فرهنگ و هنر     

 راديو فردا 

سخنرانی حسن مکارمی در انجمن فرهنگ ایران در پاریس درباره سنت و مدرنیته 

2-

A Look at the Principal Objectives of Modernization in Iran During the Two Last Centuries
Who, in each attempt, will first look and then
Go forward , will make use of his life.
Hafiz, 14th-century Iranian poet
When I asked a famous Iranian historian and social researcher to provide me with a bibliography about the “principal objectives of modernization in Iran during two last centuries”, he responded by saying: “Our cultivation looks like sown fields. Therefore all of our attempts is like this one; we had no strategic objective…”
What Is the Origin of the Question?
How did the Iranians—who managed to establish their own national assembly in 1906, much earlier than most other countries, except those in Europe and North America—completely lose all the beneficial effects of their constitution, which was signed as constitutional patent in 1906, in the constitutional referendum of 1979? These “fruits” were the separation of governing powers—more specifically, the separation of the government and the king’s court, the separation of judicial power from the clerics, and the granting of governmental accountability to the national assembly—and the liberation of the media, which essentially created a fourth power in the country. However, the 1979 constitutional referendum established an “absolute theologian governance” (“Velayate motlagheh Faghih”). According to the new constitution, the Supreme Leader (Vally e Faghih) directly appoints the Minister of Justice, commanders of security forces, and media directors. All other governmental members, such as the national deputies and the President of the Islamic Republic, have to first be approved by the Guardian Council of the Constitution before their election. The Supreme Leader directly, or indirectly through the Minister of Justice, selects the jurists of this council.
Since 1979 the attempt to respond to this question, directly or indirectly, has been the aim of many studies, theses, and articles. Our method here is to focus on the strategic objectives of the two last centuries, from the very onset of the movement that acquainted the Iranian people with the modern world.
Although we are certain that this focus on and modelling of only the main strategic objectives cannot give us a complete answer, we are obligated to choose a limited number of objectives in order to be closer to the real result. The various dimensions that are used in our research are:
- Economical: production, financial, structural, commercial, progress in industrialization
- Political: international, regional, national
- Cultural: religion, education, tradition
- Social and psychological: hope and crises, demographic facts
In our research, we assert the following:
- Iran’s awakening period, provoked by a series of wars with Russia, began in the early 19th century
- The period of our study finishes in 1979, after the institution of the second constitution
- We only focus on the strategic objectives of the modernization in two last centuries; we cannot pay attention to all the details of social, political, regional, and international events
- We try to be objective and do not judge the protagonists: politicians, political parties, and the ideological, historical, or sociological concept. Instead, we try to use the demographic and financial facts, reports, and all the references that might help us answer the questions central to our modeling purposes.
- However, we know that all actions, even the undignified ones, have a place in the historical construction of each society. We can compare our modeling to a great map of a country: Even if we just show the great mountains and rivers, it does not mean that the roads are not important.
The modernization movements in Iran during the two last centuries have been studied by numerous researchers from various fields such as sociology, economics, politics, geopolitics, demography, psycho sociology, and political anthropology. Using well-known theories, they based their studies on the modelling of societal movements: the type of state, the governance, the influence of religion, the impact of tradition, and the cultural bases.
We present here a list of these theories and their conclusions. In brief, the point of our observations is that we did not find a study about the strategic objectives nor their modelling system. Our modelling system needs these following dimensions:
- Economic: production, consumption, exchange, investment
- Development: movement within the different classes of the society and changes to the standard of living
- Cultural: all of the representations of cultural dimensions, such as religion, tradition, knowledge, and know-how
- Organization of society: how the services for the population are produced, how they are evaluated, how they are improved, what is the system of accountability?
- Demographic movement and their origin: population movements and their reasons and impacts
It could be interesting to use an example to better explain the differences of our modelling system versus those of social, economical, and historical studies. For instance, the century-long work-span of a large automobile plant could be modelled by this method. The questions that would be important in our deliberations could include:
- What is produced and for whom, what car models, what are their technical characteristics, and who are the customers?
- How do they build the cars, what are the production processes, what is the cost of a car?
- What is the relation of this unit or factory with the market, according to a study of the movement of capital?
- And finally, how do they prepare for the future of their employees and the modernization of their organization in order to remain competitive?
If the relationship between these elements is harmonious, the activities of the plant can continue and it can be competitive and modern in the long-term future. As it will be observed, that we do not need to know the names of the people responsible nor how many years an individual was the manager. In this analysis, we only need to know how the plant’s strategic objectives changed, why they changed, and what were the effects of these changes. For example, how did the production of the small family car change in the course of a century to the production of the great luxury car?
