Ethnic cleansing in Iran?

Ethnoreligious distribution of population in Iran

Map courtesy of the Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection at the University of Texas, Austin

In today's Wall Street Journal Online, American Enterprise Institute scholar Michael Ledeen says that the U.S. doesn't need to invade Iran to effect regime change, rather it only needs to support the Iranians' longing for freedom after almost three decades under the country's unique form of Islamic totalitarianism. According to Ledeen:

The mullahs know their doom will come from their own people, which is why they have embarked on a new wave of mass repression, with a spate of public hangings in the Kurdish, Balouch and Ahwaz areas, a wave of arrests of pro-democracy leaders in Tehran and Isfahan (the most famous face of the Iranian resistance, Ahmad Batebi, reportedly suffered a stroke in the mullahs' torture chambers, and is now in a coma).

In Khuzestan -- the oil region in the south -- there are plans for a massive program of ethnic cleansing, moving more than a million Arabs to other regions. It brings back memories of Stalin's efforts to destroy Soviet "nationalities." All these actions bespeak a profound insecurity in Tehran, just waiting for the free world to exploit.

I think Ledeen makes a dramatic case here, but in doing so I think he actually risks undermining himself. This is because as far as I can tell, in characterizing what is going on in Khuzestan as a "massive program of ethnic cleansing" he goes beyond any of the publicly available evidence.

Now it's easy to demonstrate that the situation for Arabs is indeed grim in Khuzestan. There are many independent organizations who have reported on what is going on, for example, this May 2006 Amnesty International:

Much of the Arab minority in Iran lives in the strategically-important oil-producing Khuzestan province in southern Iran (known as Ahwaz by the Arab community)which adjoins Iraq and this Arab minority is believed to constitute between 3 and 8 per cent of the total population of Iran. Historically, the Arab community has been marginalized and discriminated against in various ways including through restrictions on access to employment, to adequate housing, social services, and education, and denials of their right to equal participation in cultural activities.
Expropriation of land belonging to or occupied by members of the Arab minority is reportedly so widespread that it appears to amount to an unofficial policy aimed at dispossessing Arabs of their lands.

But to call what is happening a "massive program of ethnic cleansing" - and by that I assume Ledeen means to imply that there is some kind of official sanction - one has to take into account that there is an official denial that this is the case.

News of this ethnic cleansing program first surfaced in 1999 when a letter purportedly written by a presidential advisor was widely disseminated. The English translation of this letter can be found here. But this letter cannot be offered as evidence without also including the alleged author's denial that he ever wrote such a letter - which can be found here.

Again, not to minimize what is happening in Khuzestan. The situation is grim, and again, I quote from the AI report:

Since [April 2005], the cycle of violence has intensified in the province. Scores of Arabs were arrested following four pre-election bomb blasts in Ahvaz and two others in Tehran which killed up to 10 and injured at least 90 people. Other bombs in October 2005 and January 2006 killed at least 12 people and were followed by waves of arrests. Arrests have also followed demonstrations on significant occasions such as the Muslim festivals of ‘Id al-Fitr and ‘Id al-Adha. Amnesty International has received the names of around 500 Iranian Arabs detained since April 2005, some repeatedly, although the true number of detainees is likely to be much higher. Two men, Mehdi Nawaseri and Ali Awdeh Afrawi, were executed in public on 2 March 2006 after they were convicted of involvement in the October bombings. Their executions followed unfair trials before a Revolutionary Court during which they are believed to have been denied access to lawyers, and their "confessions" were broadcast on television. Others are also feared to be at risk of execution.

What I'm trying to say here is that I think it is actually counterproductive for Ledeen to use a term like "ethnic cleansing" in this situation. Because of the legal and political ramifications, "ethnic cleansing" is narrowly defined. And I'm afraid that by using this label without total precision -as the evidence would seem to suggest he did - Ledeen may have actually hurt his cause by providing the perpetrators a way out on a technicality. In this case semantics - or specifically, the official denial that there ever was such a plan.