Conspiracy, Mismanagement, or Mass Killing: The Blame Game in Response to the Mina Tragedy

According to a report from the Organization of Hajj and Pilgrimage, the casualties of Iranians in the Mina tragedy until Tuesday, October 7, 2015, were 228 dead, 246 missing, and 27 injured. (IRNA, October 6, 2015) This event was so significant for the Islamic Republic that the Iranian government immediately declared three days of public mourning after the incident, and Hassan Rouhani cut short his visit to New York. Most high-ranking officials and well-known Shia clerics issued statements or spoke out condemning the Saudi government. The blame game, similar to all issues in the Middle East, including the civil wars in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and the conflicts and hostilities in Bahrain and Lebanon, saw Iranian Shia believers and Saudi Sunnis blaming each other. State and semi-state media and officials of the Islamic Republic clung to the unverified idea from the early moments after the tragedy that Saudi officials had closed some routes leading to Mina (due to the movement of some senior officials of the host country), which led to overcrowding and the deaths of pilgrims. They believe this action targeted Iranian pilgrims. According to reports from Saudi social media and public media, some Iranian pilgrims (about 300 people) were moving against the flow and caused this massacre. Some reports also seek to find the hand of the Revolutionary Guards behind this tragedy. Iranian Shia and Saudi Sunni believers and their religious leaders, who often see God's hand in testing humans during natural and human disasters, quickly and without hesitation blame the other side in this case as well. There is little difference in blaming the Saudi government among Iranian Islamists, nationalists, and even Marxists. Hatred for the other side has blinded so many that few wait for the actual reports and investigations. Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, a member of the Assembly of Experts, considers this event a result of a conspiracy by the Saudi government: "This route was the path of most Iranians and Shia, which was suddenly blocked without prior notice and coordination. This horrific tragedy is unnatural and conspiratorial. The Saudi regime is the main culprit for the massive slaughter of pilgrims in this great tragedy." (Khabar Online, October 5, 2015) State and semi-state media of the Islamic Republic refer to five observations to consider this event a conspiracy: 1. The share of Iranians among the number of pilgrims is about 3%, but their share of the Mina casualties is about 20%; 2. Saudi officials refused to issue a visa for Ali Jannati, the Minister of Culture, who wanted to travel to the country to be informed about the details of the issue. The Saudi Foreign Minister also rejected Zarif's request for a meeting in New York; 3. The Saudi Interior Minister ordered the collection of surveillance cameras along the route to Mina. (Tasnim, October 5, 2015) 4. All routes for pilgrims had emergency exits, but these exits were inexplicably chained shut; (Tasnim, October 7, 2015) 5. The immediate and collective burial of unidentified bodies (photos related to this issue pertain to the earthquake in Pakistan). However, the conspiracy theory does not solely help one side of the story to fabricate its narrative. The Saudi side has also presented its specific observations of an Iranian conspiracy in this event: 1. This tragedy occurred hours after the start of the ceremony on Eid al-Adha, which is the first day of the Hajj ceremony. Events that lead to overcrowding and the death of pilgrims usually do not happen on the first day but rather on the third day when most pilgrims are in a hurry to conclude the ceremonies and return home. 2. Ghazanfar Roknabadi, the former Iranian ambassador to Lebanon from 2010 to 2014, was present in the crowd. He had close ties with Hezbollah Lebanon. The Al Arabiya news network reported, citing Saudi sources, that Ghazanfar Roknabadi did not enter the country normally; and 3. Just moments after the overcrowding and massacre, state media of the Islamic Republic, including the country's state radio and television, began their attacks on Saudi officials without any investigation. They immediately used this issue to raise their previous demands for internationalizing the administration of holy places in Mecca and Medina for Muslims. The second narrative among some officials and media within the country regarding this issue points to the mismanagement of Saudi officials. Almost all officials of Rouhani's government have considered this the reason for the massacre: "Addressing this great tragedy and accepting the legal, political, and managerial responsibility of the Mina tragedy, as well as apologizing for what has happened, is the minimum that the Islamic world and grieving families expect from the Saudi government." (Es'hagh Jahangiri, First Vice President, Tasnim, October 5, 2015) Hassan Rouhani also accused Saudi officials in an interview with NPR in the United States of not cooperating with Iran regarding the repatriation of bodies, sending the injured, and finding the missing. Among officials close to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, only his military advisor Yahya Rahim Safavi denied the intentionality of the Mecca incident: "I doubt the Mina tragedy was intentional, but what is certain is that the incompetence, unfitness, and mismanagement of the Al Saud is evident in this tragedy." (Alf, October 5, 2015) Ali Khamenei has also mainly resorted to the mismanagement approach to explain this tragedy: "The Saudi government is obliged to accept its heavy responsibility in this bitter incident and act according to the principles of right and fairness. The wrong management and inappropriate actions that caused this tragedy must not be overlooked." (October 2, 2015) The Islamic Republic's officials and media propagate the view that the Saudi government is currently fighting against Shia in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen and is directly involved in the suppression of Shia in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia itself. The main premise behind this view is that the Saudi government is seeking the mass killing of Shia. They refer to the killing of over 400 Iranian pilgrims in 1987 in Mecca in this context. Fatemeh Daneshvar, a member of the Tehran City Council, declared this incident intentional. (Tasnim, October 7, 2015) The Deputy Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces also shares this belief: "Given the influence of the usurping Zionist regime in Al Saud, the likelihood of the intentionality of the crane collapse incident in the Grand Mosque and the death of thousands in Mina is high." (Fars, October 7, 2015) This belief is so strong among powerful Iranian Islamists that one Iranian expert on Middle Eastern issues mentioned the possibility of the use of "toxic gas" against the pilgrims by Saudi officials in an interview with Khabar Online. (October 5, 2015) This issue was denied by the Minister of Health of Rouhani's government, but the original accusation had widespread reflection in the media. The large number of Iranian dead, injured, and missing (501 people) has created an atmosphere within the country that makes the accusation of intentional killing believable for anti-Saudi Shia. Realities or Emotions? As always, in this event, realities do not play the main role in understanding current events in the Middle East among many citizens of these societies. Individuals on both sides of this issue quickly and based on emotions reached premature conclusions. On the Iranian Islamist side, they completely ignored the process of investigation and evidence and scientific studies regarding overcrowding for their judgment. The officials and media of the Islamic Republic had no opportunity for investigation in this regard to assertively comment on this matter. On the Saudi conspiracy theorists' side, they did not wait for the report of the investigation committee appointed by King Salman. The blame game and hatred usually do not allow individuals to pose difficult questions and seek answers to them. Four main questions in this regard are: "Was this tragedy preventable or not?", "Considering previous events, do pilgrims receive the necessary training in this regard?", "How can pilgrims be voluntarily involved in this matter?", and "Given a list of these tragedies over the past four decades during Hajj, how can this massive human gathering be managed to prevent such events?" Accusations and prejudices do not answer these questions.