Imperial Legacies and Modern Exceptionalism: Diverging Paths of National Identity in Turkey and Iran
Written by Luca Guerzoni
Published on March 20th, 2025
The imperial histories of Iran and Turkey have left an enduring imprint on their modern political identities, ideologies, and the public preferences of their citizens. Iran, as the heart of the ancient Persian Empire, carries a legacy of sovereignty and resistance to external domination, culminating in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This event marked the end of the Western-supported Pahlavi dynasty and solidified an anti-Western, pan-Islamic identity rooted in its imperial narrative. In contrast, Turkey, the successor to the Ottoman Empire, embraced secularism under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk when the Republic of Turkey was established in 1923 and distanced itself from its Ottoman past. Though the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Turkey had revived Ottoman symbolism in the national narrative by the early 2000s, it did so aiming to reassert Turkey's regional influence while maintaining strategic relations with Western powers rather than to reinforce the aversion to external influence, as was the case in Iran. The imperial legacies of Iran and Turkey played a significant role in shaping each of their modern political identities and electoral preferences. Their similarities and distinctions present a unique case study of how historical grandeur informs modern governance.
The imperial legacies of Iran and Turkey have fostered a similar sense of exceptionalism with differing manifestations. While Iran's imperial heritage reinforces a focus on sovereignty and resistance to external interference, Turkey's Ottoman legacy drives ambitions for regional leadership. The electoral successes of Erdogan’s AKP Party in Turkey and the Iranian Revolution have shown that citizens of both nations prefer a strong leadership over liberal democratic ideals, albeit motivated by distinct historical and cultural narratives. Imperial legacies profoundly shape political identities and electoral preferences in Turkey and Iran, as historical grandeur and the enduring symbolism of empire continue to inform modern governance, fostering distinct narratives of national strength and political authority.
Interpreting Imperial Identities
Western political thought has long upheld the idea that democracy is a universal aspiration and the ultimate goal of any civilization. This perspective has shaped how political movements in non-Western societies are understood by the West, often leading to misinterpretations of events. In fact, this logic can not be applied in Iran and Turkey as both nations were former empires and have a defined imperial identity. For instance, political protests and dissent in these nations are frequently framed as movements toward democratization, neglecting the influence of non-democratic imperial legacies that shape their political cultures. The 1979 Iranian Revolution is often oversimplified as an Islamist takeover of a pro-democratic movement, while events like Turkey’s Gezi Park protests in 2013 are viewed as straightforward expressions of democratic aspirations.
The legacy of being a former empire ingrains a collective memory of centralized power, territorial dominance, and a unifying narrative of grandeur, which fosters a cultural preference for strong leadership as a reflection of past glory and stability. This imperial legacy often frames governance through the lens of continuity with historical greatness, prioritizing the preservation of a cohesive national identity over the pluralistic and often fragmented ideals associated with democracy. For this reason, Imperial legacies offer a more nuanced explanation of political developments in these nations. Turkey’s modern political identity draws heavily on its Ottoman past, as seen in the AKP’s deliberate use of Ottoman symbolism to legitimize its governance and aspirations for regional influence. The blending of Islamic values and Ottoman heritage provides a unifying narrative for diverse communities while fostering ambitions to reclaim historical dominance. Similarly, Iran’s political culture reflects a dynamic interplay between ancient Persian imperial traditions and the later incorporation of Shi’a Islam to shape national identity and regional influence. The Islamic Republic’s invocation of pre-Islamic symbols, such as reverence for Cyrus the Great and the celebration of Nowruz, illustrates how these legacies are reinterpreted and integrated across regime changes. This blending of pre-Islamic and Islamic elements highlights a deliberate modification rather than a straightforward continuity, reflecting the evolving nature of Iran's political and cultural narrative. Both nations prioritize historical sovereignty and assertive governance over Western democratic ideals, demonstrating the enduring relevance of their imperial pasts in shaping modern political identity.
