The Persian Paradox and The Kurds: From the 1971 Tents to the Yugoslavia Scenario
Scherco R. Baban | Exclusive to iKurd.net
In 1971, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi staged a grand, hyper-stylized ceremony at Persepolis to commemorate 2,500 years of the Persian Empire. This was more than mere vanity; it was a calculated attempt to summon a “Persian national genie” to anchor a multinational state and serve as a bulwark against the rising tides of Leftist ideology.
However, the irony of Iranian history is profound: for over a millennium, “Persia” was rarely ruled by ethnic Persians. From the fall of the Achaemenid Empire through The Greeks, The Umayyads, Abbasids, Seljuks, Safavids, Zands and Qajars, the sword was almost exclusively held by Kurdish, Arab or Turkic hands.
Even the Pahlavi dynasty and the leaders of the current Islamic Republic—Khomeini and Khamenei—do not represent a “pure” Persian lineage. The historical genius of Persian nationalism, unlike the warriorism of The Kurds and The Turks, lay not in its ability to rule, but in its ability to culturally colonize its conquerors, imposing its language and administrative traditions on whoever held the throne. Perhaps this thanks to Hulegü Khan and The Mongol Invasion and the subsequent establishment of The Mongol Ilkhanate that allowed Persian to solidify its position as dominant cultural, administration and literal language. But this Persian, unlike the homogeneous Kurdish, was heavily influenced by Arabic and other languages beyond repair.
The Failure of the Pahlavi Project
The Shah’s attempt to manufacture a secular-nationalist identity failed in 1971 because his primary rival was not just the Left, but the religious establishment—a force that had historically acted as a junior partner to the throne.
Following the 1979 Revolution, political Islam took the reins with an iron fist. Yet, decades later, we see a resurgence of the “Cyrus Cult”. Fearing this shift, the current authorities suppressed gatherings at the Tomb of Cyrus in 2017. Paradoxically, the Jewish tradition’s attribution of near-prophetic status to Cyrus has only added layers to this complex ancient legacy that the regime now struggles to contain.
The Impending Pivot: The “Yugoslavia Scenario”
As the Islamic Republic faces ideological bankruptcy and an inability to address the material needs of its citizens, it is preparing for a strategic retreat into Pan-Iranism.
We are approaching a Post-Socialist Yugoslavia Scenario. Just as Slobodan Milošević pivoted from Communism to radical Serbian Nationalism to maintain power—igniting a decade of ethnic cleansing and civil war—the current Iranian establishment may abandon its Islamist pretenses in favor of a “Persian Chauvinism.” This shift is designed to preserve the central state at any cost, using “territorial integrity” as a shield against international intervention.
The Kurdish Liberation Movement: Challenges and Risks
The rise of Persian Chauvinism, likely supported by a resurgent Azeri nationalism (often fueled by Pan-Turkic interests), presents an existential threat to the Kurds of East Kurdistan (Rojhelat). If the regime pivots toward radical nationalism, we can expect:
-
The Fate of Kermashan (Kermanshah): There is a high risk that Kermashan could repeat the fate of Kirkuk of Iraqi Kurdistan, once a Kurdish majority city but now lost to the central rule of Baghdad . The regime may attempt to use sectarian and dialectical differences to peel away Shia Kurds, Feili Kurds, and followers of the Yarsani/Yazidi faiths from the broader Kurdish national identity.
-
Ethnic Cleansing and ISIS-Style Tactics: To suppress Kurdish aspirations, nationalist forces may resort to the same brutal tactics used by ISIS to “cleanse” disputed territories.
-
The “Territorial Integrity” Mantra: Global superpowers will likely prioritize the stability of borders over the rights of minorities. This “mantra” will be the primary tool used to justify the suppression of Kurdish autonomy in the name of preventing a “failed state.”
Are We Prepared?
The Kurdish movement must confront difficult questions:
- Are the parties of East Kurdistan unified enough to combat the deliberate fragmentation of the Kurdish nation along sectarian (Sunni/Shia) and dialectical lines? Are these parties mature enough to unite around a common cause?
- How will the movement navigate a future where Turkey actively supports Pan-Turkic elements in Iranian Azerbaijan to the detriment of Kurdish territorial continuity?
- Is there a strategy to protect “disputed” cities like Urmia and Kermashan from the looming “Yugoslavia” style civil conflict?
The coming tide of chauvinism will not be silent, and the West will not risk a total collapse of the Iranian state. Instead, they will likely wait for the departure of the current regime to redraw the map under a “refined” but still centralized system.
The Kurds must be ready for a reality where the enemy changes its face from the Mullah to the Nationalist or even a Shah but maintains the same iron grip on the Kurdish Lands.
Scherco R. Baban, an independent researcher and analyst specializing in Kurdish Question and The Middle Eastern security, economical and cultural dynamics.
The opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of iKurd.net or its editors.
Copyright © 2026 iKurd.net. All rights reserved.
Related posts:
The Resurrection (Ba’ath) Party – Before the Iran-Iraq War
Iran Regime Change Vs. Map Change
A Root Cause Review of the Israeli-Hamas Conflict
The Assassination of Abdurrahman Ghassemlou: No Friends but the Mullahs?
What makes a good NATO ally? The Case of Turkey
Iran, a Failed Country by Enemies Within
Reza Pahlavi’s return may further threaten Kurdish rights in Iran
The Sun Also Rises in Western Iran
The Deposed Kings of Iran
The Mustashar and the Jash – A View from the Position of ‘Iraqi National Unity’ on the ‘Descendants of Treason’
