Constructing Identity over Others’ Culture

Lacking historical roots and a deep-rooted culture, small Arab states of the Persian Gulf try to gain a "national identity" by forging names for the Persian Gulf and supporting UAE claims over the Iranian triple islands. Although inventing names for the Persian Gulf has its roots back to Britain’s colonialism, nowadays it has found a new shape and every now and then is encouraged by some transregional states. To analyze Arabs’ gradual inclination towards unsubstantiated claims over Iran’s territory and historical culture, we talked with Dr. As’ad Ardalan, researcher in international relations and law.

 

 

Well, it has a long history and I don’t think that is related much to our discussion. But in brief, its origination goes back to time of British presence in Persian Gulf. Since they wanted to use all the Persian Gulf islands they intrigued tribes and sheikhs under their control to use their own flag.

 

As you know no governments in its modern sense existed in Persian Gulf at that time and the flags belonged to tribes and sheikhs. So by this demand, Britain wanted to be sure that its fleet could anchor and its military could deploy easily at the coasts, because that was impossible if Iran controlled these regions. Another point was the competition at that time between Russia and Britain which made Britain fear if under Russian influence the Iranians might restrict their activity in the Persian Gulf. So by proxy, they were sustaining their control over the region.

 

This is the historical background. But the question is why the problem continues to exist now that the British have left and by recorded agreements –whose documents exist- Iran has restored its rule and considers the triple islands as a part of its territory? There can be several reasons.

 

The first reason I think is psychological. If you look at the world’s map, you see some countries that are significant in terms of population, area, mineral resources, per capita income, history and culture. There are other states which can be called medium states. There are also a group of small states that have small area, low population, single-product economy and depend on non-renewable resources. In fact, after these resources are used up, they will face serious problems since they lack a production economy that can reconstruct itself at any circumstance. There are also countries called microstates. Psychologically speaking, these countries try to become greater.

 

Yes. And the point you mentioned, I mean Persian Gulf countries or those countries that emerged after collapse of the Ottoman Empire and can claim rule over a territory; these countries are trying to get out of their status quo.

 

So this has a psychological cause. They’re seeking to enforce their rule, and second to reach political stability. By political stability I don’t merely mean the continuance of governance, but having the will to actualize one’s intentions without falling under the influence of others. Third, these countries want to gain support. That’s because the most significant feature of small countries is their vulnerability, especially against their neighbors. Now if they have a single product economy which is approaching its end, naturally they’ll become more vulnerable. They must have an alternative for this economy; otherwise they may face the threat of territorial claims and expansionism of powerful neighbors.

 

Examples are ample in Middle East. So these small countries need support and in fact they need to use this opportunity to find an identity and put themselves into the foreground. Efforts made by some regional states which has caused several wars and crises are quests for identity, an identity by which they can introduce themselves [to the world] since they currently lack the power to influence international relations. So they are inventing an identity for themselves.

 

I think UAE’s efforts are mainly are a search for a national identity. Unfortunately with their attempts to change the name of Persian Gulf and their false claims over triple islands -which have never been in their hand-, their quest has come at odds with Iran[’s national interests]. There was no country before 1971 and sheikhdoms were a group of nomad tribes primarily under the Iranian rule and later, with Iran losing its power at the time of Qajar dynasty, under the control of the British.

 

Yes. Formerly they did this as Britain’s agents and they took advantage of Iran’s weakness. Of course documents show Iran never remained silent and insisted on its claims over the territory it ruled, even when it was in a weak position. But I repeat what I said about the psychological causes.

 

[They want] to create an atmosphere to say everything around them belongs to them. They’re somehow brainwashing their younger generation. Unfortunately most of Arab countries are afflicted with this problem and they try to create big titles such as GCC etc. to gather and help each other.

 

Of course when nobody’s around, they quarrel with each other over borders, but their [territorial] claims have now become more obvious. Even countries with significant historical background have sought to consider Islamic regions as a part of the Arab world. If you study researches about Arab countries’ national identity, you will see that they have two identity-constructing factors which are the Arabic language and Islam. Of course there are some countries like Iraq, Egypt and Syria which have had a glorious history before colonization, but others –since they lack such a historical background- are trying to usurp others’ identity, thus [they say] every where Islam and Arabs have been present are a part of the Arab territory. In fact they want to foster a mentality that these lands once belonged to them, so they must regain them. This is clearly visible in their literature.

