«سهام داران مساوی در شرکت ملی ایران»

نشستی درباره عدم تمرکز و رفع تبعیض
 

اشاره:

آنچه «مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی» منتشر کرده نظرات پیشنهادی خود مرکز است که البته از نظرات مطرح شده در آن نشست هم استفاده کرده و الهام گرفته است. این نکته در پاراگرافهای بعدی تصریح شده است. چندی پیش جمعی از صاحبنظران و کنشگران سیاسی و اتنیکی مختلف ایرانی (کرد، ترک، عرب و بلوچ) در مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی گردهم آمدند تا درباره یکی از حساس‌ترین موضوعات حقوقی و سرزمینی با یکدیگر گفت‌وگو کنند. برگزاری این نشست عمومی نبود تا به دور از مجادلات حاشیه‌ای، صاحبان دیدگاه‌های مختلف در فضایی منطقی با یکدیگر مباحثه و مفاهمه کنند. مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی خلاصه‌ای از دیدگاه‌های مطرح‌شده را منتشر می‌کند با این باور که درک متقابل ارزشها یک ضرورت است و گفتگوی میانه‌روهای دو سوی شکاف اتنیکی در ایران برای هر دو طرف سودمند است؛ یک طرف را با رنج‌ها و عمق تبعیضات و معضلات مناطق پیرامونی و اتنیکی آشنا میکند و توجه طرف دیگر را به پیچیدگی های عملی تحقق خواسته‌های‌شان جلب می‌کند، و به هموارتر کردن مسیر تقویت صلح و همزیستی مسالمت‌آمیز مدد می‌رساند. این نشست در ۲۷ خرداد ۱۴۰۳، برابر با ۱۶ ژوئن ۲۰۲۴ در پاریس برگزار شده است.

 مقدمه

در حالی که مهمترین شکاف و تضاد حاکم بر جامعه ایران بین اکثریت ملت ایران از یکسو و استبداد دینی حاکم از سوی دیگر است اما در عین حال شاهد شکافها و تضادهای مختلف فرهنگی و سیاسی دیگری هم هستیم. مانند تعارض بین موافقان و مخالفان مذهب، نظام پادشاهی، نظام جمهوری، نظام متمرکز، فدرالیسم، فمینیسم، اصلاح طلبی، سرنگونی طلبی، انقلاب 57، فلسطین، اسرائیل و ...، که هر یک میتواند شکاف و تضاد اصلی را تحت الشعاع قرار دهد.

راهکار ترجیجی که مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی دنبال کرده است گفتگوی میانه روهای موجود  پیرامون هر یک از این شکافها و تضادهاست. این نکته قابل توجه است که آرایش نیروهای سیاسی در بحث پیرامون فدرالیسم نسبت به برخی مقولات دیگر دچار تغییر میشود و بخش مهمی از نیروهای ملی گرا، سلطنت طلبان و بخشی از جمهوریخواهان در یک صف مشترک قرار میگیرند.

جنبش بزرگ، فراگیر و عمیق مهسا/ ژینا در ایران آموزه ای دو سویه برای همگان داشت: از یکسو مردمان مناطق غیر اتنیکی را نسبت به تبعیضات عمیق و دردآلودی که در برخی مناطق ایران بر مردمان این سرزمین رفته است، آگاه ساخت و از سویی نیز میل به همبستگی مردمان و مناطق مختلف ایران را در شعارهای متعددی به ایرانیان و جهانیان نشان داد.

 با توجه به نکات یاد شده، «مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی»، سمیناری خصوصی برای بحث پیرامون مقوله عدم تمرکز و مسئله مبرم رفع تبعیض، با حضور هموطنانی از اتنیکهای مختلف ایرانی (کرد، ترک، عرب، بلوچ) به همراه برخی فعالان سیاسی و کارشناسان دانشگاهی تشکیل داد. در این سمینار مباحث مختلفی به بحث و گفتگو گذاشته شد تا شاید بتوان به پیش نویسی برای یک توافق ملی، از میان مباحث و گفتگوهای میانه روهای پیرامون این شکاف، دست یافت.

بر این اساس «مرکز ایرانی مطالعات سیاسی» پیش نویس زیر را برای پیشبرد این امر ملی پیشنهاد میکند.

 پیش‌نویس پیشنهادی درباره عدم تمرکز و رفع تبعیض در ایران

 این پیش‌نویس می تواند با دغدغه ای مبتنی بر عدم تمرکز و رفع تبعیض، در چارچوب نگاهی ملی و فراگیر، مورد بحث  و حک و اصلاح قرار گیرد. همراهی میانه روهای دلسوز و مردم دوست از دو سوی طیفهای پیرامون این شکاف میتواند به رفع یکی از نگرانی ها در باره آینده ایران و میهن و مردم مان یاری برساند.

