The Most Democratic Method of Historicism

Written by: Mr. Sayyed Qasem Yahoseini
 Translator: Mr. Mohammad Baqer Khoshnevisan

Why should we engage in war and its oral history?
The Questions that might often preoccupy us are as follows:

-Although many books, articles and newspapers have been and are still published about the Iraqi imposed war, why should we use up yet again our energy and power to register and record the oral and written history of the war?

- What was Iran-Iraq war about that we should engage in orally?

- Is war and fighting a good thing that we must engage in?

- The People have been tired of the war and those years of war, and need calm and peace. The eight-year war has come to an end and it should be joined to history. Is it necessary for us to engage in it?

- This type of approach toward the imposed war is a kind of regress and looking at the lost and finished past. A present, Iran needs construction, reconstruction, renovation and looking at future horizons. Doesn't the war change the visions?

Such questions might preoccupy a lot of people. So it is necessary to briefly answer these questions before engaging the main topic – the necessity of the war's oral history. 

- Is war a good thing?

If we pay attention to the propaganda of the public media in Iran and some journals and books published by state and even non-state institutions, we found that these institutions and cultural and publication centers look at the war with a kind of Gnostic-divine approach and tendency and show somehow as if the war is basically a good and holy phenomenon. Even some regard the "Sacred Defense" term as a kind of defense and even the sanctification of war and violence. Is this really correct?  Is war really sacred and good? The war that causes many people to be killed, makes many homeless and orphan, causes death, destruction and famine in the cities and villages, causes many mental disorders, breaks up the warm family atmosphere, claim the lives of or disable the youths who should build the future of a society, leave deep mental injuries and paralyze the economy and development of a society.

No common sense and healthy man considers war as good and pleasant. War is a very heinous and ugly phenomenon from which the human community suffered, suffers and will suffer during the human history. The study of the history of human civilizations in the past six thousands years shows that no community has escaped from the war. Unfortunately, war is a human phenomenon the life of which dates back to the man's life. If we want to take a look at the history with a religious approach, the war has come into existence since the period of Adam's children (war between Habil and Qabil). Some psychologists and psychiatrists believe that war, violence and dispute are parts of man's nature and essence and that the man should work hard and try a lot culturally and morally to be released from the war and violence.

In 1933, the father of atomic bomb in the world, Albert Einstein wrote a letter to the father of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud and asked about the war and its psychological origin. Freud's answers about the belligerent essence of man under the title "Why War?" are interesting to read, containing lessons. Therefore, although the war is an ugly and horrible phenomenon, it has been the integral part of the human life from old times to now. Like a disease, war is a bad thing and as long as the man exists and quarrels over various patriotic, economic, social, cultural, ideological and other issues, it will also exist. No one likes a disease but it exists and is a reality. War is no exception.

However, it should be said that not only the war is not sacred but also it is satanic and unholy. The religious men are also of the view that aggressing the soil and rights of others is a satanic and non-divine phenomenon. The Almighty does not admire brutality, cruelty and aggression and does not like the oppressors, tyrants and aggressors. But there is a difference between war and defense. To the extent the war and aggression is dreadful and blameworthy, defending one's own right and soil in all the cultures and on the basis of international rights is fine and praiseworthy and is the inalienable right of every man who is oppressed and aggressed.

About the Iraqi eight-year war against Iran, to the acknowledgment of the United Nations and the then UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar in December 9, 1993 and based upon the sixth article of the UN Resolution 598, today it has been revealed that former Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1981 and that he started the war. The Iranian forces on the basis of international laws and wisdom and religious law had no way but to defend their country. If they didn't stand against the Iraqi army and did not defend Iran and Iranians, it was unknown what humiliating behavior the enemy did with our land and people.

Therefore, Iran and the Iranians did not wage a war but they defended themselves against Saddam's invasion and aggression and it can be said that the defense is a praiseworthy and even a holy phenomenon. The war was imposed on Iran by the Iraqi Ba'ath regime and Saddam and the Iranians took their arms inevitably. So, it was with such subjective and historic background that the "Holy Defense" term and composition emerged in the war front culture and Iran-Iraq war, and it is still repeated. We do not have the holy war, because war is basically bad and satanic, but we have the holy defense. Defending against the invader and the tyrant is praiseworthy in any culture in the world.

