Since 1979, Iran's attitude toward its Jews has been shaped by the basic concepts of Islamic revolutionary philosophy, its traditional attitude toward the Jews, and the general politics of the revolutionary regime. The more pragmatic and open atmosphere prevailing since the election of President Mohammad Khatami (May 1997) and the formation of his government (August), has had a somewhat mitigating effect on the Jewish minority (numbering over 25,000), but has so far failed to produce any significant change toward Israel, Zionism or the Jewish world. For Iran, the political and religious aspects of the Middle East conflict remain intertwined, and the distinction between Jews, Zionism and Israel continues to be blurred.

For the disciples of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Islamic Revolution was more than the name of a revolutionary movement; it was an ideal they strove to implement in order to return the Muslim world to the glorious days of early Islam. As part of Iranian society, the Jews were influenced by the revolutionary change; as members of a religious minority, the revolution had distinctive ramifications for them, especially in light of the maltreatment they suffered up to the twentieth century. Moreover, Khomeini's doctrine as formulated prior to his takeover, combined Islamic anti-Jewish elements with European anti-Semitic motifs.

Once in power, however, the Islamic regime could not totally ignore the loyalty of the Jewish minority, nor the traditional responsibility toward the dhimmis (protected non-Muslim minorities) which devolves upon Muslim rulers. A significant change in public pronouncements became evident.

Still, Iranian Jews were made aware of their inferior status as a minority group and occasionally felt insecure. In general, while the regime sowed the seeds of hatred, it prevented it from being translated into violence; officially, it made a distinction between Judaism and Zionism, but in practice obfuscated the terms.

Zionism, "World Jewry" and Israel

The fact that Iran has made itself the bearer of the anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli flag was bound to arouse anti-Jewish sentiments. Many Iranians continue to view the Jews as the arch-foes of Islam, and their "successors" (Israel and Zionism) as enemies of the Muslim world. As in the Arab world, the distinction between Jews, Israel and Zionism is often obscured. There are many references to Israel as a "bunch of Jews," and occasional allusions to seventh-century Jews as "the Zionists of [Prophet] Mohammad's time." The obfuscation of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is exemplified in a series of articles in Kar va Karegar which appeared on the eve of International Jerusalem Day. The paper claimed, on 17 January 1998, that in fact all the Jews, those of Iran included, were Zionists. It alleged that fourteen centuries after the advent of Islam, the Jews -- no matter where they resided -- still possessed the basic features portrayed in the Qur'an, and expanded on these unflattering characteristics, thus attesting to the fact that the distinction between Jews and Zionists continues to be problematic for many Iranians. Often, such expressions were accompanied by more general accusations of the Jews' control of the world economy or of the media, their influence over foreign governments, and the use of such power to advance the aims of Israel and the Zionist movement.

More often than not, Iranians chose to criticize Zionism rather than the Jews, and while condemning Israel stopped short of castigating Judaism. Even so, some distinctively anti-Jewish sentiments were sometimes expressed. Criticism of Zionism could be perceived as anti-Jewish, and charges against Jews increased animosity toward Israel and Zionism. Thus, for example, American Jews were often referred to as Zionists, and Iranians occasionally hinted that Jews controlled the governments of the countries in which they resided and, worse still, betrayed those governments by preferring the interests of Israel and world Zionism.

Commenting on the appointment of a Jewish American ambassador to Cairo, Jomhuri-ye Islami (26 October) wrote, that "selecting a Jewish ambassador" who would naturally be inclined toward the Zionists, was "a calculated step" to advance Israel's interests. His selection, it asserted, placed the "tripartite cooperation" between Cairo, Washington and Tel Aviv "on the basis of a Jewish triangle." The appointment, the paper added, was also intended "to organize Jewish and Zionist circles" inside Egypt. The fact that some of the key positions in US Middle East policy were held by Jews and "about 80 percent of America's mass media network" was "in the hands of the Zionists," indicated "an octopus-like network of Jews and Zionists" in the American administration, it concluded.

While for most Arab states, the Middle East conflict was a political, national and territorial dispute, for Iran it was in many ways a religious crusade. As one Iranian intellectual, `Ali Akbar Behbudikhwah, put it, since Israel was "by nature" (zata) the enemy of Islam and the Qur'an, it was "the religious duty" (taklif-e shar`i) of every Muslim "to confront it."