In our research, we assumed that Iranian society operates like this large plant, and that its product is the civil service that the people receive. Model-building from this point of view may result in new questions that could find their answers in sociological, economical, historical, psychological, cultural, anthropological, and developmental theories. This technique, at least in the beginning, asks experts to try to understand our model before passing judgment. Then, critical questions from the different fields are welcome.
On the other hand, our modelling method uses the same trajectory that an architect uses to understand how an old building lived in its time. The architect tries to draw the plans (after the building’s construction) to understand how the building was designed and constructed, as well as what were the difficulties, mistakes, misconceptions, and theories. By using the strategy map from the Balance Scorecard method, we also try to create broad pictures of the strategic objectives of modernization in Iran across two centuries, mainly by placing all the economic, social, historical, and cultural information about these objectives in the context of geopolitical realities. We know that the documents concerning real reflections about such strategic objectives are rare. For example, a very interesting document named “Yek kalemeh” (“One Word”), written before the Constitutional Revolution, explains that all the problems of Iranian society come from the absence of written “law” (here, “one word” means “law”).
In reality, this research in finding the answer to our main question mentioned above may help us to go even further by trying to find an answer to another important question: “What are the balance sheet results of Iranian society after 1979?” From a strategic point of view, this question is composed of four other questions:
- What are the strategic objectives of the system of the Islamic Republic, and are they achieved?
- What are the strategic objectives of the Iranians, and are they achieved?
- How can we compare the balance sheet of Iran with other countries similar in terms of economical, social, cultural, and geopolitical dimensions?
- And finally, how we can judge these results, where are the weaknesses and strengths in the definitions of these objectives (the system of governance and the people)?
After all, the main objective is to try to construct a country where the people make use of all their opportunities (cultural, natural, geopolitical, etc.) for a better life through the means of modern technology, at least according to the definition of the millennium’s objectives of the United Nations. Such a reflection will enable us to make the past a light for the future.
Definitions of modernity:
The classic definition of modernity by different tendencies can be summarized as:
- Modernity, like Westernization, means to copy and conform to all the principles, acts, and fashions of the West, as the thinkers of modern Iran noted: “We should become Western, from the tail end of the foot up to the head…”
- Modernity means respecting some governance objectives, such as:
o secularism, democracy in a nation-state context
o declaration of universal human rights
o minimum level of comfort and social respect in the use of modern technology
- Modernity, as defined by an enterprising organization, is any opinion that might be accepted by the people in accordance with their perspective of life. This means that if the inhabitants of a country choose to live in harmony with nature by respecting environmental principles, this becomes their definition of modernity, even if other countries continue to abuse nature.
We can conclude that, in the field of our research, modernity from the perspective of Iranian society can be defined as the following:
“Modernity is the respect of secularism, human rights, culture, and history, principles as well as the optimal use of all natural, geopolitical, and cultural potentials. It is to have a secure (externally and internally) nation-state within equated international relations, which can be measured by the indicators of the millennium criterion of the United Nations.”
The Strategic Objectives of Iranian Modernization:
The concept of “strategy” has been borrowed from the military and adapted for business use. In truth, very little adaptation is required as strategy is about means. Moreover, it is about the attainment of ends, not their specification. The specification of ends is a matter of stating those future conditions and circumstances toward which effort is to be devoted until such time as those ends are obtained. Strategy is concerned with how you will achieve your aims, not with what those aims are or ought to be, or how they are established. If strategy has any meaning at all, it is only in relation to some aim or end in view. Strategy is one element in a four-part structure: firstly, the ends to be obtained; secondly, the strategies for obtaining them and the ways in which resources will be deployed; thirdly, tactics or the ways in which resources that have been deployed are actually used or employed; and lastly, the resources themselves, which are the means at our disposal. Thus, together strategy and tactics bridge the gap between ends and means.
Establishing the aims or ends of an enterprise is a matter of policy, which stems from the Greek words politeia and polites (“state” and “people”). Thus, determining the ends of an enterprise is mainly a matter of governance not management and, conversely, achieving them is mostly a matter of management not governance. Those who govern are responsible for seeing to it that the ends of the enterprise are clear to the people who people that enterprise and that these ends are legitimate, ethical, and that they benefit the enterprise and its members.
