Why a proposal to resettle Parsis in Iran in the 1940s never took off

In June 1947, as India stood on the brink of independence, sections of the Iranian press began publishing articles suggesting that Parsis would emigrate in large numbers from India to the land of their ancestors. The idea echoed global calls within the Jewish diaspora encouraging migration to Palestine.

GA Naqvi, an officer in the consular section dealing with Indian affairs at the British Embassy in Tehran, informed authorities in New Delhi that the idea of Parsi immigration was gaining traction in Iran.

“It appears that a good deal of propaganda is being carried out to persuade the Parsee community in India to migrate to Iran,” Naqvi wrote in a letter dated July 24, 1947, to HC Beaumont, deputy secretary in the External Affairs and Commonwealth Department of the government of India.

The immigration proposal was the brainchild of two Zoroastrians based in Iran: J Badhni, a Parsi who had lived in the country for several years, and Arbab Jamshid Soheil, an Iranian Zoroastrian.

Naqvi noted that Badhni, an electrical engineer and representative of the Iran League of India, had visited India the previous year in connection with the scheme. “I understand [he] was also deputed to visit other foreign countries to find out suitable places where the Parsis of India could migrate to,” he added.

Badhni attempted to arrange for a group of Parsis to visit Iran in 1947 and identify potential settlement sites, including Shiraz and Isfahan.

The Persian-language newspaper Bastan reported on the expected arrival of a Parsi delegation. “We are pleased to announce that in the month of Shahriver [usually in August-September], some prominent Parsis of India, under the leadership of Mr Noshirwanji Adenwalla are visiting Iran,” the newspaper wrote.

It outlined an intensive 70-day trip: from Bombay to Khorramshahr by sea, onward to Abadan, and then by the Trans-Iranian Railway to Tehran, followed by visits to Khorasan, Mazandaran, Azerbaijan, Isfahan, Shiraz, Yazd and Kerman before returning to India.

The newspaper described Adenwalla as a prominent and well-known Parsi figure while naming the rest of the delegation. “These persons are very well acquainted with the present condition of the Parsis as well as of the whole of India,” it added. “The feelings of the Parsis towards their ancient land Iran and their great ancestors are well known. Thus love of Iran and its glorious part are never forgotten by the Parsis.”

Misleading impression

The afternoon daily Ettela’at also reported on the planned visit: “The aims of the party seem to be to explore avenues and make enquiries from various sources with a view to find out whether in case the present, unsettled political conditions in India would not be favourable to them and unfavourable laws involuntarily enforced upon them, they may eventually return to their ancient Fatherland and live there peacefully.”

Another publication, Mehre, endorsed the idea, stating that it was “high time” Parsis returned. “We are sure that the whole Iranian nation will be happy to see them in Iran and will positively honour and love them,” it wrote.

A media commentary even criticised earlier governments for discouraging such a return and urged the current leadership not to repeat those mistakes.

Soheil was so committed to the idea that he approached Iran’s prime minister, Ahmad Qavam, seeking support. According to a Radio Tehran report, he requested permission to travel to India and bring back a larger delegation of Parsis to present their case.

Naqvi closely tracked these developments and the statements of Soheil and Badhni. He reported that the Iranian prime minister expressed goodwill towards the idea, assuring that returning Parsis would enjoy the same rights and privileges as other Iranian citizens.

However, Naqvi made clear that sentiment was not the primary driver behind Iranian interest. “The main attraction that the Iranians have for the Parsees is not so much their Persian origin as their capital,” he wrote. “It is generally hoped that if the Parsees migrate to Iran, a good deal of Indian capital would be brought by them to this country.”

While admitting he was unsure whether the idea was gaining traction among Parsis in India, Naqvi cautioned that Iranian propaganda created a misleading impression that Parsis were struggling in India, a country that had, in his words, “given them shelter and made them prosperous”.

Attracting capital

Within India, the prospect of large-scale Parsi emigration caused unease among sections of the bureaucracy. The community’s business achievements and philanthropy were widely celebrated and Parsis were held up as a model minority who exemplified India’s historic tolerance and welcoming attitude towards persecuted groups.

The External Affairs Department alerted the Intelligence Bureau and sought more information about Badhni, whose surname was not common in the Parsi community. It requested for his “parentage, residence and full particulars of his passport”.

Investigations revealed his full name was Jehangirshaw Badhnivalla and he was born in Bulsar (Valsad) in 1897. He had moved permanently to Iran in the 1920s but retained Indian citizenship. British Embassy records indicated that he frequently visited India, where he encouraged Parsis to relocate to Iran.

Rameshwar Nath Kao, an intelligence officer who later served as the founding chief of India’s external intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing, tasked the Central Intelligence Officer in Bombay with assessing whether any serious migration plans existed.

In his October 1947 report to Kao, the Bombay officer was unequivocal. “No such proposed scheme for the migration of Indian Parsis to Iran is in existence or is being contemplated here,” the officer wrote, “nor will the Parsis, who have settled in India for hundreds of years and have their interests closely linked up with this country ever think of leaving India, were any such scheme to be sponsored.”

The officer’s report noted that while Parsis were “few in numbers”, they were “particularly zealous of their communal identity” and would not risk it by moving to an Islamic country while “still carrying memories of [the] bitter past”.

The report concluded that Iranian press reports were primarily aimed at attracting Parsi talent and capital. There was “no question” of a potential delegation being shown places where Indian Parsis could settle down.

“The intended visit was for the purpose of visiting and inspecting charitable institutions founded in Iran by the Parsis of India and to study the conditions of Zoroastrians residing in Iran,” the report said.

The proposed visit was eventually postponed to November 1947 and the idea of mass migration found virtually no takers.

In independent India, and even in neighbouring Pakistan, the Parsi community continued to be regarded as an integral part of national life and the broader project of nation-building.

Ajay Kamalakaran is a writer, primarily based in Mumbai. His latest book, Colombo: Port of Call, has been published by Penguin Random House.