Moreover, it was in these years of the holy defence that some of the Iranian combatants – of course, not all of them - elevated to higher spiritual and Gnostic degrees.

So, the spiritual and Gnostic approach of Iran-Iraq war is the result of this real and human phenomenon. However, the excessiveness in the war propaganda and its exaggeration, and seeing the war and defense in all the moments and places as holy and Gnostic, has irreparable historic and even social harms that should be noted specifically.       

In all, war and aggression cause shame and disgrace, and defense and resistance cause honor and proud and we defended ourselves during the eight-year imposed war honorably and proudly. 

The historic status of Iran-Iraq war 

Another question that should be answered is that what value and historic status does the war have that should be noted this much and deal with it from various dimensions and angles? About the importance and historical value of the eight-year war, it is just enough to say that the war is one of the longest wars in the history of the twentieth century worldwide. The bloody World War I took four years from 1914 to 1918. The deadly devastating World War II took six years between 1939 and 1945. Both wars happened in twentieth century. But the Iran-Iraq war also occurred in twentieth century took longer than both World War I and II wars. The war took eight years that is two times more than World War I. Furthermore, as the then world politicians and officials have admitted, more than forty countries were involved against Iran and supported Iraq and Saddam. They spared no efforts to help Saddam's regime financially, spiritually and other cases. The most important countries that backed Saddam were Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, America, Britain, France, China, former Yugoslavia, former Soviet Union, Germany and Canada.

This world assault against Iran has historical value per se. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, no country like Iraq had been given weaponry, equipment, spiritual and propaganda aid and this shows well the unique status of the eight-year war in the world contemporary history.  

The war from the perspective of Iran's contemporary history 

If a fair person studies the history of Iran's wars with its neighbors from the period of Iran-Russia 27-year wars under Fat'hali Shah Qajar until 1979 when the Pahlavi monarchy collapsed, he or she finds out that throughout Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties, Iran had been defeated in all the wars it had with its neighbors and the foreigners and sometimes it had lost parts of its soil. 

In Iran's wars with Tsar Russia, we lost large parts of lands beyond Caspian and Caucuses area and today's Middle Asia (some 17 cities and tens of villages) during the humiliating treaties of Torkamanchay and Golestan. In British war against Iran in 1856 in the era of Nasseroddin Shah Qajar, Britain separated today's Afghanistan from Iran by force and turned it into an independent land. During the First World War, Britain, Russia and Ottoman invaded Iran and in the Second World War, in addition to Britain and former Soviet Union, the United States also attacked Iran and inflicted great economic, social, cultural, and human damages on the country.  In the era of Mohammad Reza Shah, the important and strategic land of Bahrain was separated from Iran and turned into an independent country, of course without any war or blood shedding. Therefore, during the past 150 years and before the victory of the Islamic Revolution, Iran and the Iranians have always been defeated in all of the wars with its neighbors, and its national pride has been hurt.

It was only during the eight-year imposed war that this broken and wounded pride healed totally.  Iranian soldiers and combatants for full eight years fought not only with Iraq but also with some forty countries and proved proudly to themselves and the world that if the Iranians fight with faith and will, they would stand strong and would not be defeated.  

The highest point during the eight-year war was the restoring of the capital of the war, Khorramshahr from Iraqis during Fat'holmobin Operation in May 23, 1982. The liberation of Khorramshahr was the ending point for the Iranian historic disgrace and its wounded pride. Iran and Iranian regained its 150-year humiliated proud and dignity and showed the world that it is not hawkish and aggressive, but if it is attacked, it would defend itself bravely and courageously and humiliate the enemy. And this is the unique historic status of Iran-Iraq eight-year war.