Understanding these strategic objectives a hundred years after is not easy. It requires a very thorough investigation of various official and international political documents, historians’ essays, speeches by political leaders, and writings by Iranian authors. Rarely can we actually find documents that summarize these objectives, nevertheless naming them as “strategic objectives”. Thus to identify these objectives, we first need to submit all of the dimensions of the event in detail. After placing the information in browsable format, it is possible to find the strategic objectives. Within the language of everyday conversations in Iran about modernization we can familiar hear some ideas. They will help us to have our first schematic impression of these objectives:
- Complete copy of Western culture, organization, and etc.
- Revival of the great Persian origins
- Uniting of all Islamic peoples
- Reconstruction of the country and the opening up of its economic structure, then the rest will change automatically
- Change Iran’s cultural dimension and educational system, then the rest will organize itself
- On the other hand, some intellectuals, when they understood the different standards of living between European and Iranian societies, became greatly pessimistic. They began asserting that the Iranian people, as a race, were degenerated and that it was impossible to find a suitable method for modernization. One of the Ghajar kings, when he heard a lot of talk about the progress and the civilization of other countries after his trip to Europe, reportedly said: “If they have had some progress, it does not mean that we have gone backward...”
- Change the interpretation of all political, social, and humane activities, as well as the theory of conspiracy: “All is decided, arranged, and done by them or by their representatives”. This deep way of thinking greatly influenced the modern political and social thinking of Iran.
- And finally, according to the open-minded intellectuals who believed in a possible path to modernization, Iran should make use of all of their natural and cultural possibilities alongside striving toward technological progress so as to achieve a realistic and happy life for its people. They tried to invent a new procedure more appropriate for society by using the most successful modernization model.
One of the best examples demonstrating the strategic objectives of the Constitutional Revolution was a document named “Yek Kalemh” (“One Word”), which was written by “Mostasharaldoleh” in 1881. This is considered one of the main documents that helped initiate the Iranian enlightenment. The author states that the only way to modernize Iranian society is to have written law (the “one word” referred to in the title) and to use it in all societal activities. In this book, he tried to compare French constitutional law with the verses of the Koran and the monarchic establishment. Ultimately he concluded that there was no contradiction between them and thus, as constitutional law brought modernity to the French, it could also help the Iranians to continue in that direction. In his analysis of the 19 articles of French constitutional law, which he referred to as the “great and basics principles”, he wrote: “I studied the principals of this law for some time and, after deep research and thinking, I find that all of them are confirmed by the glorious Koran.” He went on to explain the “permanent spirit of the articles”: the separation of major and minor articles, distinguishing the major articles, which are permanently correct, from the minor ones that can be changed over time. We can think here that Mostasharaldoleh separated the strategic objectives from the semi-objectives (operational).
The first Iranian Constitutional Law did not go further than the principal articles mentioned by Mostasharaldoleh. Some protests from the “Social-Democrat” faction present in the assembly sought to address the problems related to the large landowners, but they were ignored by the lawmakers. After the Iranian enlightenment in the beginning of 19th century, the Constitutional Revolution was one of the most important events that opened the door of modernization to the Iranian society. It had incredibly important effects on many aspects of Iranian everyday life.
For a better understanding of the events surrounding the strategic objectives of Iran’s modernization after 1906, we will present here three tables:
- The chronology of the political transfer and changes
- The chronology of the social movement and changes
- The important implantations of modernization
Date
The Chronology of Political Transfers and Changes
1797
Fath Ali Shah ascended the Crown.
1803
Assault of the Russian Army on the Caucus.
1813
Pact of non-aggression named Golestan between Russia and Iran.
1825
Assault of Prince Abbas Mirza, the Crown Prince, on the Caucus.
1828
Pact of non-aggression named Torkaman Tchai between Russia and Iran.
1834
Fath Ali Shah died and Mohammad Shah ascended the Crown.
1848
Mohammad Shah died and Nasser al-Din Shah ascended the Crown.
1873
The first trip of the king to Europe.
1896
The king was killed by Mirza Reza Kermani; Mozaffar al-Din Shah ascended the Crown.
1906–1907
Mozaffar al-Din Shah died and Mohammad Ali Shah ascended the Crown.
1909
Mohammad Ali Shah left Iran.
1925
Reza Shah ascended the Crown.
1941
Reza Shah left Iran and Mohammad Reza Shah ascended the Crown.
1979
End of the dynasty of Pahlavi.
Date
Chronology of the Social Movement and Changes
1891
Tobacco protest; concession cancelled by Shah in 1892.
1893
Mirza Reza Kermani and some members of “Bidaran” group were arrested.
1905
In December 1905, two Iranian merchants were punished in Tehran for charging exorbitant prices. They were bastinadoed (a humiliating punishment where the soles of one's feet are caned) in public. An uprising of the merchant class in Tehran ensued, the clergy following suit as a result of the alliance formed in the 1892 Tobacco Rebellion.
The two protesting groups sought sanctuary in a mosque in Tehran, but the government violated this sanctuary and entered the mosque and dispersed the group. This violation of the sanctity of the mosque created an even larger movement, which sought refuge in a shrine outside Tehran. The Shah had no choice, and was forced to agree to the concessions demanded by this larger movement: a "House of Justice".

