Ali Kalai

The story of asylum in Iran, from political asylum to social asylum, is a long and winding tale. It tells of the struggles of Iranians for a better life and escape from danger. From the era of minor tyranny and the exodus of some elites after the Constitutional Revolution of Iran, who sought refuge in other countries from the minor tyranny of Mohammad Ali Shah, to the Pahlavi era where many were forced to leave their homes and choose other countries as their new home in pursuit of political tyranny by the father and son Pahlavi rulers.

After the February 1979 revolution and the establishment of the Islamic Republic system, this trend began to increase. A trend that has ultimately led to today, in the fourth decade after the revolution, according to official statistics, approximately five million Iranians live outside the country. Of course, this figure has been extracted from the files and statistics of the consular section of the Islamic Republic and undoubtedly, considering the number of Iranian refugees who do not have any files in Iranian consulates around the world, the number will be much higher than this figure.

But from which borders did all these Iranians leave the country? How were these large numbers of refugees able to leave Iran and reach a life in Europe, North American countries, or Australia? The question is both easy and difficult. Many countries are on the list, from Pakistan to Malaysia, Afghanistan and even India. But one country has always been the main corridor for Iranians to leave their homeland since the early days of the revolution; Turkey.

From Shapour Bakhtiar, who symbolically passed the border of “Bazargan”, most of the activists and leaders of the left were forced to leave Turkey. Only by looking at names like Reza Alamehzadeh or Nasim Khaksar, one can understand that many of these activists saw Turkey as a way to escape Iran and the police pressure after the events of June 1960. Alongside them, the supporters of the previous regime in Iran had a strong base in Turkey. For example, Bahram Ariana (Hossein Manouchehri), a former officer of the second Pahlavi regime, even had a military force in Turkey until early 1984. These forces, stationed in Ankara and Istanbul, would use their influence to help their own forces leave the country and, of course, the presence of a military force from a neighboring country was taking place while the Turkish Prime Minister officially denied their presence in his country in December

Ten years after the Iranian Revolution, Reza Alamzadeh discusses the situation of these refugees in a film titled “Guests of the Astoria Hotel”. These refugees, mostly victims of the previous regime’s purges, were fleeing from the new regime’s religious laws and left-wing political forces. The film examines the individual situations of each refugee and identifies them separately.

Turkey experienced its third and final coup d’état and became a republic one year after the Iranian Revolution. The situation of coups and military conditions in this country continued until 1985 or 1986, and according to witnesses, the presence of military forces was very noticeable during those years. In such circumstances, Turkey is faced with a neighbor where many dissatisfied individuals or young people seeking education are leaving the country, and many of them have come to Iran’s borders in search of refuge and a better place to live. Reports of Iranian refugees in hotels in major cities like Istanbul tell of smugglers approaching their doors and taking them to a third country for safety. This was happening while the security forces, or the police, were imposing strict control on the people after the coup, in a semi-military or military government. In this situation, being Armenian or Kurdish was an added tragedy, and the conditions were not easy for foreigners and even Turks.

Masoud Mavan

In such circumstances, Masoud Mafan, one of the activists of the Fedayeen Minority Organization, leaves the country and goes to Turkey in the last days of 1363 (1984). What follows in terms of describing the conditions of these years and the refugee rights section, is reported by this activist who is currently residing in Sweden.

Masoud Mafan’s report from months of presence in Turkey until his departure to Sweden indicates the intense activities of political groups from all factions, from Mujahideen to Fedayeen, in Turkey on one hand, and the significant presence of Iranians outside of Iran and in Turkey on the other hand. Masoud Mafan talks about the presence of factors such as idealism, hope, and extraordinary adaptability among young Iranian students and newly-emigrated political activists, who were active in the border areas during those years.