However, the only reason for special attention to this important historic war in the contemporary history of Iran and the world is not what mentioned above. Hundreds of thousands of people went to the war fronts and fought with the enemy during the years between 1980 and 1988 and millions of people stayed behind the front and tasted the bitterness of aggressing their soil and water. Many amazing developments and events happened during the eight-year imposed war historically in terms of culture, literature and art all of which worth registering, recording, compiling and transferring. Many of them can be a rich source for filmmakers, painters, musicians, poets, playwrights, novelists, graphists, designers, architectures, historians, populists, sociologist, psychologists, physicians, craftsmen and of course for oral historians and those who write memories. It is just enough to take a look at the artistic and cultural works relating to war in the international level to find out well to what extent the war and defense can be a strong source for movies, novels, music, social and human studies, etc. Napoleon's attack on Tsar Russia in 1812 became a valuable source for Leon Tolstoy to write the great and enduring novel, "Peace and War". World War I was reflected in hundreds of novels one of which was "A Farewell to Arms" authored by Ernest Hemingway. The Russian civil wars caused Mikhail Sholokhov to write "Silent Don". Spanish civil wars and the disputes between the Republicans and the Monarchists led by Franco created tens of interesting and attractive novels among them are: “Hope” by Andre Marlo, “For Whom the Bell Tolls” by Ernest Hemingway, "Dialogue with Death" by Arthur Koestler, “Homage to Catalonia” by George Orwell, etc. So far tens of movies and serials have been produced and still produce about the World War II and Vietnam War. In recent years, “Full Metal Jacket” directed by Stanley Kubrick, “Saving Private Ryan” and “Schindler List” directed by Steven Spielberg, “Squad” by Oliver Stone or “Pearl Harbor” by Michael B. have been the best selling movies of 1990s and the first decade of the third millennium. 

At the same time, even children have not been forgotten and thousands of books with war backgrounds have been written for them. A research by Jan Wood Grisson released in 1981 shows that more than 300 books exclusively about war were authored for children in Britain and more than 400 in the United States only during the period between World War I and World War II. The subjects which have been noticed in these books are: domestic fronts, domestic fronts in other countries, retreat, flight, sea operations, spies, ground wars, animals, sabotage and the role of the girls in the operations. Thus, the eight-year war between Iran and Iraq at its heart has thousands of films, serials, novels, dramas, symphonies, paintings, statues, graphics, etc. for different strata of the community ranging from children and teens to the adults and even the elders that can be highlighted and even noticed in the international level. 

Still about war?

Another question that should be answered is that despite all these books and writings, is it necessary to spend human energy and material costs and to meet the eight-year war? Everything about the war has been said and narrated during some thirty years!

In response to this question, we should say that if we imagine and consider the greatness and the size of the war, we found that we not only have not done much but also done less about the stunning aspects of the war and that we are still in the stages of taking the first steps. In order to find out our less work and other nations’ hard work, we’d better to know that only about the US civil wars which took place between 1861 and 1865 between the US southern and northern states, some one hundred thousands books have been written in the forms of memoirs, reports, analysis and history. Also according to the sixteenth volume of Britannica encyclopedia, more than one hundred thousands books have been published only about Napoleon Bonaparte and his wars. Also this is correct about the patriotic wars of the former Soviet Union against the German’s Hitler soldiers. Despite the passing of sixty years from that event, the writers’ unions in Russia are still looking for the Russian old soldiers and officers to write their memoirs and register in the history. According to an early estimate, some two million combatants were dispatched to the war fronts during the eight-year war. If only ten percent of them – there is more than this number – witness important events and have valuable memoirs, the stunning number will be two hundred thousands. If one thousand books are compiled and written annually about the written and oral memoirs of the combatants (which is less than one fifth of that), it will take two hundred years – yes, two hundred years – to provide and compile the memoirs of the war combatants! But this is just about the combatants. We have also some 218,000 martyrs, 43,000 POWs and about 400,000 wounded and disabled. In addition to these, there were tens of millions of civilians behind the fronts who were effected by the war directly or indirectly. Each of them can be an independent subject for the war’s oral history.

I think the official figures mentioned above are enough obvious and shows well in what stage we are for registering and recording the oral history of the combatants, the disabled, the wounded, the captives, the martyrs’ families and the civilians and what a great, amazing and unbelievable job we should do?

Does research about war is a kind of warmongering?

Some articles have said and say clearly or implicitly that the war has been finished and that we shouldn't meet it anymore. They also say "meeting war means garrisonizing the cities. The people need calm and peace. To what degree should we talk about war?"

