The tragedy of Reza Shah
In pre-WWI days, Russia and Britain had eyes on Iran for its oil fields, entry to India and warm water ports. They divided Iran up, made puppets of the reigning Shahs, and joint forces to intervene such that a major political/religious/social revolution towards modernisation and a republic ended with much frustration but no concrete success. Then this military guy Reza Khan rose to power, first among Russian-trained troupes of Iranian Cossacks, to be the top man in Iran military. He quelled Turkish, British and Russian forces and restored an integral territory for Iran. When the last Shah of the previous dynasty abdicated he became Shah.
He's a man with iron will and fierce sense of nationalism. He couldn't stand above all surrendering territory and resources to foreign powers, or accepting any form of aid or interaction (always believed to be selfish and ill-intentioned) with foreigners. So he strengthened the military and was dead set on modernization and progress. Built the hallmark of Iran's modernization - a trans-Iran railway - refusing all foreign loans. He still tried to employ mysticism to a certain degree to get popular with the people, but believed Islam to be the cause of Iran's backwardness, so glorified ancient Persia instead to justify his rule. Under that justification, he modernized infrastructure and education, minimized power of Islamic religious leaders, lifted veils of women, uprooted nomadic tribes, all with brute military force and not without bloodshed.
Reza Shah failed to realise Shia Islam is an integral part of Iranians. It was impossible to just do away with it within a few decades as an obstacle to modernisation. Eg, he forbade public self-flagellation during a ceremony to commemorate martyred Islamic leaders in the past. From the surface it sounded sensible, because it seems perverse and fanatic to inflict pain upon self. But the Iranian masses had been fanatics. To whom could the people complain about centuries of unjust ruling, invasions, getting trampled by foreigners? It was only through wailing and real intense physical experience in the context of religion, and thus identifying with a bygone idol who sacrified himself for justice, that the pent-up passions, sufferings and bitterness found an outlet. With such intensity it's hard to stop asking the people to be emotional overnight. It's like if a person's extreme about something you should calm him down first, make him see reason instead of directly forcing him to do the opposite. Reza Shah didn't get this. Or he got it but thought he could make it anyway. So ended up being the brutal, unjust dictator.
Even more sadly, during WWII the foreign forces that he drove out came back to claim Iran in all righteousness of fighting against the Nazis. Reza Shah's cherished trans-Iran railway was needed to deliver supplies to Russia. Poor Iran's neutrality meant nothing. The army Reza Shah used large part of the treasury to build was not much compared to the Allied forces. When he refused to join the Allies because the thing he hated most was to let his hard-earned independence bow to foreign will (and the same wills too) once again, he was put into exile. After having fought much for the independence of his land, he left it in humiliation, never to see it again.
The coming and going of this Reza Shah has an aura of the tragic drama. It's more to my personal taste than any number of stories of martyred religious leaders. I guess that's because I believe it's healthier to get some control over own life and create balance. Intense outbursts are exhausting and shorten lifespan. But after you've done all you could and still it didn't work, whether or not you did it in the right way, it's despairing and has the make for a tragedy. Then it seems to follow that researchers have great potential to lead tragic lifestyles. But the kind of stuff we do, in our lifetime or ultimately, are they really that consequential after all? Maybe it's just me. Then again maybe not.
He's a man with iron will and fierce sense of nationalism. He couldn't stand above all surrendering territory and resources to foreign powers, or accepting any form of aid or interaction (always believed to be selfish and ill-intentioned) with foreigners. So he strengthened the military and was dead set on modernization and progress. Built the hallmark of Iran's modernization - a trans-Iran railway - refusing all foreign loans. He still tried to employ mysticism to a certain degree to get popular with the people, but believed Islam to be the cause of Iran's backwardness, so glorified ancient Persia instead to justify his rule. Under that justification, he modernized infrastructure and education, minimized power of Islamic religious leaders, lifted veils of women, uprooted nomadic tribes, all with brute military force and not without bloodshed.
Reza Shah failed to realise Shia Islam is an integral part of Iranians. It was impossible to just do away with it within a few decades as an obstacle to modernisation. Eg, he forbade public self-flagellation during a ceremony to commemorate martyred Islamic leaders in the past. From the surface it sounded sensible, because it seems perverse and fanatic to inflict pain upon self. But the Iranian masses had been fanatics. To whom could the people complain about centuries of unjust ruling, invasions, getting trampled by foreigners? It was only through wailing and real intense physical experience in the context of religion, and thus identifying with a bygone idol who sacrified himself for justice, that the pent-up passions, sufferings and bitterness found an outlet. With such intensity it's hard to stop asking the people to be emotional overnight. It's like if a person's extreme about something you should calm him down first, make him see reason instead of directly forcing him to do the opposite. Reza Shah didn't get this. Or he got it but thought he could make it anyway. So ended up being the brutal, unjust dictator.
Even more sadly, during WWII the foreign forces that he drove out came back to claim Iran in all righteousness of fighting against the Nazis. Reza Shah's cherished trans-Iran railway was needed to deliver supplies to Russia. Poor Iran's neutrality meant nothing. The army Reza Shah used large part of the treasury to build was not much compared to the Allied forces. When he refused to join the Allies because the thing he hated most was to let his hard-earned independence bow to foreign will (and the same wills too) once again, he was put into exile. After having fought much for the independence of his land, he left it in humiliation, never to see it again.
The coming and going of this Reza Shah has an aura of the tragic drama. It's more to my personal taste than any number of stories of martyred religious leaders. I guess that's because I believe it's healthier to get some control over own life and create balance. Intense outbursts are exhausting and shorten lifespan. But after you've done all you could and still it didn't work, whether or not you did it in the right way, it's despairing and has the make for a tragedy. Then it seems to follow that researchers have great potential to lead tragic lifestyles. But the kind of stuff we do, in our lifetime or ultimately, are they really that consequential after all? Maybe it's just me. Then again maybe not.
posted by Azzurra | 1:36 PM
1 Comments:
Yup, religion seems to play a part for some. During the Dark Ages, the wars and crusades froze all development in Europe and Middle East. Another factor - lack of contact with the west.
But it fails to explain, for instance, why China started to decline after the time of Zheng Ho. There was no major religious issue. During Early Ming, China was the most powerful country on Earth. But they chose to isolate themselves, and allowed the West to overtake. Russia got pulled along by Europe due to the proximity of St Petersburg. Other cultures just stagnate. I think maybe it is a case of "Feng Shui Lun Liu Zhuan"... Persia had its glory days. China had too (eg. Han, Tang). Perhaps we see the west as more powerful because it is a more recent phenomenon. Of course, the French and Brits are pretty smart people too.
Post a Comment
<< Home