By Kiarash Manavi
Some advocates of modern political systems argue that federalism does not necessarily mean dividing a country along ethnic or linguistic lines. Instead, they present it as a model of decentralised governance, designed around the capacities and needs of different provinces and regions while remaining within the framework of a single, united country.
Supporters of this approach argue that the purpose of such a system is to find the lowest common denominator and promote national development by allowing regional capacities to flourish. They also claim that federalism is fully compatible with a parliamentary monarchy.
However, a closer look at Iran’s historical roots, social fabric, and national security requirements suggests that these assumptions represent a major strategic mistake. Comparing Iran with countries that operate under federal systems overlooks fundamental differences in their historical and political development.
1. The Historical Comparison Fallacy: Why Aren’t Germany and the United States Models for Iran?
One of the biggest mistakes made by supporters of federalism is comparing Iran’s political structure with countries such as Germany or the United States.
Germany: Unlike Iran, Germany was never historically a single, continuously centralised nation-state. Modern Germany emerged in the nineteenth century through the unification of kingdoms, duchies, and previously separate territories, such as Prussia, Bavaria, and Saxony, each of which had maintained distinct political identities and boundaries for centuries.
In that context, federalism developed as a practical way of bringing together previously independent states and territories under a single political framework.
The United States: The United States is a relatively young settler nation and did not emerge from an ancient, continuous nation-state. From its earliest political development, it consisted of individual states that entered into a political union with one another.
Iran, by contrast, is an ancient and continuous nation-state, with thousands of years of shared history, cultural interconnection, and a deeply rooted sense of national identity.
Applying a federal structure to such a historically integrated country, rather than strengthening national development, risks weakening the bonds that have held the country together.
2. The Illusion of Decentralisation and the Contradiction with a Parliamentary Monarchy
The argument that federalism is simply a model of decentralisation designed to allow different regions to prosper overlooks the legal and political nature of federal systems.
Federalism inherently involves the constitutional division of political authority and the creation of regional governments with their own powers and legal responsibilities.
At the same time, the claim that federalism would be entirely compatible with a parliamentary monarchy presents a serious contradiction in the Iranian context. A parliamentary monarchy in an ancient and historically unified country would require a strong sense of national cohesion and a clear national centre representing the unity of the state. Creating parallel regional parliaments and governments could instead lead to ongoing political disputes, competing interests, bargaining between regional authorities, and instability.
3. The Risk of Multiple Centres of Power and Greater Fragmentation
Perhaps the most serious potential consequence of introducing federalist ideas in Iran is the possibility of creating greater space for separatist movements.
Once political power is divided among regional governments, different groups could eventually seek greater autonomy under a variety of justifications. Over time, this could lead to the emergence of competing political symbols, institutions, and identities across different parts of the country.
Throughout Iran’s long history, regional affairs have been administered through governors and local officials who, at their best, have been expected to serve broader national interests rather than operate as separate regional governments.
Iran’s history and national identity are built on unity and continuity. Protecting this land requires strengthening national cohesion, merit-based governance, and territorial integrity, not importing political structures designed for fundamentally different historical and geographical circumstances.
We, Iranians are one nation, and one nation alone!