In response to this question, it should be said that we along with the people of Iran say: Greetings to peace, and calm. Peace and peaceful coexistence is very valuable and a human phenomenon. But whether we want or do not want, the ugly and heinous phenomenon of war has been an integral part of the human life until today and is and will be in the future. Furthermore, although the eight-year imposed war was finished on August 20, 1988 through the UN ceasefire, its massive consequences were never finished and will not be in the near future. The war's economic, political, cultural, environmental and human consequences will continue for years and even decades after its end. 

Moreover, the Iran-Iraq war has now joined the history and it is natural that it attracts the attention of those who are interested in historical studies, populism, socialism, psychology, etc as a historical subject. At the same time, oral historians by using the method of oral history try to record and register some parts of the combatants and soldiers' memoirs during the years of the sacred defense.

If supposedly, today an academic center puts on agenda the project of the oral history of Vietnam or Iraq war veterans, will it be accused of warmongering?

Iran-Iraq eight-year war is one of the most important assets of the Iranian people and nation. Future generations have the right to know what happened to their fathers and ancestors and this is possible merely through recording and registering the history one of the most important of which in recent years is the method of oral history. 

Oral history of the eight-year war 

Now after answering to some questions and removing the doubts, it is necessary to talk about the oral history of the eight-year war, its necessity and other issues regarding this. But before anything else, it is better to define briefly the oral history.

Today, a phenomenon called "oral history" has expanded extensively in the west and develops more deeply and profoundly everyday. The range and extensiveness of the oral history has influenced in almost all the spheres in the west. One of these spheres is the important and basic issue of war. At present several research and academic centers in the international level are busy working on the issue of the war's oral history and every year they publish or release their findings and performance in the international conferences or in the professional journals.

Iran-Iraq eight-year war also as one of the longest and most important wars in the twentieth century is per se an independent and considerable subject in the field of oral history which has attracted the attentions since three decades ago. In broad outline, we can define the oral history of the eight-year war compactly as follows:

Technique, and method which register and record the memoirs of the elements who were involved in the Iraqi war against Iran in the form of word, oral and unwritten narration by using means and tools like tape recorders, videos, cameras and any kind of recording devices.

It is necessary to mention that memoir in this special definition means that narrating one, several or abundant of memories from the events, clashes, conversations, expressing viewpoints and in general any kind of emotional mind image left from the war directly or indirectly.

Therefore, the narration of the narrator about childhood and youth and pre-revolution and pre-war years are also considered in the approach toward the oral history of the eight-year war and covers the last year of the war in 1988 and the years after that.

The necessity of meeting the oral history of the eight-year war

As we mentioned before, according to the official figures by the centers involved in the Iraqi eight-year war against the Islamic Republic of Iran, some two million people were dispatched to the war fronts during the imposed war from the beginning to the end (1980 – 1988). From this number, some 218,000 were martyred, around 43,000 were captured and some 400,000 were injured or disabled.

The Iraqi war against Iran did not remain just in the international borders and the fronts. In the first months of the war, the enemy seized thousands of kilometers of Iranian territory in the south and west and occupied hundreds of villages and several important cities. Many people were forced to leave their home as a result of the occupation and went to safe areas and some stayed in the occupied regions, enduring hardship and dangers.

As the bombardment of Iranian civilian areas and cities known as the war of the cities was started by Iraq, millions of Iranian civilians tasted war, destruction, death and homelessness, and experienced war and the enemy's invasion tangibly. In addition to two million combatants who fought against Iraq in the war fronts, millions of Iranians behind the fronts and in the towns and villages were involved in the war somehow and the war affected almost all the Iranian citizens directly or indirectly.  

As long as the generation of the war exists, we should do our best to register and record the memories of the elements who were involved in the war so that the memory and remembrance of the martyrs, combatants, the disabled, the captives, and all the elements involved are kept alive.

Why oral history?

Why should we seek the memories of war times with oral history? In response to this important question, we must say that:

1- The oral culture and dialogue among the men and the Iranians are easier, more widespread, and cheaper. One can speak easier rather than writing. Therefore, oral history per se is an easier and more available method for registering and recording the memoirs of the war.

