic of Iran with an impartial treat- ment of this highly sensitive subject. She manages to maintain that position throughout the book. The reader is often reminded that, "The purpose is not to blame, condemn, or sit in judgment but simply to understand" (p. 106) the dynamics of state-minority relations. Although one can find an extensive body of literature on various Iranian religious minorities, they usually deal with one specific religion, often are biased, and rarely have tackled the topic in an all- inclusive and comparative approach as is done in this slim book. Besides some sporadic news items on religious minorities, no one has ventured to analyze this complex subject in Iran since the 1979 revolution. The author presents a wealth of information and analytical explanations regarding the treatment of Zoroastri- ans, Jews, Armenians, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Bahais, and other Christian denominations, especially during the fateful decade of 1979-1989.

The non-Muslim minority issue has had a turbulent history, going back hundreds of years prior to the advent of the Islamic Republic. Their experiences involve periods of relative calm and co-existence, and much longer periods of segregation, oppression, and harassment forcing them into the status of subordi- nation and submission to the Muslim majority and the state. The Islamic Repub- lic recognizes Zoroastrian, Jewish, Armenian, Assyrian, and Chaldean religions as "Ahl al-Kitab" and allows them to elect their own political representatives, practice their religions freely, and maintain their cultural heritage. Although improvement is reported in the position of the "recognized religious minorities" (RRM), their overall marginal status continues. However, the state's treatment of the Bahais and the Iranian Christian converts is fundamentally different from those of the RRM. They are considered apostates with no religious rights and protection. These two groups are often accused of proselytizing among Muslims, an act that is not tolerated in the Islamic theocratic system. The Bahais, the Ira- nian Christian converts, and the Jews have suffered the most in recent decades, although for different reasons. In dealing with these three groups the "perception to motivation to the most severe action" (p. 110) sequence of minority harass- ment became a reality, especially in the early 1980s. Apparently a multitude of groups and motivations were behind the atrocities committed against the mi- norities. The RRM (Zoroastrians, Armenians, Assyrians, and Chaldeans) have

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.253 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:09:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews 261

been treated relatively better. The reader is often reminded that, in the period under study, the Muslim majority was also the subject of state intrusions and hardship like the non-Muslims.

Two major differences between the shah's regime and the Islamic Republic are identified with regard to the religious minorities. In post-revolutionary Iran, a greater inter-minority discourse is taking place and the nature of state-society relations is highly localized. The non-Muslim representatives often showed a unified approach to secure and defend their mutual rights, particularly during crucial constitutional debates. Although they were not able to eliminate many of the discriminatory elements from the constitution (e.g., in penal codes and in the economic realm), they fully supported the constitution and often ask for its full implementation to safeguard their communities against state interventions and abuses committed by extremists. During the 1980s, state-society relations and policies varied between Tehran and provinces, among communities and relig- ious groups, as well as over time. For example, non-Muslims, especially Bahais and Jews, suffered more severely in Shiraz than the rest of the country. Yet, state policies toward non-Muslims were never uniformly rigid and in time "flexibility became the norm in state-minority relations on communal affairs" (p. 92). An overall improving trend is reported in the state-minority relations since 1989.

The RRM, protected by their constitutional rights, have been active in responding to allegations, in correcting the distortions about their religions and communities, and in demanding actions by the state to rectify mistakes and pre- vent overarching intrusions. Three factors, "namely fatalism, segregation, and fear of coercion were part of their response to the Islamic Republican regime" (p. 136). To survive as a minority, each group has also learned to adapt to a sub- ordinate status in the prevailing social system. Since 1979, the size of the relig- ious minority population of Iran has declined significantly, mainly through immigration to Europe, North America, Australia, and Israel. Another remark- able development is a closer sense of intra-community belonging among adher- ents of each religion. Those who remain in Iran are fully conscious of their unique societal positions and show a greater interest in their religious ceremo- nies than before the 1979 revolution.

Religious Minorities in Iran is a meticulously researched book, with an extensive bibliography, forty-four pages of informative notes, glossary, tables, and photographs. The addition of a reference map showing cities named in the text would have been helpful to readers who may not be familiar with the geog- raphy of Iran. Scholars and students of religion, politics, minority and human rights, and Iranian affairs are the prime audiences for this book. It is written in a lucid and jargon-free style that makes it interesting reading for non-specialists as well. Although the author is critical of the theocratic political system, she often mentions the state's flexibility and occasions when the concerns of the RRM have been taken into consideration. Yet the Iranian penal code treats Muslims and non-Muslims differently. The Islamic Republic's image in the international arena reinforces the author's conclusion that: "Scapegoating non-Muslim mar- ginal groups has been a historical blemish for Iran, its version of Islam, and state

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.253 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:09:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

262 Reviews

policies" (p. 163). The recommendation to the state, the Muslim majority, and the non-Muslim minorities is to "contemplate" the causes and consequences of this long historical relationship, to learn from past mistakes, and guard against repeating them in the future.

Mohammad Hemmasi University of North Dakota

History and Documentation of Human Rights in Iran, Shirin Ebady (translated by Nazila Fathi), New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press, Persian Studies Series, Number 18, 2000, ISBN: 0-933273040-1, x + 122 pp.

This is a translation of Thrrkhchah va asnad-i huquq-i bashar dar Irian, pub- lished in Tehran in 1373/1994-95. The Persian title printed for the purpose of the ISBN contains a typographical error, indicating from the start that the English translation needed much better copyediting. The original Persian version con- sists of three sections. The first offers an evaluation of international human rights documents, especially those that were drafted after the establishment of the United Nations; the second and the most valuable section deals with the domestic laws in the Islamic Republic of Iran that, as Ebady shows, are in con- flict with international human rights norms; and the third section offers, in Per- sian translation, the texts of the main human rights declarations, covenants and treaties issued by the UN. The translator properly omits the last section for the obvious reason that the official texts of these documents are widely available in print and on the Internet.

The preface to the English version states: "The author of this book has pro- vided a very thorough historical analysis of the declaration of human rights, together with international conventions, covenants and protocols. . ." Certainly this is true for the Persian version and for readers in Iran, for whom the coura- geous writer has performed a valuable service. However, scores of valuable books and articles are available in the United States, describing and analyzing the historical evolution of human rights. In comparison, what part 1 offers to the English readers is far from being a "very thorough historical analysis." It may even be misleading. For example, the Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee are the two UN bodies monitoring human rights. The author discusses the working of the Committee but does not do the same for the Commission. This is puzzling, since for all practical purposes the Commission on Human Rights and its Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities have played a greater role than the Committee in the evolution of human rights. The Commission is the effective supervisory body that appoints the country-based special representatives, the thematic special rap- porteurs, and working groups. After all, it is the Commission that has placed the Islamic Republic, since 1984, under its special procedure and appointed the

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.253 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:09:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions