The relationship between the Persians and the Arabs is very complex, and this complexity is not new. Rather, it has roots in history and geography that brings together two nations that were destined to be adjacent to each other, separated only by a gulf and common borders.

Despite the ethnic extension of the Persians to the east and north, where their cousins, the Uzbeks and Georgians, are present, they see the world only through their Arab neighbors in Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula. It is the complex of history and the attempt to impose hegemony on neighbors with whom they have no relationship other than the common borders. Nevertheless, all the attempts of the Persians to impose hegemony and occupation were always directed westward to Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula. Despite their simplicity, lack of natural resources, and hard life, the Arabs represented a superiority complex to the Persians that was difficult to understand.

The characteristics of hatred and arrogance are what imposed the rules of the game and drew the relationship between the kings of Persia and the Arab peoples and leaders from 2000 years ago until today, that is, since Shapur II (Shapur with the shoulders) invaded the coasts of the Arabian Peninsula. At that time, he penetrated until he reached Medina, killing and terrifying the Muslims, and dislocating the shoulders of the Arab fighters with nails.

Perhaps the very famous Dhi Qar incident in the history of the Arabs and Persians did not happen arbitrarily or as a result of disputes between two kings, but rather had its early precursors between two nations which relationship reached the point of explosion. The Persians dealt with the Arabs with arrogance and tyranny, and the Arabs manage the relationship by staving off danger and by trying to neutralize those who do not satisfy them at all.

The battle of Dhi Qar turned into a dividing line in that relationship between arrogance and rejecting it on the other hand, and turned the Arabs into a peer and paved the way for them a few years later, not only to defeat the Persians, but to uproot their rule from its roots and seize their crowns in the famous Islamic battle of Al-Qadisiyyah.

With regard to Dhi Qar, it may be useful to read it historically first, according to the narrations circulated about it: “Dhi Qar is a famous battle that took place in southern Iraq between the Arabs and the Persians, in which the Arabs won. It was one of the greatest days of the Arabs and is the first time that the Arabs defeated the Persians”.

The narration also says that the beauty of Arab women was mentioned to Khosrau Ibn Hormuz, and there was an Arab man called Zaid Ibn Odai in his council, and Al-Nu’man had killed his father, so he said to him: Dear King, your servant Al-Nu’man Ibn Al-Mundhir has more than twenty daughters, sisters and cousins in his family who are of this beauty.

Khosrau sent Zaid with a companion to Al-Nu’man for this mission. When they entered, they said to Al-Nu’man: Khosrau wants some Arab women for himself and for some of his sons, so he wants to honor you, and these are the qualities that he requires in wives. Al-Nu’man said to him: Did he not find in the cows of Iraq and Persia what would satisfy his needs? Send my greetings and apologies to Khosrau and tell him that Al-Nu’man did not find these qualities in the women he knows. Zaid reached Khosrau and ignited his anger and hatred. He said to him: Al-Nu’man tells you that you will find whoever you want in the cows of Iraq.

Khosrau got angry and kept silent in order to make Al-Nu’man feel reassured, then he sent to Al-Nu’man to bring him. Al-Nu’man knew that he was inevitably about to be killed. He carried his weapons and went to the desert of Banu Shayban, where he sought refuge with their master, Hani Ibn Masoud Al-Shaybani, and entrusted him with his women, property and weapons, and went to Khosrau. Khosrau did not meet him and insulted him, and sent to him those who arrested him and sent him to a prison where he stayed until the plague struck him there and died.

The historical narrative is over, but reading it from another perspective is the important matter:

It is true that there were problems and dispute that occurred between Khosrau, the king of Persia, and Al-Nu’man bin Al-Mundhir, the Arab king, but the dispute in reality was much deeper than that. The Persian king considered the Arabs to be mere followers who had to obey his orders. He made the decision of war and peace based on his interest, so they had only to obey and send their sons to his pyre. This was evident in his decision to wage war on the Romans. Al-Nu’man and his people tried not to fight it, as it was not their war, nor was it in their interest to engage in a battle between two great powers, as he knew that his end would be by the victorious power. That is what actually happened to him later by Khosrau.

The Persian king could not go beyond that independent Arab decision and considered that the mere presence of an Arab decision posed a danger to him and the prestige of his Persian people. What is narrated about Al-Nu’man’s refusal to marry Khosrau to his daughter or one of his relatives was just a pretext used by the Persian king to take revenge and kill Nu’man because of his political attitude towards the battle of the Romans.

When reading history and linking it to the present, perhaps it is useful to understand the Persian mentality and extract its political and military performance and its rooted vision of the Arab neighbor from before the advent of Islam until today, which is based on the following:

  | A treacherous racist political mentality that does not fight its opponents except through sub-adversaries.

    | If any battle occurs, it does not fight with its own soldiers, but with mercenaries and prisoners, and it makes the Arab fighters allied with it at the forefront of the battlefield.

    | Those fighting its Arab opponents are its Arab mercenary allies. This is what is happening now in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, isn’t it? This is the same way of conducting the war by proxy that Khosrau and Shapur carried out against their Arab neighbors, isn’t it? Iran today is the same old Persia that fights only through Arab agents and militias who carry out its military actions, implement its interests and adopt its agendas. It is history that never ends and never comes out of nowhere.