 

If we turn back to the psychological criterion, a small country, whether singly or along with a great power, can’t be that much influential in the international system. Great powers talk to them only if they’re beneficial for their geopolitical objectives. In this case some of their minor opinions may be taken into consideration.

 

Another feature of small countries is that they can’t provide security using their national capacity. As I said vulnerability is the main characteristic of these countries, hence they have to rely on others. Now this can be in form of contracting military and bilateral pacts with neighbors or clinging to great powers.

 

Kuwait chose the second option during the Imposed War [Iran-Iraq 8 year war]; its ships bore U.S. flag to remain safe from air raids. That’s why we can say a small country has an invisible presence at the global stage. They’re not influential, or we can say they don’t have a good position. Their invisible presence relies upon the power of others.

 

Now this has two forms. The small country may enjoy the support of a great power, or once it recognizes that the country they have problems with does not have an international support. Hence, they can use the adverse international atmosphere against the country to project their claims and foreground their role. Small countries either resort to any of these options or form regional coalitions.

 

The United Nations has ordered its organizations to not use any name other than Persian Gulf. You can see that UN documents use the correct name for this gulf. Great powers’ reaction depends on their political considerations.

 

For example despite three decades of hostility between Iran and the United States and the freeze in diplomatic relations, I haven’t heard any American official to use any other name than Persian Gulf. The basic reason is that they may be accused of being uninformed, as about history. From the ancient maps with Latin labels to memoirs of Arab travelers that have visited the region, you can see the only name used is the Persian Gulf. As I said, unfortunately this is a quest for constructing identity and has become more vigorous throughout the recent years.

 

I don’t think it would become a serious challenge if it stays at the current level. They can’t change their neighbors and borders. Probably the only exception was Saddam Hussein who invaded Kuwait. No wars, no annexations are going to occur.

Look, changing the borders is not a legitimate act and it is rejected by international law. Sovereignty, though it has shifted from its absolute sense, is still accepted. This means the basis of international law is respecting the countries’ right of sovereignty over their territory. That’s why UN allows Kuwait to act against Saddam’s military attack.

 

Of course the same reaction was not shown when Iraq attacked Iran in 1980s, on the contrary, West equipped Iraq with arms. I mean for Iran none of the conventions were observed. However, Iran must have good relations with these countries since they are its neighbors. As long as the challenges are at the present level, diplomatic or cultural efforts through media and informing others about the historical background of this gulf can counter their attempts.

 

You may know that rocketing oil prices have provided a chance for small countries to temporarily cover their economic weakness, and the revenue has helped them a lot to buy prestige in the world. Unfortunately, they’ve bribed many research centers specializing on Persian Gulf, so in their deal, they’ll fund these institutes with thousands or millions of dollars in repayment for using a forged name instead of Persian Gulf.

 

Unfortunately this has become rampant. Of course in any place where this funding has been done, Iranian scholars have resisted and answered back in their writings out of their personal interest and nationalistic sentiment.

 

For many Western authors the name of this gulf is not important, so they use the original name. About the websites and international maps that you pointed to, they use the fake name because of the funding or because of the share Arabs hold in the institute to give them a certain direction. Also at times they fund cartography projects in case that it uses their desired labels. Anyway, these are the ways Arabs try to attain their goals.

 

Well, Emiratis really likes to take the case to International Court of Justice. But I don’t see any point in taking the case to the court.

 

Look, I think we have much more serious problems. Iran faces other challenges, so this is not its priority. And since all the regional countries are Muslims, there’s no insistence to make this controversy look like one between Muslim countries.

 

As you see most of the wars are happening in this part of the world, over borders and some other problems. So the best thing is writing about this controversy. The books Iranians write whether in international languages or Persian and even Arabic, in fact neutralize the attempts.

 

Even if these forged names are not used in global maps and the internet, they’ll be taught to their younger generation at school. They are taught that Arab Ummah’s territories are beyond what it is now.

 

Arab nationalism is a factor that can unite a group of these countries. This was evident during Iraq’s 8-year war with Iran. There were even Arab countries that claimed to be Iran’s friend and were at struggle with Saddam Hussein and the Baath regime, and they supported Iran while Iraq had occupied some parts of its territory, but as soon as Iran entered Iraq, they would start their protests. If you look back at the war, you see Arab officials have interviewed with media and asked Iran to withdraw out of Iraq. The brainwash is going on unfortunately.