In the winter of 2023, a 5.7-magnitude earthquake struck near the city of Khoy in West Azerbaijan Province, Iran. The earthquake caused significant devastation, resulting in numerous casualties and injuries, with many homes and buildings destroyed. Over 70 villages reported damage, and the disaster caused significant disruption to water, power, and gas supplies. The economic impact was substantial. This devastating natural disaster’s victims furthermore had to suffer through the the mountainous region’s harsh winter, desperately searching for shelter, food, and supplies.
Iran, a multiethnic nation, is home to Turks (Azerbaijani, Qashqai, etc.), Arabs, Lurs, Kurds, Balochs, Gileks, and more. However, minority ethnic groups have also long grappled with issues of Persian ethnocentrism and cultural erasure through “persianification”. State policies materially and culturally favour the dominant Persian ethnicity and even actively discriminate against minorities towards this end, stripping non-Persian ethnic groups of their rights and marginalizing them in times of need.
In the wake of the Khoy earthquake, the response from the government and society was extremely inadequate, with little aid reaching the affected areas. The government refused to send aid, refused international offers of assistance (notably from the neighboring countries Turkey and Republic of Azerbaijan), and restricted or banned aid from reaching the city, particularly aid provided by other Azerbaijanis. Allegations emerged of authorities taking back supplies given to people once cameras turned off. On the societal front, support predominantly came from Azerbaijanis, while other ethnic groups showed little interest. Persian celebrities did not advocate for aid, and social media saw no significant trends highlighting the issue, indicating a dearth of attention and support. In stark contrast, natural disasters affecting predominantly Persian regions of Iran have historically garnered substantial support and attention. Compare the above with the example of the Iranian response to the 2003 earthquake in Bam, southeastern Iran, which saw extensive international aid and a coordinated government response, leading to effective rescue and reconstruction efforts, supported by widespread national solidarity.
Even the death of a rare Asiatic cheetah cub named Pirouz (Persian for “victorious”), sparked national outrage in Iran, with extensive media coverage, widespread public mourning, and active involvement from celebrities advocating for wildlife conservation. In contrast, the Khoy earthquake, which caused significant human suffering, received limited media attention and a relatively muted public response. The government's inadequate aid and restricted local support further highlighted the disparity in social engagement and preferential treatment between different ethnicities of Iran.
The "Us vs. Them" Dichotomy
National solidarity versus national indifference: why do such disparities in our response to tragedy and suffering exist? Despite their similarities in appearance, as well as shared religion and country, Iranian Azerbaijanis often face neglect compared to their Persian counterparts. The answer lies in our biology and the "Us vs. Them" reaction, a fundamental aspect of social behavior.
The "Us vs. Them" dichotomy simplifies social identities into two opposing groups: the in-group ("us") and the out-group ("them"). This distinction, while fostering group cohesion, can also lead to prejudice and conflict. Rapid, automatic biases against an out-group are demonstrated by a clever test: the Implicit Association Test (IAT). This psychological tool measures unconscious biases by assessing the speed at which people associate different concepts with positive or negative attributes. Concepts such as race, ethnicity, religion, age, etc. Developed in 1998, the IAT reveals implicit attitudes that influence perceptions and behaviors.
Tests similar to IAT have also been used for assessing non-human primates, revealing insightful parallels to human implicit bias. In a study, monkeys were shown images pairing in-group members ("us") with desirable fruits and out-group members ("them") with aversive spiders (primates have shown an instinctual fear of spiders). The results showed that monkeys stared longer at images that mismatched these associations - that is, in-group members with spiders or out-group members with fruits - which indicates a disruption in expected associative processing. This suggests that implicit “Us vs Them” biases, are not exclusive to humans, highlighting the deep evolutionary roots of these social behaviors. Similarly, among our primate relatives, chimpanzee groups can exhibit this phenomenon. When chimp groups grow larger, they often split, and the newly formed groups regard each other as rivals, despite their previous warm and welcomed in-group status.
In humans, neuro-imaging studies show that out-group members trigger the amygdala, the brain's center for aggression and fear. Neutral faces of out-group members are more likely to be perceived as angry, further demonstrating a deep-seated bias favoring the in-group.