Iranians and Turks share a historical imperial identity that continues to shape their political outlooks. However, this identity manifests differently. In Iran, the Persian imperial legacy, intertwined with Shi’a Islam, fosters a strong anti-Western stance and prioritizes sovereignty and regional influence. In Turkey, Ottoman heritage inspires a neo-imperial ambition, blending Islamic values with modern governance to reassert regional leadership while selectively engaging with Western powers.
Turkey
The AKP’s electoral success in 2002 marked a shift in Turkish politics, driven by support from two marginalized groups: the Anatolian Islamic bourgeoisie and the lower-income working class in urban shantytowns. These groups, previously neglected by Kemalist elites, embraced the AKP’s Islamic-nationalist rhetoric, which combined Ottoman symbolism with modern governance. The party’s neo-Ottoman narrative emphasizes Turkey’s imperial heritage as a source of national pride, fostering aspirations for regional leadership. The blending of Turkish nationalism, Islam, and Ottoman identity has shaped a foreign policy focused on former Ottoman territories, with interventions in Cyprus, Syria, the Balkans, and North Africa reflecting a broader ambition to reclaim historical influence. In Cyprus, the 1974 invasion and ongoing East Mediterranean maritime claims highlight Turkey’s effort to restore its regional dominance and maritime power, framed as protecting Turkish Cypriots and national interests. Military campaigns in Syria and soft power initiatives in the Balkans aim to reassert Turkey’s strategic and cultural influence, while involvement in Libya signals a renewed engagement with North Africa, all underpinned by a narrative of reviving Ottoman-era prestige. Turkey’s support for the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian cause aligns with its pan-Islamic narrative, positioning itself as a leader within the Muslim world. Despite these ambitions, the AKP has maintained ties with Western institutions like NATO and the EU, balancing its neo-imperial aspirations with pragmatic collaboration to enhance Turkey’s geopolitical standing. This is because Turkey's imperial legacy, rooted in the Ottoman Empire's long-standing engagement with Europe through diplomacy, trade, and conflict, positioned it as a bridge between East and West, fostering a historical aspiration for acceptance by Western powers. This political trajectory reflects a collective national identity rooted in imperial grandeur, prioritizing stability and influence over Western democratic ideals.
Iran
Iran’s imperial legacy spans millennia, shaping its identity as a civilization deserving of respect and influence on the global stage. This perception persisted through foreign invasions, cultural upheavals, and the rise of Islamic governance. Even as Iran adopted Shi’a Islam under the Safavids, it maintained a distinct imperial identity that differentiated it from neighboring Sunni powers like the Ottoman Empire. The Islamic Revolution of 1979 marked a turning point, with the new regime blending Persian traditions with Shi’a ideology to craft a narrative of resistance against Western domination. Iran’s anti-Western stance, rooted in historical experiences of foreign interference and imposed borders, resonates with citizens who prioritize sovereignty and regional hegemony. The regime’s invocation of Persian history alongside Islamic principles underscores its commitment to preserving national identity and imperial ambitions. Elements like the celebration of Nowruz and reverence for Cyrus the Great illustrate how Iran’s pre-Islamic heritage continues to inform its political culture. While internal dissatisfaction exists, it does not translate into widespread aspirations for Western-style democracy. Instead, Iranians often support a governance model that emphasizes sovereignty and resistance to external influence.
Conclusion
The imperial legacies of Turkey and Iran have profoundly shaped their contemporary political landscapes, fostering a shared sense of exceptionalism rooted in historical prestige. While both nations reflect a preference for strong leadership, this sentiment diverges in its motivations: Turkey seeks to reassert itself as a regional leader through a neo-Ottoman identity that blends Islam with modern governance, while Iran emphasizes resistance to foreign influence, using Shi’a Islam as a means of unifying national identity. Ultimately, the enduring influence of imperial history suggests that both nations prioritize sovereignty and a unique form of self-determined governance over Western democratic aspirations, interpreting their imperial pasts as a blueprint for their modern ambitions.