2- The great majority of the war combatants and the ordinary people in the cities especially the villages and nomadic areas have not the ability of writing their memories and even in some cases, they can't read or write. So, in such cases, there is no other way but using oral history. In this relatively new method, all strata of the people from ordinary and illiterate to military, political elite, … with any degree of literacy, knowledge and experience and any gender, language, race and geographical area can define, narrate and retell their memories and feelings by word or orally without any problem, just as they do for their families or relatives. Even in the age of techno-electric, post modern world and the age of Internet and satellites, the human once again returns to the age of pre-Gutenberg (the inventor of printing press) and today many written media try to spread their messages orally. I think the following story shows well the status of oral culture among the men in the beginning of the third millennium:

"Charles Krauthammer, the American commentator in media affairs in an article wrote about the death of the 40-year old Public Interest magazine once was one of the most influential journals and had readers from all classes of the community and its stories were used by other media and news agencies around the world. The magazine's editor-in-chief in the farewell ceremony of the magazine said that the impatience of the people, the emergence of internet and weblogs have changed the direction of journalism history and our magazine was one of the victims of this development. All of our writers have created a weblog for themselves and present their articles in them and that the readers no longer need to read a magazine. On the other hand, today, the people do not have the patience to read long articles and they are looking for articles with easy-to-understand subjects and are able to find all the necessary information within less than one minute. And this is while a printing journal is not able to do this. The people do not want to spend their time (more than fifteen minutes) reading a newspaper, let alone reading a hard-to-read one. Today, those journals can survive which write briefly and journalistic, while every writer is not able to do this method of writing. The number of such persons is less and their payment high. In fact, due to the attention of impatient people to short and inclusive subjects, listening to radio has increased once again."

In our community which has basically an oral tradition and culture, the importance, status, necessity and philosophy of meeting oral history are revealed well. 

3- Experience has shown that the Iranians in general and in most of the cases have not the patience to write and note down. They would like to talk about a subject or a memory, but they are not ready to express the same subject in a written form. Moreover, writing needs talent, training, and exercise. Many can define a memory very well and attractively, but they cannot write that memory even imperfectly. Furthermore, today's personal, economic and social problems do not leave any time for the Iranian citizens to write.

4- In oral dialogue, the narrator can narrate and retell his or her memories more precisely through accurate and strict questions of the interviewee. Experience has shown that if someone writes a memory, he or she usually suffice to mention the generalities and outline of the subjects, but if he or she narrates that memory orally or by word, and the interviewee asks him or her various and different questions (about that subject), he or she remembers and retells many dark angles. It has happened to me several times that I have read memories of a war combatant in a magazine or newspaper, but when I have gone to look for that war combatant with some questions in mind around the same subject, he has defined his memories with more details. In the method of oral history, the interviewee or "the oral historian" as one of my friends who is a researcher, Alireza Kamereh'ee says, can attain and present more strict, detailed and objective image from the remaining memoirs of the people by his or her minor and bigger questions.

5- In a philosophical attitude and from the viewpoint of "the philosophy of oral history", we should say that the modern phenomenon of "oral history" is considered the most democratic and popular method of writing history in the contemporary world. In traditional method of writing history and memories, by exemplifying the philosophical theory of "the role of champion and the elite in history", political leaders and military commanders were taken into consideration and their memoirs were probably written or documented by the historians. But in the method of oral history, the most ordinary people and lower classes of society find the opportunity to retell their memories. From this philosophical aspect, oral history is in fact an uprising against the Carlyle and Hegel philosophical theory of "the role of champion and the elite in history". For example, in the oral history of the eight-year war, an illiterate woman from a village in the suburb of Howeizeh (in Khuzestan province) who witnessed the invasion of Iraqi forces on her home and village can and must narrate and retell her memories just as much as for example Mohsen Rezaee, the then IRGC commander or Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafshanjani, Imam Khomeini's envoy to war areas and the then Majlis speaker.

So it's fair to say that all strata of people find an equal opportunity for presetting and narrating the history by using oral history, and hence, a kind of equality and balance is created among unknown but effective masses in the process of historical events, and the elite handling the eight-year war. This is an ideal which is close to historical justice.

For showing the huge and amazing dimensions of the eight-year war's oral history realm, it is just enough for us to mention branches and the related sub-branches. Considering such cases, we are able to guess where we are now historically and in terms of "undone jobs" and to what degree we should do our best to organize our job even a less percent.