Decentralization & Elimination of discrimination

A draft proposal

The draft proposal below can be discussed and amended within the framework of a national dialogue with the participation of moderate and reasonable elements from all relevant parties, searching for an acceptable solution that can address most (if not all) of the key areas of concern that encompass the issue of  decentralization, including the elimination of all forms of discrimination in Iran.

ONE

Iran is a country that is comprised of one nation containing a ‘rainbow of people’. This rainbow with its various cultures, languages and religions, as well as economic and political capacities, should be seen in light of the potential opportunities that it offers and not as a threat to the cohesion of the nation.

Furthermore, the presence of people with different languages ​​and religions, especially in the peripheral areas of the country, who share many similarities with the people across the borders, is well placed for the promotion of development and good neighbourly relations with the various neighbouring states.

TWO

The underlying prerequisite for any kind of meaningful dialogue between moderates is that all the views and arguments should take place in an atmosphere that is based on good-faith and devoid of negative prejudices and stereotyping. In addition to enhancing mutual knowledge and expanding shared horizons, such a dialogue can also play an effective role in highlighting and giving prominence to the priorities and concerns of other parties, thus building mutual trust, which is an essential requirement for the future construction of a new order in Iran.

THREE

No one person or movement can claim to be the representative or the spokesperson of all the people, either in the entirety of the country or of any specific region. Thus, they can only put forward their own points of view or at most those of the organizations they represent.

FOUR

Since lack of familiarity with certain terminologies used by participants in such discussions could lead to potential misunderstandings, in order to avoid new problems or disputes, it is suggested that the word "ethnic" and the expression "preserving territorial cohesion" [«حفظ یکپارچگی سرزمینی»] should be used in the same vein (i.e., inter-changeable) with such terms as “Nation” and “territorial integrity” [ملت و تمامیت ارضی][1]

FIVE

The vast majority of the participants agreed about the existence of discrimination in different regions of Iran (especially in ‘ethnic’ regions), and some differences of views were expressed regarding the manner that such discriminations could be interpreted, analysed and potentially resolved. It was also noted that the practice of discrimination was multifaceted – i.e., political, economic, religious, linguistic discrimination, and as such, it should not be seen merely as a solitary issue. 

SIX

Parliamentary democracy respecting the rights of all citizens that was based on the concept of  ‘one person one vote’, while an important necessity for Iran and all Iranians, it is, nonetheless, insufficient by itself. According to previous historical experiences, the model of a ‘centralized parliamentary democracy’ may not be the best solution for eliminating discrimination in Iran. Therefore, one should try and look for a more suitable model to eliminate discrimination.

Discounting historical times in Iran, and especially in the period from the establishment of constitutional governments to the present, various models such as state and provincial assemblies, local councils, associations and the like, as well as demands for autonomy, federalism, etc., have all been suggested in response for dealing with the issue of decentralization.

SEVEN

The question of "decentralization", in terms of a solution, is altogether a different, larger and more fundamental  topic than the issue of "federalism". Hence, proper attention should be focused on discussing the areas that separate these topics. Also, historical memories and different past practices - both positive and negative - that exist in the minds of different people in Iran concerning these concepts, should facilitate meaningful conversation as well as creating a suitable framework for decision-making by moderate political activists and academic researchers.

EIGHT

Nationalist forces (i.e., advocates of ‘one nation’ model or proposition) and defenders of such a ‘centralized system’ should be encouraged to understand the concerns of an important segment of the Iranian people who suffer from regional, ethnic, linguistic and religious discriminations and the alike. Moreover, they should be encouraged to refrain from any type of resort to undue prejudices or recriminations against those who speak in defence of a different model. 

NINE

For their part, supporters of federalism, in defending the model of their choice, are also encouraged to adopt a manner that is also devoid of provocative language and pre-dispositions. They need to understand the concerns on the part of an important body of people and political forces in the country, who believe that ‘federalism’, could be a steppingstone to a situation whereby the territorial integrity of the Iranian nation is compromised.

TEN

All political activists and idealistic intellectuals, including ‘nationalists’ and ‘federalists’, should separate the domains that exist between ‘values’ and ‘strategies’ (or ideology and strategy) so that they can then establish the proper relationship and links that needs to exist between them. They can promote all their values ​​and defend all their beliefs in the public arena and the media as much as possible, but in the field of strategy, they need to be able to come up with practical, consensual and democratic ways for the realization of their goals.

In the field of values, the criterion is "truth", and in the field of strategy, the criterion is "success". If nationalists on the one hand and the federalists on the other want to deal as much as possible in the strategic field and do not find ways of reaching an agreement in some kind of a ‘win-win situation’, then the country could suffer violent turmoil in the future, exposing people to further oppression and dictatorship.

Such a scenario could potentially lead to a situation whereby military or populist elements can gain the upper hand by attaining full domination over the ‘idealists on both sides of the equation’.  Repeated political experiences in Iran and the world have shown that if you are unwilling to compromise or modify your demands, it is often the case that everything is lost and the game is ultimately forfeited to other parties.

