A documentary-level introduction to the 1979 Iranian Revolution

The documentary Iran 1979: Legacy of a Revolution, produced by Al Jazeera English, first aired in August 2009. It examines the legacy of the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran and its impact on Iranian society. The documentary narrates the difficult to exaggerate impact of Grand Ayatollah Khomeini on the revolution. The exiled Imam returns to Tehran in February of 1979, where he emerges as the figurehead around whom the revolution coalesces. This coalescence, however, is thought to have started long before his exile.

In the days leading up to the revolution, the opposition had very little to unite it except for their goal of deposing the Shah. Liberals, Democrats and Islamists didn’t forward a template for a post-Shah Iran. For the revolution to succeed, a unitary voice was necessary, it was believed. To achieve unity, the revolution sidelined the demands of plenty of othered opposition. A similar struggle broke out within the ranks of Khomeini’s supporters, with one group who wanted to emphasise the republic nature of the Islamic Republic and others the Islamic. The Islamic versus Republic division of the Islamic Republic outlived its architect, continuing to this day. This is evident in the oscillation of power between moderates such as Muhammad Khatami and hard-liners such as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Islamic Revolution of Iran was by no means just a domestic transformation; it had international implications as well.

Shortly after the revolution, the US Embassy takeover was dubbed a second, bigger revolution. With the takeover of the US Embassy, the Islamic Revolution came to symbolise not only the overthrow of a tyrant but a challenge to world order. By violating diplomatic norms, the Republic had acted more like a non-state actor than a state actor. This was akin to an announcement that the new Islamic Republic believed that fighting secular tyranny and imperialism justified any means. The decision to violate diplomatic norms early in its debut on the global stage would play a decisive role in its perception as a challenger state by the international society. It reveals Iran’s understanding of full sovereignty as the right to add uncertainty to the system, which became a pillar of its foreign policy. Its direct challenge to the global hegemon was visualised in its conversion of the US Embassy to the museum of evil. It was precisely this challenger status that would make the Iraqi invasion of Iran possible, exposing it to chemical weapons. The silence of the international community refuelled deep existing anti-Americanism. While Iraqi forces were pushed out of Iran by 1982, the Iranian government decided to continue a war of attrition against Iraq until 1988. Surprisingly, the war neither lessened the Imam’s popularity nor impeded the Republic’s development. After the war, the policy of moderation towards the US was met with punishment by the George Bush government, which placed Iran within the axis of evil. It is this that allowed the pendulum to shift towards hard-liners, inspiring a policy of confrontation with the US instead.

Read: Iran, war and nuclear weapons

Meanwhile, the revolution also had transformative regional implications. The exportation of the Islamic Revolution was a pillar in Khomeini’s regional vision as an ayatollah. The first legacy of the Imam’s regional vision would be the creation of Hezbollah, now a formidable force in political discourse. The creation of Hezbollah would create a new pathway to imperial resistance for Iran without having to leave Iranian soil. This not only highlights a turning point in regional relations but also in Iran’s military capabilities, signalling a maturation of the young revolutionary guards. Hezbollah’s decisive victory against Israel in 2006 marked the first time a regional player was able to secure victory against Israel. This signified a shift in regional power dynamics in the Middle East, with Iran emerging as an exceptional force that can resist imperial powers. Iran’s nuclear programme further reinforced perceptions of military exceptionalism in a region that has been historically characterised as militarily weak. To balance the uncertainty created by Israel’s covert nuclear arsenal, Iran insists on its right to its own nuclear programme. The difference between the regional and international discourse on Iran’s nuclear programme and the domestic narrative, evident in the documentary, is remarkable. To the world, its nuclear programme is seen as aggression. To an Iran surrounded by American military at home, it is textbook deterrence. In the Iranian discourse, the issue is framed as a matter of refusing subordination. In this sense, the nuclear programme is motivated by a main pillar of the Islamic Revolution itself, through which its legacy lives on.

Another legacy of the revolution can be found at the citizen level, in which the revolution converted Iran into a regional safe haven for trans people. Counter-intuitive as it may be, it was a fatwa by the Grand Ayatollah that enshrined the rights of trans people, in some cases extending more constitutional protections for them than some liberal democracies. Furthermore, the Republic seems to have distinguished itself within its drug treatment programme and the lack of social taboo associated with treatment. Meanwhile, its human and women’s rights track record continues to come under global criticism. A holistic look at its women’s development trajectory forwards an alternative story, which the documentary presents, one in which female representation in government exceeds even that of some liberal democracies. Whichever way, the Republic of Iran continues to be a state that struggles to be understood. This is the most important legacy of one of the most defining revolutions of the world.