Sub-branches of the imposed war’s oral history

In a general analysis, we can divide the oral history of Iraqi imposed war against Iran into the following sub-branches. It is necessary to mention that each of the considered sub-branches have numerous sub-groups which we stop mentioning all of them due to lengthening the discussion and we go through the details of just two or three of them:

1- The oral history of the war of Iran’s Army

2- The oral history of the war of Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC)

3- The oral history of the war of Basij (voluntary forces)

4- The oral history of the war of combatant tribesmen

5- The oral history of the imposed war martyrs

6- The oral history of the families of the imposed war martyrs

7- The oral history of the captives of the eight-year imposed war

8- The oral history of those who were disabled during the eight-year war

9- The oral history of disclosed or undone operations

10- The oral history of the commanders of the eight-year imposed war

11- The oral history of the Iraqi captives in Iran

12- The oral history of non-Iraqi captives of Iraqi Army

13- The oral history of Iraqi jailers in Iraq’s concentration camps

14- The oral history of Iranian jailers in Iran’s camps

15- The oral history of those Iranian captives who escaped from Iraqi concentration camps

16- The oral history of the those Iraqi captives who escaped from Iranian camps

17- The oral history of the Iraqi soldiers

18- The oral history of the non-Iranian combatants in the Iranian army

19- The oral history of the members of staff of Red Cross during the eight-year war

20- The oral history of the foreign leaders and officials

21- The oral history of mass media

22- The oral history of the doctors, nurses and relief workers of the eight-year war

23- The oral history of the craftsmen and workers involved in the affairs of the imposed war

24- The oral history of employees, technocrats, and technicians who were dispatched to the war fronts

25- The oral history of the ordinary people of the areas, cities and villages, which were attacked by the enemy

26- The oral history of the ordinary people of those Iranian cities and villages which were out of war

27- The oral history of the spies and fifth column who were cooperating with the enemy

28- The oral history of the artists, poets and writers who were involved in the eight-year war

29- The oral history of the elegists, the musicians and cameramen who were involved in the imposed war

30- The oral history of the main elements of those centers which sent forces to the war fronts

31- The oral history of those who didn’t like to go to war fronts and those who escaped

32- The oral history of the immigrants whose cities were attacked by the enemy

33- The oral history of the Iraqi fighters who fought to the benefit of Iran

34- The oral history of Kurd loyalists who supported Iran during the war

35- The oral history of the morticians, gravediggers and the martyrs' grave 

36- ….. 

Following sub-groups can be counted and considered about the sub-branches of the Army and IRGC:

1- Army and IRGC Ground Force

2- Army and IRGC Air Force

3- Army and IRGC Navy 

We can also divide for example ground force sub-group in a stricter and smaller form as the following:

1- The oral history of army, IRGC and Basij forces

2- The oral history of squads

3- The oral history of groups

4- The oral history of companies

5- The oral history of battalions

6- The oral history of brigades

7- The oral history of divisions

8- The oral history of IRGC

9- The oral history of headquarters

10- The oral history of command centers

11- The oral history of garrisons

12- The oral history of districts

13- The oral history of regions

14- The oral history of war zones 

The oral history of families of the martyrs consists of the following sub-groups:

1- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s father

2- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s mother

3- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s wife

4- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s brother

5- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s sister

6- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s child

7- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s friends

8- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s neighbors and colleagues

9- The oral memoirs of the martyr’s relatives

10- …. 

Considering the above-mentioned cases, which is only a brief list, the massive and amazing extensiveness of the oral history of the eight-year imposed war becomes clear. It also shows that the centers of collecting oral memoirs and the audio and visual archives relating to the war face with a great amount of job and that the horizons of the eight-year war’s oral history van cover many fields and arenas. No doubt that given the unbelievable range of job and the tough time and place restrictions, we cannot work one hundred percent on all the above-mentioned fields but it is necessary to register and record several proper examples which are of great importance historically. 

There is a difference between war and defense. To the extent the war and aggression is dreadful and blameworthy, defending one's own right and soil in all the cultures and on the basis of international rights is fine and praiseworthy and is the inalienable right of every man who is oppressed and aggressed.