Talk:Iran-Arab relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Arab world WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	Saudi Arabia Portal This article is part of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Saudi Arabia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 The Map 2 The Opening Paragraph 3 Re: the 20th century 4 Egypt has no relations with Iran, and western sahara is not Arab or a country! 5 Map 6 Rearrangement 7 Suggestion to split this article

[edit] The Map

Is wrong. Somolia is NOT an Arab country, nor is Djabuti. Though both countries belong to the Arab League they are not Arab.

[edit] The Opening Paragraph

I think the opening paragraph could use an overhall, but it will be a while before I focus on it (for the moment, I think I will be sticking to the 20th century). If anyone wants to beat me to it (it being a revision of the article), that would be cool. --(Mingus ah um 06:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Re: the 20th century

I've alphabetized/added to the Arab states, but we still have some serious work to do. When it comes to the blank states (that is, the empty sections), Lebanon and Syria should be our primary focus, if only for Hezbollah's and Syria's reigning Baath party's close ties to Iran. Then again, there's so much to do here... any contributions would be worthwhile. --(Mingus ah um 06:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC))

Should the the 20th Century be split into two different categories (e.g., Relations with the Pahlavi dynasty and Relations with the Islamic Revolution)? Any thoughts? --(Mingus ah um 23:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC))

I thought about that as well, but so many Arab countries did not obtain independence only until the last years of the Pahlavi dynasty. I think it would lead to a whole bunch of small three sentence paragraphs. I think keeping it in its current form is mroe flowing... other opinions?

--(Tototom 22 May 2006 (UTC))

Hmmm... Maybe there should be subcategories within each nation. Example: Main Category: Relations in the 20th Century Subcategory: Specific Nation Sub-subcategories: Relations with the Pahlavi Dynasty; Relations with the Islamic Revolution

If we do not have any information regarding the relations of a given country with the Pahlavi Dynasty, we can throw up a section stub, and, if we know that there were no relations with the Pahlavi Dynasty, we can start Relations with the Islamic Revolution with a sentence like this: "Diplomatic relations between Country X and Iran were formed after the consolidation of the Islamic Revolution." What do you think? --(Mingus ah um 20:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC))

Lets do it! Tototom 11:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Egypt has no relations with Iran, and western sahara is not Arab or a country!

Western Sahara is not a country with an Arab majority, it isn't a member of the Arab league, it isn't recognized by any Arab country or any international body as an independent state.

Egypt does not have normalized relations with Tehran, there is no Iranian embassy in Cairo or a consulate anywhere in the country, nor is there an Egyptian embassy in Tehran. There have been intermitent attempts at reconciliation, but they have mostly been short lived and Cairo's position hasn't changed much for the last three decades. By this definition, Egypt (and I believe many of the countries on the list) has no relations with Iran. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karkaron (talk • contribs)

[edit] Map

This article deals with the Iran-Arab relations. Therefore it is necessary to know what the Arab world is. As there is more than one definition of the Arab world, as rightfully recognized by the Arab world article, the map should include all possible definitions. Emphasizing one definition (such as the map inserted by User: Arab League) therefore constiutes a violation of WP:NPOV. Sijo Ripa 09:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

i find it insulting, why would i Emphasize with a topic defining Iran's relations with Arab States???

i simply created the map to sho the official boundries of both nations, rather then ethnic maps of the Arab world to decrease its area!!!, why then not eliminate non-persian parts of Iran, if thats the case, i find YOUR acts as violations of WP:NPOV, just think about it, why decrease the Arab Official lands into ethnic ones and not do the same with Iran's??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arab League (talk • contribs) 00:50, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I don't really understand everything you are trying to say. Why the current map is better, is that it shows the various definitions of the Arab world, including the maximal definition. The reason why the same is not applied for Iran, is simple: this page is about the Iran-Arab relations. Iran is a country, the Arab world is not and several definitions exist about what countries are Arab. While the article can include all countries of the maximal definition, an emphasis on one definition is POV. Sijo Ripa 09:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rearrangement

I separated foreign relations of Pahlavi dynasty and Islamic republic of Iran. Ithink it helps to look at it as whole instead of writing similar notes for every Arab country. We can understand Pahlavi's foreign policy on the basis of the cold war logic. Usually Pahlavi dynasty was a ally of west and therefor it had good relations with the U.S. allies in Arab world. Islamic republic is completely another state and it follows another doctrine, i.e. It cooperate with anti-western states and stay against westernized states. --Seyyed(t-c) 06:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion to split this article

I'd suggest to make both "Relations with Pahlavi Dynasty" and "Relations with Islamic republic of Iran" separate articles. The article is currently awfully long, as is the table of contents (55 entries!). Moreover, since both abovementioned sections contain exactly the same subsections, links to these won't work correctly. Even when editing a subsection of "Relations with Islamic republic of Iran", you are taken to the same-name subsection of "Relations with Pahlavi Dynasty" after saving.—Graf Bobby (talk) 00:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I support u in being bold! Ryan4314 (talk) 00:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

It's good idea. Of course we can make an article about Iran-Arab relation during history and these are two of the sub-articles of that one.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)