In short, the in-group is always preferred. We perceive ourselves as smarter, more beautiful, stronger, and more ethical, with our beliefs and customs seen as superior. While we acknowledge our mistakes, we view "them" as fundamentally flawed or inferior. This biased favoritism toward in-group members is evident in both humans and other social animals, as demonstrated in the example provided.
Different types of "Them" evoke distinct feelings, rooted in variations in the neurobiology of fear and disgust. For instance, fear-evoking faces make us vigilant, activating the visual cortex, while disgust-evoking faces provoke repulsion. Our brains categorize people along two axes: warmth (friend or foe) and competence. This results in four combinations: high warmth/high competence (“us”), low warmth/low competence (e.g., homeless individuals), high warmth/low competence (e.g., the elderly), and low warmth/high competence (e.g., minority groups seen as contemptible but capable). Each category triggers different emotions: pride for us, disgust for cold and incompetent, pity for warm but incompetent, and envy for cold but competent. These reactions can shift, influencing our perceptions and social dynamics. For example, shifts from high warmth/high competence to low warmth/low competence can evoke feelings of betrayal or disgust. In the case of ethnic rivals, we usually see the latter (LH) or (LL).
Historical and Contemporary Examples
As human brains have evolved in complexity, so too have the psychological phenomena that govern our social interactions. The "us vs. them" dichotomy can be applied even to groups that are not obviously distinguishable from each other.
Consider the early Christians, who originated as a sect within Judaism. Initially, they presented themselves as adhering to the same religious tradition, albeit with a new interpretation centered on Jesus as the Messiah. Despite their shared foundation in the Old Testament, they faced severe persecution from Jewish authorities, as they were perceived to have crossed into the territory of "them" despite being part of "us" initially. This transition from insiders to outsiders highlights how former in-group members can become rivals. (Remember the case of chimpanzee groups.)
In the context of Judaism and Christianity, after the rise of Christianity as a religion backed by state authority, Jews themselves became persecuted. Scholars suggest that several factors contributed to this persecution, including their role in moneylending (i.e., usury, often one of the few professions allowed to Jews due to restrictions on land ownership and guild memberships), their strong intra-communal solidarity (“achdut" (אחדות)), and their refusal to assimilate into Christian society. These economic and social distinctions reinforced the "us vs. them" mentality, leading to widespread prejudice and discrimination.
For an even more interesting case, consider the Cagots, a historically marginalized group in France and Spain. From the Middle Ages until the 19th century, they faced severe discrimination despite being indistinguishable from the rest of the population in appearance, religion, language, names or anything else. They were forced to live in separate quarters, wear distinctive clothing, sit apart in church, and take on menial jobs. Yet, the reason for their distinction was and still is unknown. There are theories proposed to explain the reason for their initial discrimination: they were the descendants of soldiers from the Islamic invasion of Spain, or perhaps, my favorite, they were the first group in the region to convert to Christianity, leaving them discriminated far past point of when the rest of the population also converted. There were also baseless claims that Cagots carried diseases and infections, reinforcing negative stereotypes without any factual basis. During the French Revolution, Cagots burned official documents to escape persecution, highlighting their desperate efforts to free themselves from deeply ingrained prejudices. The history of the Cagots exemplifies how unfounded "us vs. them" distinctions can lead to long-lasting social exclusion and discrimination.
Implications for the Khoy Earthquake Response
In writing this article, I am not asserting that the "Us vs. Them" dichotomy is the sole explanation for the complex ethnic discriminations in Iran. Nor am I justifying the actions of Persian authorities by labeling them as evolutionary psychological behaviors that can be dismissed. Rather, my objective is to analyze these issues from the perspective of behavioral biology to provide a new lens through which we can understand and address this century-long issue.
When a group is labeled as "them," their suffering is often perceived as deserved punishment or downplayed. Their movements and protests are seen as selfish, insignificant, and unimportant. Their pain is dismissed as irrelevant.
This attitude has been evident in Iran, such as in the predominantly Persian society and government dismissing Azerbaijani linguistic protests as “pan-Turkism”, the drying of Lake Urmia in the Azerbaijani provinces in the last decades being blamed on Azerbaijani farmers' wells, and the response to the Khoy earthquake was largely one of neglect.
