Those Who Stayed on One Side of the Aras, Those Who Stayed on the Other Side

A series of programs titled 'Faction' broadcasted by Radio Farda coincides with the seventieth anniversary of the establishment of the autonomous government in Azerbaijan, Iran, and is dedicated to examining this historical event. This is the first episode of the program. On December 21 of this year, it will mark the seventieth anniversary of the establishment of a government in Azerbaijan, Iran, which lasted just over a year and was soon dismantled under numerous legal ambiguities and countless accusations; this entity was called the 'National Government of Azerbaijan.' In the margins of this distinct political unit, an organization known as the 'Republic of Kurdistan' also declared its existence within the territory of West Azerbaijan province. Both organizations are pivotal in contemporary Iranian history for those interested in political reforms in Iran and the transition to modern democratic governance. From those who believe that federal governance is a serious option for the future of Iranian democracy to those who see a powerful centralized government as the path to the prosperity of all Iranians, from those who complain about what they call discrimination against ethnic groups to those who believe the root of problems lies in the undemocratic structure of governance, from those who secretly or openly desire the disintegration of Iran to those who staunchly defend the territorial integrity of Iran, all refer to the events of seventy years ago in Azerbaijan with a unique narrative, showcasing parts of what happened as historical evidence for today's political arguments and reinforcing their legitimacy. Seventy years after this event, the organization known as the 'National Government of Azerbaijan' serves as evidence for today's separatists that the idea of Azerbaijan's separation from Iran has a significant historical basis and is an old project that must be pursued to defend the rights of Azerbaijanis. In contrast, opponents of Iran's disintegration view existing documents regarding this organization’s ties to the Soviet Union and its eventual fate as evidence that what has been labeled as separatism by some Azerbaijanis is a foreign-backed anti-Azerbaijani and anti-Iranian conspiracy, which not only lacks a basis in reality but is also contradicted by the historical truth of what happened and the ordinary people's reactions to this organization after the withdrawal of Soviet military forces from Iran. Thus, the events of 1945 and 1946 are, for some, the 'Azerbaijan Affair,' and its conclusion is referred to as the 'salvation of Azerbaijan,' while for others, it sparked a so-called 'national' movement. How can a historical fact create pride for two completely opposing political groups? What exactly happened seventy years ago that both supporters and opponents of Iran's disintegration refer to? What was the role of the Soviet Union in this matter? How did Iran navigate this crisis? And ultimately, why did the National Government of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Kurdistan, known as the Republic of Mahabad, collapse so quickly after the withdrawal of Soviet military forces? The historical series 'Faction,' which will be broadcast every night at the end of the evening magazine on Radio Farda over the next month, is an effort to find answers to each of these questions. Alongside the broadcast of each episode, an online version will also be published daily on the Radio Farda website. In these online versions, you can read the text related to each episode and listen to the complete radio version. The history of separation: The history of what we today know as 'Azerbaijan' on both sides of the Aras River is intertwined with the essence of Iran until the entry of the Russian Empire into the political geography of the region. However, at a historical turning point, part of this land separated from Iranian sovereignty and took another path; where the northern neighbor, the Russian Empire, succeeded in two consecutive wars in the 19th century to acquire the main parts of the Caucasus region; during the signing of the two treaties of Gulistan and Turkmenchay between the governments of Iran and Russia in 1813 and 1828. Touraj Atabaki, a historian and author of the book 'Azerbaijan in Contemporary Iran' and a professor at Leiden University in the Netherlands, states that following these two treaties, Iran lost control of territories including 'the Khanate of Shirvan, Ganja, Karabakh, Nakhchivan, and...' and the border between Iran and Russia reached the Aras River. The simple and brief narrative of the story is that from this point, the fate of the peoples on both sides of the Aras became entirely different. However, among the areas that separated from Iran after the second treaty, the Muslim khanates north of the Aras had deep cultural and religious commonalities with the inhabitants south of the Aras. This group, like Azerbaijanis, were Turks, spoke Turkish, and were Muslims. Perhaps this is why when the political sovereignty of these areas shifted from Tehran to Moscow, some residents of the region decided to migrate south of the Aras. Majid Tafreshi, a history researcher in London, recounts that in the early days after the separation: 'The Russians had occupied Tabriz at that time, and the lands south of the Aras were returned to Iran after the second treaty. Then, population movements occurred. Some migrated south of the Aras for various reasons, including religious, economic, and national pride, to remain settled in Iran.' However, this population movement did not merely end with the migration of Muslims interested in the Muslim Iranian sovereignty, and as Touraj Atabaki states, it was encouraged within the framework of a long-term strategic policy by the Russian rulers north of the Aras; that Muslims should migrate south of the Aras, while Christians south of the Aras, who were mostly Armenians, should move north of the Aras. This policy was implemented so vigorously by Russia that it eventually led to protests from the Qajar government, and it reached a point where the Russian government promised, through a treaty, to abandon this policy. However, in practice, this did not happen. The pain of separation: Despite all this, a large group of Turkish Muslims remained north of the Aras under the shadow of the Russian Tsar. In other words, this large group one day woke up to find that there was no longer any news of the Muslim Shah of Iran, who was himself a Turk. Instead, the Christian Tsar of Russia was the tribute-paying ruler of the land. How did this significant transformation occur for the inhabitants north of the Aras? Jamil Hasanli, a historian residing in Baku who has published several books on the developments in Azerbaijan, states that this separation was very difficult for the residents north of the Aras: 'The separation of an ethnic group and a population under any circumstances poses serious problems for these people. The division of the lands inhabited by Azerbaijanis between the two governments of Russia and Iran later had very impactful negative effects. In border areas, ethnic groups and relatives lived together. Residents who remained in northern Azerbaijan had feelings similar to their hometowns in the southern cities like Ardabil and Tabriz. Similarly, for the people who stayed south of the Aras, the northern cities felt the same way. The free movement of people in the region was restricted. Economically, it also had its impacts, especially in border areas such as Moghan, where people's lives were based on pastoralism and nomadism. Even long after the signing of the treaty and until the establishment of political borders, residents on both sides of the Aras would migrate seasonally.' Ultimately, these political borders became more pronounced day by day, and as time passed since that cold and frozen winter day in 1827 when the Turkmenchay treaty was signed, the distance between the inhabitants on both sides of the border also increased. Those who stayed on the other side of the Aras became the last group of Iranian citizens who, based on a political agreement, suddenly became foreigners. (How has the history of this separation been recorded in the areas north of the Aras? Do they also refer to the treaties of Gulistan and Turkmenchay as disgraceful treaties like Iranians do? And how and why was the name of the Muslim-inhabited areas of the South Caucasus changed to 'Azerbaijan'? Answers to all these questions will be provided in the second episode of the program.)