By Saieh Mohabi
Urmia — Amid growing complaints about the marginalization of Kurds in Iran’s public sphere, criticism is mounting against policies seen as excluding non-Persian national identities — particularly in multiethnic cities like Urmia.
Urmia is one of the oldest multicultural cities in the country, with a population of over 900,000. Over time, its demographic composition has changed. For example, the Christian population has declined compared to the past, while Kurds and Azerbaijanis now form the majority of the city and its surrounding villages.
Throughout history, successive Iranian central governments have used Urmia’s linguistic and religious diversity as a means of control and restriction rather than a model for coexistence. In recent decades, the city has become a focal point of cultural and identity politics.
Today, Kurds constitute one of the main population groups in Urmia. However, according to civil society activists, they face various forms of denial and marginalization within official policies. This trend is particularly visible in the naming of public facilities, where Kurdish names are excluded from streets, parks, and commercial centers. This has sparked anger among citizens who see such measures as an erasure of their cultural and linguistic identity.
The city’s nearly dried-up river, listed on satellite maps under its Azerbaijani name “Shaharchay,” as well as parks named “Güler Baghı,” “Eller Baghı,” and “Saghlıg Baghı,” and commercial centers like “Turk Mall,” are cited by residents as examples of unequal linguistic representation. According to them, Kurdish names have no place in public spaces and sometimes even face restrictions or intervention by security forces.
Civil activist (Sadiqa K.) stated that the denial of Kurdish identity in Urmia began with the exclusion of the Kurdish language from official use, alongside the marginalization of its literature and vocabulary. She pointed out that speaking Kurdish in institutions is treated as undesirable in the absence of official recognition — a situation reflected in the ban on Kurdish names for public facilities.
“The existence of a shopping complex called ‘Turk Mall’ raises questions about the standards used to grant such licenses,” she added.
“The city belongs to all its residents. The problem is not with Turkish names themselves but with policies that promote the superiority of one group over others,” she said. She also warned that such policies do not only affect Kurds but also Azerbaijani speakers, noting that Azerbaijani mothers are often prevented from teaching their children their native language and face social pressures and insults that limit their ability to pass their culture to future generations.
Another civil activist from Urmia, (Simin F.), also criticized the change of historical and original names, saying:
“Changing the names of villages and recreational sites has become a cultural threat. The government reinforces assimilation policies by converting names into Persian or replacing them altogether. These names are part of history and collective memory, and if Kurdish, Assyrian, Armenian, and Azerbaijani peoples do not resist, this neglected history may vanish from the minds of future generations. Unfortunately, this policy is particularly directed against Kurds and Christians in Urmia.”
What is happening in Urmia — and other multiethnic cities in Iran — seems to reflect the government’s general approach to dealing with ethnic and linguistic diversity. Citizens and activists believe that the continuation of these policies, in addition to deepening social divisions, could pave the way for broader protests and demands for recognition of diverse identities. If addressed peacefully, these demands could represent an important step toward coexistence and mutual respect among the nation’s peoples.