11 September: Tehran’s Night of Candles — When the People of Iran Mourned with New York
S. Rouzbeh
۱۴۰۴/۰۶/۱۸

S. Rouzbeh recalls the spontaneous candlelight gathering in Tehran after the 11 September attacks, describing how people expressed solidarity with victims and distinguished their compassion from the government’s rhetoric.

S. Rouzbeh — When news of the terrorist attack on 11 September reached us and we saw the images, the world was plunged into shock and people everywhere were deeply affected. Like millions of others, I stared in disbelief at the television screen: New York’s two great towers were collapsing in fire and smoke, and thousands of innocent people were losing their lives in the blink of an eye. I felt that every blow against those towers was also a wound to our hearts.

That night, word spread from person to person in Tehran that people were going to gather on Mirdamad Street and at “Mother” Square (Meydan-e Mohseni). I made my way there too. As darkness fell, the crowd grew by the minute until it numbered in the thousands. A heavy silence hung in the air, broken by sighs and the quiet sobs of some people. Faces were sorrowful for people they had never known; every gaze was full of grief and disbelief. People said, “They were innocent human beings; this wasn’t a war, they weren’t soldiers.” The words rose from people’s hearts like a collective lament. Everyone cursed terrorism; everyone felt the victims’ helplessness.

Although “Death to America” was constantly repeated at Friday prayers and on television, that night I saw people for whom borders and government meant nothing. Only humanity mattered to them: conscience, not religion, race or colour. This understanding and awareness among the people was admirable. They had no enmity towards other nations; their only wish was for a simple, peaceful and humane life. This took place two years after the incident at Tehran University dormitories and its suppression, and the people did not back down. Many young people were among the crowd, women and men, old and young, as well as families.

Among the crowd, for the first time, a young officer, about thirty-something, caught my attention. He seemed to be in charge of the scene, but, contrary to what one might expect, he behaved calmly and respectfully. He and his forces were saying, “Ladies and gentlemen, please move on to the pavement and do not obstruct the flow of traffic.” It was a strange moment: the crowd was in mourning, while a commander showed courtesy and reason instead of violence. Perhaps they, too, felt something different. Then, towards the end of the gathering, plainclothes men appeared on motorbikes.

Candles had been lit along the pavement, in front of the shops and beside the gutters. Their flames shone like thousands of glowing hearts. Beside each candle was a picture of solidarity: an old woman quietly shedding tears, a young person singing the anthem “Ey Iran”, a child holding their mother’s hand and gazing in wonder at the flames. The voices blended together: “America, America, our condolences”… “Death to the Taliban”… “Death to terrorists”.

Iranians gathered spontaneously in cities across the country, including Tehran. Some reports indicate that candlelight vigils and moments of silence were held in cities such as Mashhad, Tabriz, Isfahan, Shiraz and elsewhere, reflecting a profound outpouring of solidarity throughout the country.

That night, with all my heart, I realised that the people of Iran, separate from their government, are a kind and humane nation, like their ancestors. What I saw was an image that should remain in history. Now, 24 years later, the feeling of that night is still alive in my heart, and I want to recount it for younger generations, so they will know that, at the height of repression and the government’s deceptive slogans, the people of Iran chose another path with their conscience and their hearts: the path of solidarity, humanity and kindness.

1) A scene recorded in history: candles and silence

That night, thousands gathered; they sang “Ey Iran” and cried out: “America, America, our condolences”, “Death to the Taliban”, “Death to terrorists”. Thousands of candles had been lit along the pavement, in front of the shops and beside the gutters. It was a moving sight: people showing compassion for other people, a simple but meaningful expression of solidarity. The people showed that Iranian society is full of decent and honourable human beings, and that they had separated themselves from the government in this matter. The government did no more than issue a statement of condemnation; it could not even tolerate this solidarity for 24 hours, and the second night’s gathering was broken up by Basij forces.

2) Why was this solidarity spontaneous? The social psychology of a candle

1 — Boundless empathy: The suffering of civilians pushed political identities to the sidelines.

2 — Collective mourning: Candles and silence are a universal language of grief.

3 — Civic ethics in contrast with official politics: People wanted to say, “We stand with the people of America, we do not recognise the government’s slogans, and we are not hostile to any country.”

4 — A low-cost symbolic act: Yet these very candles proved intolerable to the security establishment.

3) Civic mourning versus government mourning

Civic mourning is horizontal and without flags; it comes from below and is humane. Government mourning, by contrast, is hierarchical, propagandistic and accompanied by symbols of power. People distance themselves from it to prevent public emotion from being appropriated. Tehran’s candles showed that society is separate from the government.

4) The world’s response: from the Security Council to NATO

On 12 September 2001, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1368 and recognised the right of self-defence. Two weeks later, Resolution 1373 was adopted to combat the financing of terrorism. NATO activated Article 5 for the first time. The European Union and the Organisation of American States also declared their solidarity.

According to international records, many countries held similar observances, including candle-lighting ceremonies, moments of silence and memorial gatherings.

5) Iran: The divide between the state and the regime

Khatami and the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic condemned the attack, and Tehran’s mayor sent a message of condolence. But the security institutions would not permit public gatherings. This duality showed that the reformist government and society were at odds with the security regime.

6) The response in America: The people, distinct from the regime

American media covered the scene of Tehran’s candles. Time magazine wrote of a “sea of candles”, and The New Yorker reported that Basij forces broke up the gathering on its second night. In Washington, too, discussion emerged about distinguishing “the people of Iran” from “the Iranian regime”. A year later, George Bush addressed the people of Iran directly in a message, speaking of their aspirations and a freer future.

In 2011, on the anniversary of 11 September, the US State Department officially wrote: “We will never forget the kindness of the Iranian people in those difficult days.” In those same years, Bush and other American officials repeatedly stressed: “We respect the people of Iran and know that the Iranian nation is separate from the regime.” Even official Congressional documents referred to “thousands of people lighting candles in Tehran” as a sign of the Iranian people’s sympathy for the American victims. All of this clearly reflected the symbolic impact that night had on Washington’s official outlook.

7) A sociological and anthropological view of the empathy shown by the people of Iran

From a sociological perspective, lighting candles and singing together were forms of symbolic, collective action. People wanted to represent their identity in the public sphere independently of the state. By choosing simple, universal symbols such as candles, silence and the national anthem, they showed that they were part of the global community, not part of the Iranian regime.

From an anthropological perspective, this action recalled traditional Iranian observances: lighting a lamp or candle in mourning and in sympathy, a practice that has always existed in local culture. When these traditions became connected with a global crisis, the people’s cultural memory became intertwined with their experience of the day, and a new form of solidarity was born.

The important point was that people acted without any formal organisation. This spontaneity showed that Iranian civil society, even under pressure from the regime, is capable of producing collective and ethical action. Tehran’s lit candles were not only a symbol of sympathy for the victims of New York, but also a sign of society’s desire to express human feelings freely and to distinguish the people from the regime.

Conclusion

In September 2001, the people of Iran offered a lasting image of transnational human solidarity: candles, singing, expressions of sympathy and the simple sentence, “They were innocent.” This turning point drew the world’s attention and showed it that the Iranian nation is not what the regime claims it to be. The greatest achievement was to distinguish the people of Iran from the regime; this image was recorded in history and marked a different turning point in how the world saw them.

Source: https://srouzbeh.com/en/posts/archive-fa313e60-de4b-23d4-b2a6-a3463e3980ba
Please credit the author and link to this edition.