1984/01/01 by Patricia J. Higgins · 3 citations
Social Sciences · #Autonomy #Central government #Consolidation (business) #Development economics #Economics #Ethnic group #Government (linguistics) #Islamic Studies and History #Law #Local government #Minority group #Obstacle #Political economy #Political science #Political stability #Politics #Regional autonomy #Sociology #State (computer science) #Turkey's Politics and Society
paper · doi:10.1080/00210868408701621
openalex publication_date 1984/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/22
By all accounts the departure of the shah from Iran in January 1979 was met by most Iranians with the expectation of greater freedom for both the individual and the group. For a number of minority groups, this included the expectation of greater cultural and political autonomy. Initially, the new regime appeared to be sympathetic to such expectations, but by the summer of 1979 violent conflicts were erupting between the central government and members of several tribal, regional, and ethnic minority groups. While the central government appears to have contained the ethnic and regional autonomy movements, officials and analysts have continued to express concern over the possible fragmentation of Iran, and autonomy movements are viewed by many as a significant obstacle to the consolidation of the new regime and/or a threat to its stability.