In political literature, the term” the parallel sovereignty is always used for structures which are out of formal framework of a country, but are producing power, making decision and exerting influence being parallel with it. Now, here is the question: Is Bahaism organization merely a theological movement or an example of such pattern of “parallel sovereignty”?
Investigating documents and published and analysis in some resources show that the Bahaism structure acts beyond a simple religious organization. This structure includes a multi-layer net consisting of local, national and international foundations each of which possesses strategic, financial and organizational definite functions.
What makes this structure is not merely its extensiveness; but it is its kind of application. In this pattern; a coherent chain of decision making has been formed from “local assemblies” to the universal house of justice” which not only is dealing with theological affairs, but also it plays key role in domains suck as managing resources, social guidance and even regulating group behavior, too.
One of the most important axes posed in these analyses is the subject of the “organizational plans” which have been started since Abdul Baha‘s period of time and continued during decades. These plans which are being introduced superficially having titles such as “proselytizing” or “progressive” have been interpreted in fact as step by step plans to expand influence and organizing humane resources.
According to this analysis which is based on valid data, Bahaism organization must answer to a serious question: Why does a religious movement need such a level of organizational planning and universal networking? Is the aim merely proselytizing beliefs or achieving a kind of structural power in national level?
Another issue is “the lack of glassiness. Most Bahaism activities are done in the form of foundations which are superficiality being introduced as civil or cultural organizations; but in practice, they are a part of greater network. This issue which is called “the organizational coverage” is using superficially impartial structures to proceed enormous aims.
This pattern resembles the classic models of soft influence very much; where power is being exerted not vie force, but via working, making culture and managing humane resources.
However, the most important note is influencing this structure on the concept of national sovereignty. Won’t it mean the weakening of formal sovereignty if a transnational net is able to create parallel structure from financial network to decision making system?
Researchers believe that such pattern can eventually end in a kind of “soft power transmission which influence on social and political structures without overt conflict having deep influence.
Meantime, a remarkable note is the historical antecedent of this movement in Iran. Previous experiences of anti-national activities of the Baha’is during Qajar, Pahlavi and Islamic Republic periods of time have caused each organized activity of this organization to be investigated more carefully.
At last, the issue goes back a basic binary: Is Bahaism a religion or a political organization having aims beyond a religion? Using the above-mentioned analysis, the answer is the second option, so investigating the behaviors of the Islamic Republic of Iran concerning Bahaism and the Baha’is in Iran mustn’t be merely measured in theological framework, but in comprehensive and correct look at this organization, it must be investigated in political and- security framework.
This is the very point in which discussing about a political organization of Bahaism is being changed from a religious dispute to a security and political challenge. Naturally, it differentiates the method of behavior of sovereignty with the Baha’is and other really religious minorities.
Keep in touch with us: bahaismiran85@gmail.com