Considering the warmth-competence axes into which we categorize other humans, the status of Azerbaijanis in Iran becomes clearer. The region of Azerbaijan, with Tabriz as its center, has historically been an important center for trade (located directly on the Silk Road), agriculture (being partially on the Fertile Crescent and being famous for its gardens), and industry. In imperial times, Azerbaijan also boasted significant political and military power as it was traditionally ruled by the crown prince prior to taking the crown, as well as being the location of some dynasties like the Qara Qoyunlu (Black Sheep Turkomans). However, following the Russian annexation of the Azerbaijan north of the Aras River (now the Republic of Azerbaijan), and the start of the Pahlavi dynasty, the region has been on decline in every aspect. Industry and trades have been moved to central parts of Iran, mismanagement of resources and dams have dried almost all water banks, and trees have been cut without replacement, thus causing deforestation. All political and military powers have been revoked as well, with history being retold as if the Azerbaijan region did not have much significance at all. As a result, the Azerbaijani territory has transitioned from a significant economic and political hub to an insignificant, marginal region within Iran.
Since the early 20th century, Iranian nationalists, including in state power, have pushed to unify Iran through ethnic homogenization under a centralized government. This trend has remained consistent both before and after the Islamic Revolution. While all minority ethnic groups have been affected to different extents, Azerbaijanis have been targeted most strongly. Since Azerbaijanis were traditionally relatively economically self-sufficient, politically self-governing, and linguistically and culturally distinct - in contrast to most other ethnic minority groups in Iran - they would have been the most difficult to assimilate into the emerging modern Persian national culture and identity. As a result, they also posed the biggest challenge towards Persian nationalist ideology and policy.
In response to the challenge posed by the autonomy of the Azerbaijani people, Persian authorities and nationalist extremists have sought to recategorize Azerbaijanis from LH (Low warmth, High competence) to LL (Low warmth, Low competence) in the national psyche. State policy and Persian media and culture have consistently sought to suppress Azerbaijani culture and present Azerbaijini Turks as backwards, unrefined and unintelligent. This trend began during Pahlavi times, with school books specifically advocating to not respond to your classmates if they speak in (Azerbaijani) Turkish. Later ethnic jokes became widespread in which “Turk” would mean a stupid character, and the accent of an Azerbaijani speaking Persian was also mocked in order to promote assimilation into a coveted, high-status Persian identity. Cartoonist Mana Neyestani’s 2006 caricature depicting Azerbaijanis as cockroaches was promoted in the government’s Friday-magazine Iran-e-jomee, and the children’s television show Fitileh in 2015 depicted an Azerbaijani as a stupid person using a toilet brush as a toothbrush further support this. I believe the lack of aid to Azerbaijanis during the Khoy eartquake may be a deliberate extension of the government’s strategy to weaken the region of South Azerbaijan (Iranian Azerbaijan) and expedite the assimilation process.
Azerbaijanis, along with some other non-Persian ethnicities in Iran, often seek to escape discrimination by assimilating into Persian culture, thereby losing their own ethnicity, history, language, resources, and identity. This path to assimilation is seen as a means of survival, as refusal to assimilate can lead to further discrimination and hatred from other groups, as discussed with the example of the Jews.
When a group is labeled as "them," their suffering is often perceived as deserved punishment or downplayed. Their movements and protests are seen as selfish, insignificant, and unimportant. Their pain is dismissed as irrelevant.
This attitude has been evident in Iran, such as in the predominantly Persian society and government dismissing Azerbaijani linguistic protests as “pan-Turkism”, the drying of Lake Urmia in the Azerbaijani provinces in the last decades being blamed on Azerbaijani farmers' wells, and the response to the Khoy earthquake was largely one of neglect.
In conclusion, assistance to Azerbaijanis from authorities and the general populace would indeed be surprising, given that Iranian society has historically positioned Azerbaijanis and other ethnic groups as "them". This century-long discrimination has become deeply ingrained, and actions taken have reflected this stance. The response to the Khoy earthquake further exemplifies this, as it was perceived not as an earthquake of “Iran”, but as an earthquake of “Khoy” alone.