In a scuffle in early 1906 the government killed a Seyyed (descendant of the prophet Mohammad), and a large number of clergy sought sanctuary in the holy city Qom. Many merchants went to the British embassy for refuge.

1906

In the summer of 1906 approximately 12,000 men camped out in the gardens of the British Embassy. Many gave speeches; many more listened. It is here that the demand for a parliament was born, the goal of which was to limit the power of the Shah. In August 1906, Mozaffar al-Din Shah agreed to allow a parliament and in the fall the first elections were held. In all, 156 members were elected, with an overwhelming majority coming from Tehran and the merchant class.
October 1906 marked the first meeting of parliament, who immediately gave themselves the right to make a constitution, thereby becoming a Constitutional Assembly, and by December 31, 1906, the Shah signed the constitution, modeled primarily from the Belgian Constitution. The Shah was from there on "under the rule of law, and the Crown became a divine gift given to the Shah by the people. Mozaffar al-Din Shah died five days later.
1907
The supplementary fundamental laws of October 7 established the charter of rights and overall system of governance.

1908
Mohammad Ali Shah bombarded the Majles.
1917
On December 15 Russia put in motion its eventual withdrawal from Iran, preparing the way for an indigenous Iranian military.
1919
Iran was coerced to sign a contract with England on August 9, 1919. The terms stipulated in the agreement transferred Iran virtually to the subordinate of the latter.
1921
On February 21 Reza Khan staged a coup together with Seyyed Zia’eddin Tabatabaee.
1935
In 1935, Reza Shah prohibited women from wearing the veil and forced men to wear “Western” dress.
1941
Britain and the USSR invaded Iran to use Iranian railroad lines during World War II. The Shah was forced to abdicate in favor of his son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
1949
In1949 the constitutional law was altered so that the authority vested in the Shah was expanded even more.
1953
Coup against Mossadegh.
1962–1971
Significant land reform in Iran took place under the Shah as part of the socio-economic reforms of the White Revolution, begun in 1962, and agreed upon through a public referendum. The land reforms continued from 1962 until 1971 with three distinct phases of land distribution: private, government-owned, and endowed land.
1973–1975
Oil crises brought an enormous windfall to the Shah’s treasury by 1975.
1979
End of the dynasty of Pahlavi
An analysis of these three tables shows that, in the strategic objectives points of view:
- Until 1921, the objective remains the constitution of 1906
- Between 1921 and 1940 the idea of the nation-state become important, along with issues of security. The symbols of modernization, such as education, roads, and railways, become the main objectives, but the respect of human rights is forgotten.
- Between 1941 and 1953 the same objectives are respected for the Iranian citizen (except rural and nomadic populations), while there is some observable progress made in education, sanitation, and industry. Human rights are respected more than before.
- Between 1953 and 1962 the same objectives are seen, but after the coup the respect of human rights lessens
- After 1962, with the land reform and its effects, the strategic objectives of modernization see an important change for the first time since 1906. Modernization is transferred into improving the quality of life as rural civil services, small clinics, and schools come to the rural villages and nomadic life.
- Between 1968 and 1976 there is a mass migration of peasants to the cities. The industrial activities accelerate as the good price of oil helps the Shah establish a strong army. The one-party system is installed; education and a sort of consumer lifestyle is developed in larger cities.