In a book published in 1997, Iran va Mas'aleh-e Felastin (Iran and the Question of Palestine) former Foreign Minister `Ali Akbar Velayati calls the Zionists "new crusaders" (salibiyun-e jadid), because they, like the Crusaders, aim to take over the "heart" of the Muslim world. Yet, while in the past the West tried to achieve its goals through the church, now it promotes its interests through an "indirect struggle" -- setting the Jews against the Muslims, so that once they have made the Jews leave their countries, they will work to divide the Muslim world. Velayati adds, that the creation of Israel was a "diabolical action" aimed at "creating a Zionist and anti-Islamic fracture in the heart of the political geography of Islam," and transferring "the historical crisis between the Christians and Jews of Europe to the Islamic world and converting it into a crisis between Jews and Muslims in Palestine." This, he claims, was a "historical deal" which in part "absolved Jews of the death of Jesus Christ" and led to the "realization of the aspiration of extremist and racist Jews to set up a Jewish state."

In his customary manner, parliamentary speaker 'Ali Akbar Nateq Nuri accused Israel of seeking to realize its "Nile-to-Euphrates dream." Similarly, other leading figures blamed Zionism not merely for usurping Palestine, but for its expansionist vision, which viewed all the region, "from the Nile to the Euphrates," as its "living space" (faza'-e zist). Former President `Ali Akbar Rafsanjani asserted that the Israelis were encouraged by their rabbis who decreed that by the year 1999 Solomon's Temple would be rebuilt on the ruins of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

As could be expected, the pig leaflet (see Arab Countries) provoked many hostile statements in 1997, combining charges against Jews, Zionism and Israel. Radio Tehran maintained that since Israel's establishment, the Zionists had revealed their "real identity" by insulting and "destroying the Islamic sacred places." As long as the Islamic countries failed to adopt a unified stance against them, "the Zionists will continue to insult Islamic sanctities and destroy the Islamic sacred places." On another occasion, it claimed that this and other similar occurrences were "all consequences of the racist teachings of the Zionists," which were "directed toward annihilating the sacred values of all divine religions." This "sinister phenomenon" (Zionism), which came into being "with the objective of gathering all the resources of the Jews in one place," had "under the guise of the divine Jewish religion," constantly "taken steps against all [other] divine religions and even against Judaism itself." They had acted, "by repeatedly misinterpreting the Torah," and their aim was not only to "attack the mosques and religious centers belonging to Muslims but also to eradicate the identity of the sacred places of the Christians and their churches."

On the other hand, from time to time, some prominent officials spoke in more moderate tones. The "real solution," Rafsanjani said in March 1996, would be to allow Jews, Muslims and Christians to "live freely together." Yet, he conditioned, this must be based on the return of "all the displaced" Palestinians. In an article in Siyasat-e Khareji (Foreign Policy) entitled "Islam va Masihiyat-e Orupa'i" (Islam and European Christianity), Mohammad Mojtahed Shebastari maintained that a dialogue between Islam and Christianity was not only "recommended" (mostahab), but a "necessity" (zarurat). Such a dialogue, he said, would not mean the rejection of others' beliefs or the abandonment of one's concepts, but would promote better mutual understanding. Relations between Islam and Judaism, he added, would be easier, because unlike with Christianity, their past contact was devoid of political dimensions.

The Khatami Factor

The circumstances that led to the election of Mohammad Khatami as president, his generally more pragmatic policy and the more moderate statements following his election (mainly with regard to the West and the need for dialogue between societies), were bound to lead to some relaxation in statements regarding Jews. Khatami's associates, who joined him on his visit to Lebanon a few months before his election, stressed his openness toward dialogue with other faiths and his call to renounce religious fanaticism. Khatami mentioned that while serving as minister of Islamic guidance, he had worked to initiate a dialogue between Christianity and Islam. Those who listened to Khatami, one source maintained, saw that he was "a completely different type" of Iranian leader.

In an interview to al-Safir (4 June), Mohammad 'Ali Taskhiri (the official in charge of spreading Islamic culture, in the Ministry of Islamic Guidance) similarly supported dialogue "among the divine religions." Asked whether it would be possible to upgrade Muslim-Christian dialogue to involve Jews as well, Taskhiri replied affirmatively but made one significant condition: "If Jewish scholars dissociate themselves from the Zionist mentality, then there will be plenty of scope for dialogue with them." He mentioned Iranian participation in Islamic-Christian-Jewish dialogue councils in France, including a "rich symposium" organized by Roger Garaudy (convicted in Paris on February 1998, for denying crimes against humanity; see France). Support for Garaudy, and his controversial views on the Holocaust, were occasionally expressed in the Iranian media.