Historical Analysis
Historians have tried to analyze the factors that contributed to the demise of the Jangal Movement. Some of the main studies including those by Gregor Yeghikian and Ebrahim Fakhrayi (minister of Culture in Mirza's Cabinet of the Red Republic) suggest a role for both extremist actions taken by the Communist (Edalat) Party that provoked opposing religious sentiment among the public, and Mirza Koochak Khan's religious and at times somewhat conservative views on collaboration with the Communist Party as possible factors.
It has been suggested also that the change of policy on the Soviet side regarding pursuing global revolution (as advocated by Trotsky) versus establishing and protecting the Soviet Union was the main reason for them to withdraw support from the Gilan republic. The second option got more support and therefore Soviets signed a treaty with British in London (1921) which necessitated withdrawing from Northern Iran. Correspondence between Theodore Rothstein the Soviet ambassador in Tehran and Mirza Koochak Khan supports this view (Ebrahim Fakhrayi). As part of his peace making efforts, Rothstein had also sent a message to the Soviet officers among Ehsanollah Khan's one thousand strong force that had made its way towards Qazvin, not to obey his orders and as a result that campaign was defeated however, this view has been challenged by other historians emphasizing Kuchak Khan's limited view of revolution given his socio-economic and ideological position .
Read more about this topic: Kuchik Khan
Famous quotes containing the words historical and/or analysis:
“Some of us still get all weepy when we think about the Gaia Hypothesis, the idea that earth is a big furry goddess-creature who resembles everybody’s mom in that she knows what’s best for us. But if you look at the historical record—Krakatoa, Mt. Vesuvius, Hurricane Charley, poison ivy, and so forth down the ages—you have to ask yourself: Whose side is she on, anyway?”
—Barbara Ehrenreich (b. 1941)
“Analysis as an instrument of enlightenment and civilization is good, in so far as it shatters absurd convictions, acts as a solvent upon natural prejudices, and undermines authority; good, in other words, in that it sets free, refines, humanizes, makes slaves ripe for freedom. But it is bad, very bad, in so far as it stands in the way of action, cannot shape the vital forces, maims life at its roots. Analysis can be a very unappetizing affair, as much so as death.”
—Thomas Mann (1875–1955)