ELEVEN

The ‘language issue’ is one of the more important issues in any discussion pertaining to ‘decentralization’. Most of the participants were in agreement regarding the problems that surround primary education in the ‘non-Persian regions’ of the country, although the problem has diminished in recent years to some extent due to the growth of factors such as mass media and social networks.

Participants in the seminar were unanimous in the opinion that Persian language should be the official language of the land [classified as the language of communication and mediation] - with the additional proviso  that there can be more than one official language – along with other languages ​​(including the English for scientific purposes) if approved by a future Constituent Assembly.

Some participants representing ethnic views also suggested that the ‘mother tongue’ could also be included in school curriculums for a number of years of primary education (the exact number of years should be decided by a panel of experts). However, attention was also drawn to a number of practical complications in this regard (e.g., language at the place of birth, mother's tongue, and parents with two different languages, etc.).

TWLEVE

Teaching in the mother tongue, an issue that must be decided by the parents of any child, at any level is optional and not mandatory.

THIRTEEN

Many participants, including some personalities from ethnic regions, agreed that a consensual system for ‘decentralization’ can be started based on the existing provincial divisions. Some research and field studies based on land surveying can serve as a guide, for supplementing and facilitating decision-making in this regard. At the same time, it is important to bear in mind that extensive migrations, ethnic complications caused by mixed marriages and the alike, have made this problem even more complicated.

FOURTEEN

With regards to the division of powers and duties in an appropriate ‘decentralized system’ or model for Iran, the views of experts in such fields can be taken into consideration.

Ethnic participants believed that issues related to macro-economics, foreign policy and matters pertaining to national defence should be under the control of the central government, while the remaining issues should be devolved and should come under the control of various provinces. Referring to historical experiences, some attendees believed that any appropriate model towards this end can be started on a trial-and-error basis so that the best and most efficient way forward may be found.

FIFTEEN

"Positive discrimination" for ethnic areas or areas that have suffered discrimination on a wider basis, can be a guiding factor and an independent indicator for planning and implementing new measures.

SIXTEEN

In certain experiences in decentralization models in other parts of the world, a single model has not been considered appropriate for the whole country and some geographical and ethnic areas have had different decentralization models with different powers. Such examples and  considerations can also be taken into account in planning for a decentralized system.

SEVENTEEN

Between the three systems of "centralized" (e.g., Iran and France), "federal" (e.g., Germany) and a "regional" system that lies between the previously mentioned two models (e.g., Switzerland and Spain), the third system is perhaps a more suitable model to be considered in the case of Iran on the basis of full adherence to two preconditions, namely secularism and democracy. A number of ethnic participants present in the seminar were adamant that for them, "content of the system" was by far more important than its form, appearance or title (for example, federalism).

EIGHTEEN

All discussions, examinations leading to final decisions about the future political management structures of the country, including the resolution of issues regarding discrimination and decentralization, should be conducted in a democratically elected Constituent Assembly.

All people and political tendencies actively engaged in the democratic process in convening a Constituent Assembly, irrespective of  whatever standing they may have on various issue , will be bound by all the ultimate decisions made by the Assembly.

NINETEEN

Believers on both sides of the ‘ethnic divide’, along with supporters and opponents of ‘centralization/decentralization’, as well as federalism or any other political model, in looking at Iran's various concerns and problems from a wider perspective,  can in principle agree to come together on a series of common views, by deferring final decisions on all other outstanding issues to the democratically elected Constituent Assembly.

However, most active political/ethnic groups, are generally believed to have shared/common views and perspectives regarding the following areas:

1. Democracy based on human rights
2. Secularism
3. Separation of powers
4. The need for decentralization and elimination of discrimination
5. Preservation of the territorial integrity of the country
6. All-round development that is balanced and in line with social justice
7. The belief that the attainment of these goals is contingent upon the replacement of the current theocratic government with a government that is based on the will of the people (i.e., popular sovereignty in place of the current system of ‘Velayt-e-Faghih; or the so-called government of God represented by a cleric).

TWENTY

The experience gained in the aftermath of this seminar has demonstrated in no uncertain terms that constructive dialogue between moderates on both sides of the ‘ethnic question’ in Iran is beneficial for all parties, as it acquaints those traditionally in favour of a centralized system with the problems of discriminations (political, economic, religious and linguistic) experienced by people in peripheral and ethnic areas.

At the same time, it also makes those anxious in wanting to promote and defend the rights of people in peripheral and ethnic areas, in an atmosphere devoid of violence and instability, more aware of the challenging practical complications and impediments that need to be overcome for the realization of their aspirations. Moreover, it helps all parties to better understand  one another's sometimes different values ​​and concerns – something that can ultimately help the process of building trust as an important precondition for a peaceful and less costly transition to a better future outcome for all people in Iran.

[1] The seminar was also reminded that as there was no appropriate Farsi alternative for the term ‘sub-nation’, resort had been made to using the term ‘Meliat’ (ملیت) as the nearest substitute for sub-nation.