There is definitely no possibility to examine all the political forces that have come to Turkey for refuge in a short article. So let’s skip to the days after the 1960s and the early years of the 1970s. Iranian society has passed through the massacres of the 1960s and carries the pain and wounds of the 1967 massacre on its soul and heart. The founder of the Islamic Republic has gone to his eternal place according to his interpretation and Iran has another post-war era with it. Step by step, political prisoners of the 1960s and those who have survived the executions and the great massacre are being released.

With these freedoms, another wave of released political prisoners from Iran is taking shape. Anahita Rahmani, a leftist prisoner of the 90s, spent years 62 to 70 in prisons of the Islamic Republic. She was arrested in connection with the Iranian Communist Union. Mrs. Rahmani’s husband also lost her life under torture in the 90s.

Anahita Rahmani leaves Iran in 1371 and spends two years in Turkey. The space she describes from her years in Turkey is a terrifying one, where some people commit suicide due to pressure, lack of resources, and lengthy processes. It is a space where mental and physical illnesses arise for activists during that period. However, in contrast to these events, Ms. Rahmani speaks of her role in the Refugee Council in her place of residence, Eskishir, which covered all refugees and created a division of labor for asylum seekers. In fact, she narrates a dual situation where some refugees are overshadowed by despair and hopelessness, while others still have the ability, desire, and effort to work collectively and establish institutions among Iranian refugees, both political and non-political. The account, which is narrated in other parts of this writing, is all from this leftist activist living in Canada.

Years pass and time reaches the side of the days of reforms and Khordad 76. A time when the expectation of a fundamental transformation was going on and most people thought that this time the political support had come and the waves of suffering and pressure on human rights and deprivation of freedom had reached a peaceful shore and the difficult era was coming to an end. But this perception soon fades away. From the political assassinations of autumn 77 to July 78 and the tragedy of the Kooye Daneshgah and then the arrests and crackdowns and subsequent imprisonments. The media is labeled as bases of the enemy and Saeed Mortazavi is known as the butcher of the Iranian media for shutting down media outlets and arresting and imprisoning media activists and journalists. The year 80 and the second term of Khatami is not the beginning of an opening and this is where another wave of emigration represents the intellectuals, media professionals, or activists of the new generation.

Amir Azati is a journalist. He left Iran in September 2004. He stayed in Turkey for 20 months before moving to Finland. All that is narrated from these years is based on the precise experiences of this journalist, who, with an analytical, narrative, and observational perspective, has been present during his own life and the lives of other refugees during those days.

The early years of the 80s in the Shamsi decade were the years of the rise of Islamic government in Turkey. It was a time when international agreements were being made between Turkey and Iran, and their relationship with the Islamic Republic government was becoming closer and closer. Previously, in the 60s, Manouchehr Mottaki, the Minister of Foreign Affairs during Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s era, was the Iranian ambassador to Turkey and played a role in creating many crises in Turkey. It was a time when Iranian refugees and political dissidents who had fled from the rule of the Islamic Republic government lived in Turkey under the threat and possibility of being confronted by Iranian security forces.

Anahita Rahmani / Photo of a citizen

The beginning of the 90s was a difficult year for refugees, people, and the government of Turkey. The heavy earthquake of fall 1390 (October 2011), with a magnitude of 7.1 on the Richter scale, completely devastated the refugee region of Van after 18 days of the second major earthquake. Reports show that the situation of the refugees during this disaster was tragic. It is said that even after 18 days – between the first and second earthquake – no organization came to help the earthquake victims, and it was only the victims and the people who helped each other. The situation of the refugees was even more difficult. They were not allowed to leave the city without permission from the police, and the police made it difficult for them to leave. Hamed Kavousi, a former activist and student at the University of Science and Research in Fars, who came to Turkey illegally in September 90, was one of the residents of Van during the disaster

A painful narrative has been heard in this regard, indicating a departure from a humanistic institution’s initial goals. Iranian refugees recount that in a situation where the Iranian Red Crescent is stationed in the region and refugees seek assistance from them, the Iranian Red Crescent refrains from helping their fellow refugees, using the argument that the person seeking help must have an Iranian passport.

