On the 20th of August, 1941, the Soviet, British and American Allied Armies entered Iran. Reza Shah’s dictatorship was replaced with a weak Government, based in Tehran and with no control over the south of the country, which was under British and American occupation, or the north, which was occupied by the Soviet Union. Various democratic rights were granted to the growing number of political parties in the country.The Mahabad area was occupied neither by Britain or America nor by the Soviet Union. It was an area with a long tradition of Kurdish nationalism.

In September 1942, seizing an exceptionally favourable opportunity, the Kurds of Mahabad launched the first Kurdish political movement, the Komala Jiani Kurdistan = Kurdistan Resurrection Society).

The strictly nationalist Komala, led by urban middle class intellectuals, soon attracted mass support in the towns and countryside. Despite its semi-legal status, Komala had no carefully defined political programme and no solid organizational framework. A new leadership was elected in 1943.

The democratic movement in Kurdistan soon outgrew the Komala structure. There was a manifest need for cadres with a broader political outlook, for a political programme in keeping with the times and for an organization capable of leading tens of thousands of members. A new party was founded in 1945, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (PDK), which all the members of Komala joined. An eminent intellectual and respected political and religious figure, Qazi Mohammed, played a large part in its foundation. The PDK presented a programme which contained eight key points:

1)    The Kurdish people in Iran must manage their own local affairs and be granted autonomy within Iran’s frontiers.

2)    They must be allowed to study in their mother tongue. The official administrative language in the Kurdish territories must be Kurdish.

3)    The country’s Constitution should guarantee that district councilors for Kurdistan be elected to take charge of all social and administrative matters.

4)    State officials must be chosen from the local population.

5)    A general law should provide the basis for agreements between peasants and landowners so as to safeguard both sides’ future.

6)    The PDK struggles for complete fraternity and unity with the Azerbaijani people and with the minorities resident in Azerbaijan (Assyrians, Armenians, etc.).

7)    The PDK is committed to progress in agriculture and trade; to developing education and sanitation; to furthering the spiritual and material wellbeing of the Kurdish people and to the best use of the natural resources of Kurdistan.

8)    The PDK demands freedom of political action for all the people of Iran so that the whole country may rejoice in progress.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> Because this programme reflected the Kurdish people’s aspirations, it rapidly won the support of most of the population. The specific conditions of the times in both Kurdistan and in Iran generally encouraged the democratic forces to go on the offensive.  On 24 January 1946, during a mass meeting attended by delegates from all the areas around Saqqez, the first Kurdish republic was proclaimed and Qazi Muhammed, the leader of the PDK, was elected president.

This Republic lasted less than a year, but it was endowed with a remarkable dynamism and managed to achieve several of the goals formulated in the PDK programme. Kurdish became the official language in the administration and in the schools. Several Kurdish periodicals appeared regularly, notably Kurdistan, the PDK organ, Halala (The Tulip), a paper for women, and Grougali Mindalan (The Children’s Babil), a children’s magazine. The first Kurdish theatre was founded. Kurdish women began to play an active part in social and political life for the first time. Thanks to the rapid development of direct trade with the U.S.S.R., the economy also began to improve. The lands of the landowners who had fled Kurdistan and gone to collaborate with the Tehran Government were distributed to the Kurdish peasants and to the Barzani families who had found refuge in Mahabab from the persecutions of the Iraqi Government. However, there was no agrarian reform similar to that implemented in neighbouring Iranian Azerbaijan.

As the PDK programme indicates, the authorities in the Republic strove to reconcile the interests of the peasants and ‘feudalists’. The top jobs in the administration, which had until then been held only by Persians and Azerbaijanis, were given to Kurds. The Imperial Iranian Army and police were dissolved and replaced by a National Army and Peshmerga forces (It was at Mahabad that the term ‘Peshmarga’ was applied to the troops for the first time). {‘Peshmarga’ in Kurdish implies, ‘those who are ready to face death for Kurdistan’: K2k+} The Republic’s red, white and green flag was emblazoned with a sun surrounded by corns of wheat with a quill in the middle; the sun for freedom, the quill to underline the importance of education. A well-known Kurdish song became the national anthem:<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]--> 

O Enemy, the Kurdish-speaking people still exist

Let no one say the Kurds are no more

The Kurds live on, our flag shall never fall.

