Reflections of the Cold War in I Was a Soviet Spy in Iran

Following the end of World War II in 1945, the Cold War overshadowed the international relations of countries and created tensions, both foreign and domestic. In the case of Iran, the so-called Azarbaijan Crisis (1946) brought the Iran-US relations into a new phase which changed power equations. Iran’s strategic importance as part of the “Northern Circle” countries was known to both the United States and the Soviet Union; therefore, they struggled to gain a firmer foothold in Iran by any means. There were four major discourses of power in Iran from September 1943 to August 1955: Royalist, Marxist, Islamist, and Nationalist. Examining their clashes and interactions and how they were reflected in a literary work of the time is the aim of the present article which, following Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis, focuses on Karim Roshaniyan’s roman feuilleton I Was a Soviet Spy in Iran, published serially in Tehran-e Mosavvar Weekly from May 1949 to May 1950. Based on the analyses presented, the articulated discourse of the novel is consistent with the royalist discourse. Also, the narrative directly attacks various aspects of the Soviet discourse, such as welfare, justice and liberty, and treats them as floating signifiers in the narrative. The narrator denies the other aspect of this discourse, i.e., internationalism as it is in clear contradiction with the narrator’s nationalist beliefs. Based on the reading presented in the article, this novel can be best analyzed in the context of the Cold War and its impact on Iran.
  
Extended Abstract
 
1. Introduction
The Cold War began at the end of World War II and continued until the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. The international tensions in this period, such as the Azarabijan Crisis, can be formulated as ideological conflicts of the Cold War. This crisis is regarded by some as the starting point of the Cold War. After Stalin's refusal to withdraw ‌the Red Army from Azerbaijan, Iran-US relations entered a new phase and the strategic importance of Iran as a member of the countries of the North Circle was acknowledged by the United States. Following the announcement of Truman's doctrine, the US government announced the Marshall Plan. Following that date, US economic, military, technological, and political help to Iran increased (Mahdavi, 1373: 143-151). After the occupation of Iran by the Allies, Iran's political and cultural atmosphere opened up, with four major discourses competing with each other in the political sphere of Iran between 1941 and 1953. During this period, the serial novel flourished, with I Was a Soviet Spy in Iran, by Abdolkarim Roshaniyan, as one of the most famous ones.
 
2. Theoretical Framework
Discursive approaches, influenced by post-structuralism, seem to be of greater help in explaining and describing short-lived, less stable situations. Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis approach, while presenting a clear explanation of temporary situations through outlining the structure of these situations, provides a clear picture of the prevalent political discourses in different societies. In this theoretical approach, such a structure is presented in the form of articulation of discourses, which includes a central signifier and a set of dimensions.
 
3. Methodology
Using Laclau and Mouffe's analytical approach, and based on writings on the political history of the period in question, first the main discourses of the years 1941 to 1953, including Marxist, nationalist, royalist and Islamist discourses, are explained, and then the relevance of these discourses in the political atmosphere of these years to one of the famous political novels of the period is examined. After identifying the main political discourse or discourses of the time, attempt is made to explain the discursive relationship between this novel and the political discourses of the time.
 
4. Findings and Discussion
Based on Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis, four main discourses of this period are explained: (1) royalist discourse, with the central signifier of arbitrary monarchy and dependence on the Western world, security community, support for non-political Islam and pro-monarchist political Islam, opposition to Mosaddeq, an emphasis on modernization, and opposition to the Tudeh Party; (2) Islamist discourse, with the central signifier of political Islam and support for Islamist movements, fighting foreigners, observing religious laws, opposing the monarchy, opposing the modern judicial system, religious violence, and opposing the active presence of women; (3) Marxist discourse, with the central signifier of Marxism-Leninism and support for socialism, support for the Soviet Union, support for the working class, internationalism, enlightenment, support for constitutionalism, emphasis on resistance and struggle against impoverishment, and fight against imperialism; (4) The discourse of liberal nationalism, with the central signifier of nationalism and the rule of law, emphasis on the implementation of constitutional law, freedom and democracy, emphasis on individualist Islam, struggle against Britain and the nationalization of the oil industry. Also, the inter-relationship of these discourses in the context of I Was a Soviet Spy in Iran has been the focus of attention.
 
5. Conclusion
Based on the analyses presented, the articulated discourse of the novel is consistent with the royalist discourse, though the author/narrator does not name anyone from the royal family in the text or meta-text. Also, the narrative directly attacks various aspects of Marxist discourse, such as welfare, justice and liberty, and treats them as floating signifiers in the narrative. The narrator denies the other aspect of this discourse, i.e., internationalism as is in clear contradiction to the narrator's belief. Based on the reading presented in the article, this novel can be best analyzed in the context of the Cold War and its impact on Iran. The interesting point is that the rival discourse of the dominant royalist discourse – the Marxist discourse of the Tudeh Party – despite its extensive influence on the intellectual community, failed to pay much attention to the literary form of the popular novel, while the royalist discourse took advantage of the popularity of the this type in the discursive competition. The present reading also confirms the strong link between modern Persian literature and politics, especially in the 1940s, which confirms that politics dominated the other aspects of life in the Iranian community in the last century.