After the Van earthquake and despite the destruction in the area due to the earthquake, Turkey continues to accept refugees. The atmosphere is still affected by the June 2009 elections and is heated. In this heated atmosphere and clashes with the security forces of the Islamic Republic, many activists and protesters are forced to flee in order to keep the issue of the massive influx of Iranians into Turkey after 2009 alive. Additionally, there are conditions where some prisoners and old student activists are released from prison at the end of their sentences and, due to the danger of being arrested again, choose to go into exile after years of activism both inside and outside of prison. Behrouz Javid Tehrani, a former student activist and human rights activist living in Australia who has spent many years of his life in prisons of the Islamic Republic, is also forced to leave the country in the spring of 2012. This departure marks a new phase in the life of this former student activist and human rights activist.

This process continues to persist. Even six years after June 88, the flood of activists and Iranian citizens leaving the country for refuge continues. This is happening while we witness a large number of Syrian people seeking refuge in Turkey due to the escalation and continuation of war in their country. This presence, along with the increase in the number of refugees, has also made the processes and procedures related to their cases longer. The current situation in Turkey is one of the most crowded times, due to the presence of refugees, which has created problems and issues for all of them.

But in addition to the overall situation mentioned, there are many issues that can be asked of activists in different periods in recent years; from the situation and conditions of refugees to their rights. However, here we only focus on the following headlines and try to make a comparative look at the issues from different periods. By seeing this trend in different periods, we can come to a more accurate understanding of the conditions of this constant corridor of Iranian exodus.

How to leave the country

Masoud Mafan, who left in the early 1960s, says that he left the country through smuggling and had the experience of spending 4 nights and 5 days in the snow and cold of the Iranian-Turkish borders in the month of February. The exit was not only through illegal means, but also with a fake Italian passport, which was popular at the time and could not be used to obtain a visa. However, in the 1990s and during the time of Anahita Rahmani, he was able to leave the country with his official passport. Although many others were also enduring the hardships of the mountains, cold, and the danger of illegal escape from the country. The story of illegal exit from the country has always been ongoing, and even in the early years of the 1980s, Amir Ezati, a journalist, took the mountain and smuggling route and reached Turkey. The smuggling route and the northwestern borders of Iran are still open

Asylum process

The process of seeking asylum in the early years for political activists like Masoud Mafan has been a fast process. The entire process takes three months and during this time, Mafan meets with the then head of the United Nations in Ankara. The meeting, at his suggestion, ends with Mafan going to Sweden. One and a half months of this time has been spent on interviews and going through the administrative procedures of the Swedish embassy in Turkey.

Amir Azati

But after the 1960s, the asylum process has no average or special number. In the early 1970s, Anahita Rahmani receives her acceptance letter within a month. Although she considers her case exceptional. Mrs. Rahmani talks about people who have been in Turkey for more than two years and still haven’t been able to have their initial interview. But in the early 1980s, activists also went through short-term processes in Turkey. Journalist Amir Azati mentions a six-month period for his own UN process. A number that was logical and in line with reality for asylum seekers in those years. Although the next step, the national stage, also took more than a year. The time for obtaining acceptance in the early 1990s still revolves around the same six to seven months and has not changed significantly. But with the increase of Syrian refugees, the processes have become longer. Pre-interview times are scheduled one and a half to two years after registration

Security of refugees and Iran

In the early years after the victory of the revolution, the presence of Iranian security forces in Turkey has been very noticeable. This is also strongly evident in the film “Guests of the Astoria Hotel” by Reza Alamehzadeh.