Using statistical information, the effects of migration, and changes in the way of life and production tools, it is obvious that, from a strategic objective perspective, two important social events took place in 1906 and 1962.
As written in the book Population Geography of Iran by Javan:
“The reduction of the rural population between 1966 and 1976 was more than the previous ten years… More importantly, the migration of rural people to the cities also occurred during this time. This is without doubt an effect of the social and economic evolution in the country after the land reform and the establishment of capitalistic economic principles.” p. 122
“Evidently, the rapidity of civilization comes after the land reform and the destruction of the economic and social structure in the rural areas, and the population movements issued from this.” p. 307
For a better interpretation of the strategic objectives of Iran’s modernization, we added the ratio of rural persons, nomads, and city-dwellers into our argumentation:
- Around 1906, the ratio of Iranian society was the following:
o 25% in the cities
o 75% rural and nomadic peoples, of which 61% lived as nomads or semi-nomads
- Even if the power of lawmakers in the national assembly between 1906 and 1962 (the land reform) was not always guaranteed by the political power, a look at the table showing the ratio of landlord deputies to the population shows their prominence during the 20th century in Iran:

Percentage of landlords in the national assembly
Percentage of the sons of landlords in the nation assembly
1
1906–1908
21
18
2
1909–1911
30
29
3
1914–1916
49
31
4
1921–1923
45
35
5
1923–1925
49
46
6
1926–1928
50
47
7
1928–1930
55
39
8
1930–1932
58
49
9
1933–1935
55
43
10
1935–1937
53
42
11
1937–1939
58
44
12
1939–1941
58
44
13
1941–1943
59
42
14
1943–1945
57
43
15
1947–1949
56
48
16
1949–1951
57
44
17
1952–1953
49
42
18
1952–1956
60
46
19
1956–1960
49
57
20
1960–1963
55
61
21
1963–1967
55
49
22
1967–1971
5
44
23
1971–1975
5
32
24
1975–1979

- Before 1963 there were no rural or nomadic deputies in the national assembly, and we cannot find any laws that give importance to their life.
- Meanwhile, two laws passed before 1953 took 20% of the landlords’ holdings for the construction of sanitation systems and roads for the villages. This 20% was reduced rapidly to 7.5% after the 1953 coup.
Conclusion:
- The main strategic objectives of the modernization of Iran before 1962 concerned less than 30% of the population.
- These objectives were not totally respected by the political power.
- The clerical organization, although weak, maintained itself and continued its work due to special taxes and the separate educational system.
- The main strategic objective of modernization arrived very late (after 60 years) in rural areas (more than 70% of the population) and it was executed very rapidly (in six years) without any active participation of the Iranians.
- After 1962, the traditional production system and life structure of rural people were broken. They started to migrate to the cities, where they had many difficulties trying to manage their production and they had no tools to facilitate their adaptation to the new way of life.
- There was a great distance between the strategic objectives of modernization for the people who lived in the cities (about 30% of the population) and the majority of the population in the countryside. This difference helped the clergy to take control of the leadership of the 1979 Revolution.
The main mistake of the strategic objectives in Iranian modernization from 1906 was that the land reform of 1962, which tried to give the humane conditions to the rural and nomad people, should have taken place simultaneously with the Constitution Revolution of 1906 and gradually continue forward, making way for a harmonious society

3- A Look at Strategic Objectives for Iran’s Modernization

Down Load

4 - Iran Modernization Strategic Map

Down Load