Discrimination as an Unjust Factor

General discrimination is an unfair factor.

General discrimination became a topic of discussion again with the selection of physicians, highlighting religious and ethnic discrimination in the current political structure of Iran.

Raising this issue and addressing it positively by the physicians who were elected with the slogan ‘For Iran’ and emphasizing the discourse of rights and justice for all Iranians during their election campaign, emphasized the elimination of discrimination among different ethnicities and religions residing in the geography of Iran and managed to gain some of their votes.

Naturally, this created expectations among this group of people in Iran.

During the selection of cabinet ministers, the issue of ethnicities and religions was raised again in the working groups, with positive interpretation of discrimination in their favor by Javad Zarif as the head of this working group.

Firstly, we must accept the fact that there are sometimes discriminations in the political structure and administrative bureaucracy of the country, especially regarding religions other than the official religion of the country.

On the other hand, due to geographical reasons and some historical events in certain regions of Iran, such as Kurdistan and Baluchestan, there is a sense of double discrimination due to lack of economic and infrastructural development.

Another issue is the matter of margin and center, which naturally when these factors accumulate, the sense of discrimination is felt more. On the other hand, in recent years, with the proliferation of diverse media, the intensity of this sense of discrimination has been exacerbated.

But is the fundamental solution to eliminate discrimination and address the sense of discrimination simply by appointing several provincial ministries and positions to certain political-religious activists from among these ethnicities and religions residing in these areas?

On the other hand, in societies like Iran, is it constructive to raise the issue of discrimination positively without considering the actual situation and balance of power, or could it later become a deadlock itself?

To answer these questions, we must return to some fundamental principles in the modern era, a time when we have moved away from traditional national and tribal relations towards the formation of a modern nation-state and the discussion of the concept of a modern citizen. We must choose appropriate solutions to address real and even abstract discrimination created and exacerbated by the media.

The principle should be based on the rights of the modern citizen.

Meaning that every Iranian citizen, beyond ethnicity, religion, gender, and even political views, has certain guaranteed fundamental rights by law and the government. All Iranian citizens should benefit from these rights without discrimination.

If this matter has been neglected until now, it is the responsibility of the medical professionals to revive it. On the other hand, not all issues can be attributed to the government and the governing structure.

A part of the issue should also be entrusted to the civil society itself.

To clarify the matter, does a certain Sunni political activist or a specific cleric with a particular political inclination in Kurdistan truly represent the entire population of that region, such as being given a position that creates a positive feeling for all the people of Kurdistan, taking a step towards eliminating discrimination? Or in Baluchistan, does a certain respected Mullah truly represent the genuine desires of all Baluchi youth, especially in today’s world where human identities are very complex and diverse?

Perhaps that young Kurd or Baluchi feels more alienated from a modern lifestyle of a peer from Tehran of the same age than from an elderly and traditional cleric or mullah. Therefore, in my opinion, the medical professionals and Mr. Zarif should look more carefully and delicately at the matter.

It is natural that considerations should be taken into account in political discussions with active movements in Kurdistan and Baluchestan, especially after the events of 1401. Efforts have been made to pacify these regions, but the complexity of identity issues should not be overlooked, and reactions should not be reactionary.

Therefore, I don’t find the idea of positive discrimination very helpful here. If I were to explain the discussion using classical literature, I would have to go back to the debate on rights in Hegel’s philosophy as one of the founders of the modern concept of citizenship.

Here, humans, based on their human and citizenship nature in a modern nation-state, should all have equal rights under the law. The issue of national and religious identity is removed from the realm of the state and enters the realm of civil society.

Marx, as another serious thinker who has critical complements to Hegel’s rights discussion, expands on this debate and points out that even citizens with equal rights under the law can still face discrimination later in civil society and economic relations, and real relations, especially economic ones, must be made more just.

From this perspective, if Mr. Pzshkian’s government truly stands on the fundamental principles of rights and justice for Iran, instead of giving special privileges to certain political, religious, and local currents as discrimination, it is better to implement our own constitutional principles that emphasize the fundamental rights of all Iranian citizens without any identity discrimination.

Alongside this, it should provide a platform for such discussions to enter the civil society, where critical discussions can take place to alleviate the existing sense of discrimination. However, a more serious task is to create a balanced and fair development environment for Baluchistan, Kurdistan, and other marginalized regions of Iran.

Due to the unique geography, there have been fewer opportunities for investment and infrastructure development. War, insecurity, and other factors have also contributed to the limited sustainable investment and balanced development in these regions so far.

It seems that a more appropriate approach for Pzshkian’s government should be to address the root causes of these issues.

Naturally, utilizing local elites and even local political and religious forces is a positive step, but it is not the only solution.

Insisting on these identity-based policies may not be the solution and could turn into a problem later on. Therefore, it seems necessary to approach the issues from all sides and not just overlook the problem with a top-down perspective.

To eliminate real discrimination and, more importantly, the feeling of discrimination, it is better to start from the bottom of society, seeing the youth, women, and all social classes residing in Kurdistan and Baluchestan. Even considering the internal diversity of those communities.

It should be ensured that they also see themselves as Iranian citizens with equal rights to all other Iranians.

This is contingent on breaking free from the circle of local political and religious activists.

Certainly, the presence of several ministers or governors from the Sunni, Kurdish, and Baluch communities is a positive step, but it is not the only solution.

The main task is to truly revive the concept of a modern Iranian citizen with all its complex and intertwined characteristics. Citizens who, despite cultural diversity, have maintained territorial unity for Iran and feel they have equal rights with each other in this geography.