Many people in those years were kidnapped by the security forces of the new government of Iran and taken to Iran. The names are numerous. But only in two cases, one of the activists of the Mujahedin-e Khalq organization who comes from England to Syria to visit his family is kidnapped and taken to Iran, and also one of the activists of the Fedayeen Khalq organization, the majority of whom are kidnapped in an area near the Iranian border and escapes from Iranian prisons. The rumor is very strong in these years. But it’s not just a rumor. The reality is that the security relationship between the new regime of Iran and the security forces of neighboring countries makes conditions difficult and heavy for Iranian activists and refugees, especially political ones.

This matter seems to follow the established tradition of Iran’s rule after that. The narrative of the early years of the 1970s, namely the post-Khomeini era and the beginning of Hashemi’s rule over the government and, consequently, over the intelligence apparatus, is a terrifying narrative. Reports speak of refugees being threatened. Threats that sometimes materialized and a refugee would be handed over to the Islamic Republic government. Eyewitnesses have also reported cases where, even without any threat, a refugee would suddenly be abducted by Iranian security forces with the cooperation of Turkish police during that era.

Rahman Nejat, one of the leaders of the Komala Party who was a refugee in Turkey in the years 69 and 70, recounts one of these security incidents. He says that in 1970, he was among 600 Iranian refugees who, with the coordination of the security forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Turkish government, were in the process of being deported and handed over to the security forces of the Islamic Republic. The news of this reached the Turkish newspaper, Hurriyet. Mr. Nejat describes himself as one of 104 political refugees affiliated with various political parties such as Komala, Democrat, Fedayeen Khalq, and Workers’ Party, who were part of a pre-planned conspiracy and were taken from Ankara – their place of residence – to the border areas by two buses. Eventually, with the help of the bus drivers, the intervention of the Turkish people, and the arrival of the security officer of the European Union in

The heavy security atmosphere continues in the following years as well. The early years of the 80s were also years of fear and pressure for refugees. As the relationship between the Iranian government and Turkey grew closer during these years, threats and abductions continued. According to Amir Azati, during the years 83 to 85, one or two cases of these incidents occurred. He says that these actions were definitely carried out with the coordination of the Turkish army and government.

“Watch the early years of the 90s in our interviews, but it does not remember any attempt to steal or take activists out of Turkish soil and does not know an operation. Even newly released bone activists also call threats “meaningless” and say there is no need to worry.”

Of course, the mysterious death of Seyyed Jamal Hosseini (Esfandiar Baharmas), one of the founders of the human rights activists’ group in Iran, in 1393 (2014-2015) is another story and still a memory that adds fuel to the fire.

The cost of visiting Turkey.

In the early days of Iranian refugees’ presence in Turkish soil, a report was received of unpaid expenses and even a small amount of money, although very limited, was paid to refugees who were financially struggling. However, less than a decade later, it seems that the laws in Turkey have taken a different direction. The issue of “soil money” is raised to the Turkish government and apparently, it is first implemented for those who have been rejected by the United Nations. This money continues to be collected in the following years, with a larger amount and under the name of residence expenses for refugees who have chosen Turkey as their transit route. Although it is possible that this issue can also be resolved by talking and negotiating with the police. In the early 90s and according to new laws, this issue was resolved and no longer any money is collected from refugees for this purpose.

Right to treatment

In the early years after the 1980 coup, the medical system in Turkey was weak and outdated, and mostly managed in a limited and private manner. Therefore, refugees had to pay for their medical treatment.

Behrouz Javid Tehrani / Photo of the Peace Line

But less than a decade later, and according to reports, the right to free healthcare for refugees is recognized and of course, this right only applies to those who have received acceptance from the United Nations for their case. However, this assistance and its coverage have been declared very limited. In the following years, only a very small amount is paid by the United Nations for treatment, and the refugee must bear a portion of the treatment costs themselves. From the early years of the 1990s, reports indicate the elimination of that minimum payment by refugees and free treatment for them. Reports also indicate the possibility of low or no-cost treatment in hospitals in Turkish cities, or the completion of all body examinations and check-ups, which is significant.

