The Turkmen of Iran

On May 18 Turkmenistan will celebrated the Day of Revival, Unity, and the Poetry of Magtymguly – the 18th century Turkmen national poet. Magtymguly was heavily conscious of tribal conflict, and his poetry depicts the suffering of ordinary people and the ways in which this suffering was manipulated by elites for their private gain. The irony is evidently lost on Turkmenistan’s incumbent president, Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, who will lay flowers on Magtymguly Square in tribute.

The poet is widely believed to have been born in the (now) Iranian province of Golestan. In its north lies “Turkmen Sahra” – the Desert of the Turkmen, which is home to over 2 million Turkmen. The region has a tumultuous history of opposition to centralized authority, using the poetry of Magtymguly as a rallying cry during several failed uprisings.

The region of Golestan has long been considered unruly by imperial powers such as Russia and Iran. In 1736, Nadir Shah Afshar defeated the Afghans and imposed his authority over the Turkmen tribes, but following his death in 1747, his empire crumbled. Out of the wreckage, the Turkmen re-established their tribal systems and re-asserted their nomadic heritage in resistance to the sedentary Persian way of life. In 1861, the Turkmen defeated thousands of Persian troops who had marched on Merv (modern-day Mary, Turkmenistan), chasing them through the desert on horseback.

An increasingly assertive Russian empire was to become the harbinger of the Turkmen’s pacification. The tsar’s most aggressive campaign started in 1869 when his forces occupied Krasnovodsk (now Türkmenbaşy). This Caspian Sea port played a crucial role in the empire’s expansion, acting as the administrative center for military operations against the city-states of Khiva and Bukhara. The completion of the Trans-Caspian Railway made the port even more vital, acting as the logistical nerve center for the imperial army. The crucial year was 1886, when Russian forces defeated the most powerful Turkmen tribe, the Akhal-Tekke, at the Battle of Gökdepe, forcefully annexing their territory, and expanding their strategic frontier against the British Empire. After the battle, over one million Turkmen fled through Iran and into Afghanistan, where their descendants still live today. More crucially, the battle resulted in the division of the Turkmen people, some of whom fell under Russian, and later Soviet influence, forming what is now Turkmenistan. The Turkmen to the south fell under the influence of the Qajar Empire, and later the state of Iran.

Following the disintegration of the Qajar Empire, the Persian military forces of the Pahlavi dynasty attempted to take southern Turkmenistan (Turkmen Sahra) under their control. They were met with fierce resistance, and in May 1924, by decision of the Assembly of Elders, Turkmen Sahra declared itself a socialist republic, allying itself with the newly formed Soviet Union. This project was short lived, lasting only 18 months before Reza Khan, the general who became Iran’s Shah in 1925, consolidated his control over the region. Khan’s policies were brutal, with over 200 Turkmen chiefs publicly hanged and hundreds of families relocated to other territories in the new nationalizing state. In addition, for the first time in their history, the Turkmen were forbidden from speaking their native language.

The struggle for dignity continued up until the fall of the shah at the onset of the Iranian Revolution in 1979, with the Turkmen once again declaring an independent state. During the First War of Gonbad, the Turkmen proved to be highly effective fighters, using sophisticated hit-and-run guerilla tactics against Ayatollah Khomeini’s troops. Much like their previous efforts at independence, the Turkmen republic fell in 1982 when the Revolutionary Guard crushed the poorly equipped rebels during the Second War of Gonbad, re-asserting Iranian control. Khomeini, who accused the Turkmen of “waging war on Allah,” had hundreds of militants hanged across Golestan, and forced many thousands more into brutal prison camps, where they remained until the mid-1990s.

The ideologically charged Iranian state has brought increased challenges to the people of Turkmen Sahra. For example, the regime has operated a long-term policy of keeping Turkmen out of the key offices and jobs across Golestan, hoping to keep them politically pacified. In addition, the vast state-owned cotton fields across the region rarely employ Turkmen, preferring cheap Afghan labor, contributing to the alarmingly high unemployment level in Golestan (30 percent), which is three times higher than the national average. Equally troubling is the state’s monopoly over water distribution, a highly lucrative endeavor controlled by commanders of the Revolutionary Guard. This monopoly has meant that farms run by the Revolutionary Guard receive the bulk of water supplies from the River Atak, leaving the small-scale Turkmen farmers of the region with little-to-no water. Finally, the ideological nature of the regime has meant that the Shiia interpretation of Islam has been granted privilege at the expense of the Sunni population of Golestan. Indeed human rights groups have noted that the government regularly conducts “raids” on Turkmen towns, with Shiite mullahs attempting to convert them to Shiism by offering various perks.

All of these issues have created regional tensions, which dramatically erupted on January 14, 2008, after the regime’s authorities killed a 20-year-old fisherman in Golestan. As news of the incident spread, bands of Turkmen gathered in various towns, laying siege to the local Revolutionary Guard barracks near the fishing port of Bandar-Turkmen. Like previous revolts, the authorities responded with a heavy hand, arresting over 300 and placing them in unknown locations across the country.

The history of Turkmen Sahra, though tragic, demonstrates a democratic impulse among many of the Turkmen people. Both the northern Turkmen of Turkmenistan, and the southern Turkmen of Iran’s Golestan, share a common struggle against tyrannical authoritarian regimes. They should recognize their common cause and heed the anti-elitist message of Magtymguly’s poetry.