<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->The Cabinet was composed of thirteen Ministers, including a War Minister and Foreign Secretary. As no Parliament had been elected yet, there was no legislative assembly, so laws were issued by presidential decree. But all judicial tasks were assumed by the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Justice. The authorities began to set up a local administration for the Republic. The precise status of the new government was still indeterminate: was it an autonomous regional government or a fully independent republic? The official designation for the new body was the ‘State of the Kurdish Republic’, (Dawlati Djumhouri Kurdistan), but it was also known as the ‘National Government of Kurdistan’ (Houkoumati Milli Kurdistan), as in Azerbaijan. The Kurdish Government in Mahabad had not yet defined its own ambitions.

0n 23 April l946, the Governments of Azerbaijan and Kurdistan signed a treaty of friendship. It had seven articles:

1)     The representatives of the two Governments will be accredited in each other’s territory whenever they consider it necessary.

2)     In Azerbaijani territory with a majority Kurdish population, Kurdish administrators will be appointed, and vice versa.

3)     The two Governments will set up a commission to deal with economic questions and this commission shall be responsible to the leaders of the two Governments.

4)     Whenever necessary, Azerbaijan and Kurdistan will form a military alliance providing for mutual support.

5)     Any negotiations with the Tehran Government must have the approval of the two Governments.

6)     The Government of Azerbaijan will take measures to contribute to the development of the Kurdish language and culture amongst the Kurds living in Azerbaijani territory, and vice versa.

7)     Whoever tries to undermine the historic friendship, the democratic unity or the alliance between the two peoples shall be punished conjointly by the two Governments.

Having said all this, the fact remained that the two Governments had a different approach to internal policy. In Azerbaijan the authorities took the peasants’ and workers’ demands into consideration and embarked on a large-scale programme of economic and social reforms, whereas in Kurdistan the order of the day was national unity with no bias in favour of the popular strata of society. As Kurdish society was more backward socially and economically, the goals proclaimed were much more modest.

There was still the problem of drawing up the frontiers between the two Governments. Extensive discussion was needed to settle the status of the region west of Lake Urmiah, notably the towns of Khoy, Salmus (Chalpur), Urmiah (Rezaiyeh) and Miandouad. But in Spring 1946 these differences were secondary. The main priority was the defense of the two states’ very existence against the threats posed by the American and British backed Tehran Government. The treaty between the Kurds and Azerbaijanis had enormous implications for the two peoples and was, not surprisingly, very badly received in Tehran.

The PDK was one of the founders of a front which also included the Tudeh Party and the Democratic Party of Azerbaijan, as well as three other progressive parties. Iranian Kurdistan had thus become a base for all the democratic forces in Iran.

The Republic of Kurdistan was also a centre for co-operation and solidarity between all the various parts of Kurdistan throughout the Middle East. Kurdish patriots were warmly welcomed: thousands of Barzanis and representatives from the Kurds of Turkey, Iraq and Syria were cordially received in Mahabad. The whole Kurdish nation saw the Mahabad Republic as a symbol of their aspirations and hoped that it would become the core of a struggle for the liberation of all Kurdistan. However, at the time, the political situation in Iran, notably the status quo guaranteed by the Anglo-American occupation of the area south of Saqqez, prevented the Kurdish Republic from liberating Saqqez, Sanandaj and Kermanshah. The Republic’s sovereignty extended northwards from Saqqez over the whole northern part of Iranian Kurdistan, an area with an estimated population of one million.