User rights

Since the early years of Iranian presence as refugees in Turkey, the issue of black labor has been raised. The story of black labor continues in the early years of the 1970s and even many cases of black labor and non-payment of wages by Turkish employers have been observed. Working with low wages, hungry stomachs and injured hands, whose money and wages were even looted by the employer. This issue also continues in the following decades and until today (although recently refugees have been able to find legal employment in Turkey); refugees who work in the black market and earn little money.

Right to education

Masoud Mafan narrates that if there were proper identification documents for refugees, the possibility of higher education for them was not unimaginable. This right continued to exist in the early years of the 1970s, both for the children of refugees and for themselves, and of course, this was on the condition that they could pay for university expenses themselves. However, after that, the narrations indicate the right of education for refugee children, and the news of the possibility of university education becomes very faint. In the beginning of the 1990s, refugees face the problem of not being able to obtain a permit for higher education. But it seems that from the years 1992 or 1393 AH, with a new law, refugees can study at universities in Turkey. The writer himself knows refugees who have enrolled in a doctoral program in this country and are currently studying.

Turkish police encounter

The behavior of the Turkish police in the years following the 1980 coup has been reported as very violent. This behavior of the Turkish police continues to this day and throughout all these years until the beginning of the 1970s. Strictness and violence are prominent characteristics of the Turkish police as representatives of the Turkish government in dealing with refugees. In the 1980s, with the rise of the Islamist government – Erdogan – and Turkey’s efforts to join the European Union, Turkey tried to impose laws in its country that were somewhat close to European standards. Police corruption was also one of the steps taken during these years. The police force begins to moderate in these years and violent, bribing and corrupt forces are largely removed from the lower levels of the Turkish police; although this issue never reaches zero. Until then, there were reports of violent behavior by the police towards refugees, including physical abuse and insults, which sometimes led to refugees filing complaints against the police for their behavior. However, in

Dividing cities

In the early years after the revolution and the coup in Turkey, the division of cities in Turkey, in the sense that it would later be created, did not exist. Most refugees try to find a way to save themselves and reach a country for a better life by being close to UN centers or embassies of other countries. But a decade later, the list of refugee-friendly cities is announced and refugees are allowed temporary residence in certain cities such as Eskisehir and Nevsehir. In the following years, cities like Eskisehir, Nevsehir, Nide, Kayseri, and Kirsehir are mostly refugee-friendly. They also have the characteristic of being close to the two major cities of Ankara and Istanbul. Van, which is a center for refugee trafficking, has always been of special importance. Later, cities like Sivas, Adana, Bolu, and Denizli are added. Of course, at the beginning of the Syrian war and the presence of Syrians

Undoubtedly, the gathering of over three and a half decades of Iranian refugees in Turkish soil is a limited matter in this article. However, it can be said that the evolution of social rights, status, and treatment of refugees by the Turkish government and the United Nations is clearly observable. On one hand, the living conditions and status for refugees have become slightly easier, but on the other hand, with the lengthening of processes, there are lives that are frozen in this journey and minds that are damaged. The presence of Syrian refugees in Turkey has become a factor in prolonging these processes. This has become one of the biggest challenges for the Turkish government and today, for Europe and the world.

The presence of so many Iranian refugees outside the borders of Iran and their current situation, whether good or bad, in Turkey and the long-term processes in Turkey, raises questions: Why, after about four decades since the revolution, are Iranians still leaving the country? How many generations of active and citizen Iranians have taken the path of leaving the country? Why is an active or citizen Iranian willing to sacrifice all the hardships of seeking refuge, living in limbo and passing their life, working in the black market and facing limitations in exile and in Turkey, but still chooses to leave Iran?

These are the questions that I wish Iranian political and economic leaders would ask themselves; a time when I hope it is not too late.

A picture of the kitchen and bathroom of a refugee’s house in Van, Turkey in the first half of the 80s/ A photo from the peace line.