In keeping with the Tehran Agreements, the Allied forces began to leave Iran six months after the end of the war. The Soviet Forces moved out of the northern areas of the country a few months after the Anglo-American troops’ departure. Before long the Iranian and Soviet Governments signed an agreement which allowed for Soviet participation in the exploitation of oil in the north of Iran. By late May 1946, no Soviet troops were left on Iranian territory.<!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--><!--[endif]--> 

In Autumn 1946, the Tehran Government launched a campaign to organize elections throughout the country; these ‘free’ elections supposedly required the presence of Iranian Government troops in Kurdistan and in Azerbaijan to supervise the proceedings. In December, the Imperial Army advanced on Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani movement collapsed almost without resistance, and its leaders sought refuge in the U.S.S.R. The National Government of Azerbaijan fell on 17 December 1946 and soon afterwards the Iranian troops also entered Mahabad. Again the Imperial Army encountered no armed resistance. But the leaders of the Republic, headed by Qazi Mohammed, remained on the spot. Only the Barzanis withdrew, to Naqadeh and Uchnu.

In Azerbaijan thousands of democrats were massacred by armed irregulars while the Shah’s generals turned a blind eye, but in Kurdistan the Iranian Army decided to temporize. As for the Barzanis, they were still awaiting the outcome of the negotiations being conducted in Tehran by a delegation headed by Mullah Mustafa. However, this lull did not last long. In late December Qazi and several other Republican leaders were arrested. Mustafa Barzani’s negotiations broke down: on 22 February 1947 the Iranian Army advanced on Naqadeh. The Barzanis withdrew towards the Iranian-Iraqi frontier and successfully warded off the attacks of the Imperial forces, who suffered heavy casualties. Many Imperial soldiers and officers were taken prisoner. On 13 April, the Barzanis passed into Iraq.

Meanwhile the Iranian Armed Forces were disarming the supporters of the Republic; only those tribes who had collaborated with the Tehran Government and helped fight against the Barzani were allowed to keep their weapons. After a formal trial before a military tribunal, Qazi Mohammed, his brother Sadri-Qazi, and his cousin Seifi-Qazi were condemned to death. Because of the popularity of the Qazis, the Iranian authorities hesitated for some time before carrying Out the military tribunal’s sentence, but eventually, on 30 March 1947 at dawn, Qazi and his two companions were taken to Mahabad’s chouar chra(four lights) Square by a large force of Iranian troops and hanged. Mass executions followed soon after in the other towns of Iranian Kurdistan.

Under Sheikh Ahmed, their spiritual leader, most of the Barzanis, particularly the women and children, escaped to Iraq. But Mustafa Barzani had little faith in the Baghdad Government; so on 27 May he led 500 men across the Turkish border and re-entered Iran two days later. 10, 000 troops were sent against them.  The battle went on for three weeks, till on 18 June 1947, having travelled over 300 km, Barzaniξs forces crossed Araz River and entered Soviet territory. <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]--> 

A thorough analysis of why the Kurdish democratic movement failed is beyond the scope of this essay. However, we can highlight some general weaknesses, notably in its leadership. It had been impossible to form enough capable and dedicated political* and military cadres in the eleven months of the Republic’s existence, and this shortage manifested itself in every sphere. However, external factors also played an important role. The Tehran Government which was determined to repress the progressive movements in Azerbaijan and Kurdistan enjoyed the backing of the Anglo-Saxon powers, especially America. Furthermore, the Tehran regime encountered little difficulty in neutralizing Soviet policy in Iran. However, given the political and military fragility of the Tehran Government and the great popularity of the Republic of Kurdistan, the Kurdish forces could have put up an effective resistance which, as the Barzams’ experience showed, might well have been successful.

……………………………………

* Note by K2k+:  Fifty four years after the fall of the Kurdish Republic of Mahabad, there are still too few individuals amongst the Kurdish political organizations capable of understanding and monopolizing the international politics and historic opportunities. Many of the old characteristics which prevented the Kurdish nation from achieving its goals remain alive only in a new form and under different names.  Despite all the external and geopolitical factors, Kurdish parties and their leaderships are to a great extent responsible for the failures of the Kurdish movements during the last century.  The experience in southern Kurdistan (Iraqi Kurdistan) in the last nine years is a good example.  The Kurds once again failed to fully, and wisely, utilize the situation which was created in the aftermath of the Gulf War, i.e. since March 1991.  Should KDP and PUK fail to bring about a united parliament they will be cursed by history regardless of all other factors involved.