36

I'm reading one of Paul Theroux's books, which was published in 2006 during the height of the second Gulf War, and there is a passage in it in which the author apparently claims the activity described in the title of this question:

“We were a Turkoman family in Iraq,” a woman said to me, and introduced herself as Professor Emel Dogramaci of Cankaya University. “We were powerful in Kirkuk.”
...
“We know Rumsfeld!” the woman said, snorting at the name. “He was supporting Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War. He was supporting Saddam! He was telling us to do the same!”
From their home in Kirkuk her family had observed Donald Rumsfeld paddling palms and pinching fingers with Saddam, and selling him weapons, among them land mines. The Iranian response was to send small children—because children are numerous, portable, and expendable—running, tripping into the minefields to detonate the bombs with their tiny feet, to be blown to pieces.
Theroux, Paul. Ghost Train to the Eastern Star: 28,000 Miles in Search of the Railway Bazaar (p. 61). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Several people have disputed this claim, saying it is extremely unlikely that this happened. I have no information that it did or didn't, and although there is a a documented case of a 12-year-old voluntarily blowing up a tank in the Iran-Iraq conflict, killing himself (see Mohammad Hussein Fahmideh), I can't find anything elsewhere about a more general version of this disturbing practice, if it existed. Note that a young Iranian acquaintance is shocked and horrified to hear the suggestion, though he acknowledges that Fahmideh is touted as a hero in Iran even today.

Addendum I see a couple of excellent answers, but Theroux seems to imply that smaller children were involved ("running, tripping into the minefields to detonate the bombs with their tiny feet"). Is he perhaps misinformed, exaggerating for effect, or being somewhat disingenuous?

Robusto
  • 2,604
  • 1
  • 20
  • 21
  • Wouldn't the number of mines easily exceed the number of children? – Joe W Sep 12 '22 at 16:18
  • 2
    @JoeW: Not necessarily in a tactical sense. Maybe they only wanted to clear an avenue for an advance. – Robusto Sep 12 '22 at 16:19
  • I would think even in a small area there could easily be many more mines then children – Joe W Sep 12 '22 at 16:21
  • 2
    But I'm not looking for what may be reasonable to assume. I'm concerned about facts. Nothing about illogicality or impracticality can verify that an abomination is true or not. – Robusto Sep 12 '22 at 16:23
  • And I did not post that as an answer because I don't have the facts. I was just asking a question that could possibly get some thought and more details on the question. – Joe W Sep 12 '22 at 16:24
  • 1
    Why not [ask the master himself](https://www.paultheroux.com/go-ask-paul-1)? – Dan Romik Sep 12 '22 at 17:25
  • 6
    @DanRomik: I suppose that is one possibility, but asking an author to assert that he has his facts right isn't exactly independent verification. – Robusto Sep 12 '22 at 18:05
  • @JoeW: We aren't looking for discussions, conjecture and opinions. We are looking for referenced answers based on empirical evidence. Comments should be to clarify and improve questions, not put forth theories. – Oddthinking Sep 12 '22 at 18:50
  • 4
    @JoeW says "*many more mines than children*". The goal isn't to eliminate *all* the mines; it's to create a safe path through the field. – Ray Butterworth Sep 12 '22 at 18:55
  • @RayButterworth I understand that but that doesn't mean you only need to eliminate a small number of mines to make it through the mine field. – Joe W Sep 12 '22 at 19:07
  • 1
    @Oddthinking I was attempting to ask a question to get some more clarity on the question. I didn't think that it would start any sort of debate. My question was trying to understand if this was something that was even possible to do without large numbers of children. – Joe W Sep 12 '22 at 19:08
  • @Robusto my point was that Theroux could potentially explain where he got the information. We could then investigate whether that was a reliable source and where they in turn got the information, etc. – Dan Romik Sep 13 '22 at 04:33
  • This sounds like a more extreme version of the "plastic key to paradise" story, which itself also is [somewhat disputed](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_Keys_to_Paradise)? – Jan Sep 13 '22 at 09:19
  • This was discussed in my family when I was a child, since my dad's family is from Iran. This was reported to be true and done in order to damage tanks. We were in France at the moment it happens and it was in the French press too, but I was too young to really understand, I remember my parents telling me about it – Thomas Sep 13 '22 at 16:40
  • 4
    I am an Iranian and my dad was one of those children. – Node.JS Sep 13 '22 at 22:29
  • This was mentioned in Marjane Satrapi's ["Persepolis"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persepolis_(comics)#Persepolis_1:_The_Story_of_a_Childhood). – AJM Sep 14 '22 at 08:56
  • Re: your addendum question, as others have pointed out, one can hardly “exaggerate” a horror such as this, so quibbling about whether these children should really be called “small” or if their feet were really “tiny” seems rather like missing the forest for the trees. – Dan Romik Sep 14 '22 at 14:31
  • 1
    @DanRomik: Yes, I agree. The horrifying image I had when I read the passage was of toddlers set off into minefields. The apparent reality is entirely beyond the pale, though, as you say. – Robusto Sep 14 '22 at 20:09

4 Answers4

17

Yes, according to the 07 July 1987 article For Iran's child soldiers, capture by the Iraqis is a mixed blessing from the Christian Science Monitor:

SHIRZAD lasted about 24 hours on the battlefield. He'd been sent out ahead of his countrymen - a 12-year-old boy ordered to be a human minesweeper, setting off mines by poking them or jumping on them so that the adult soldiers behind him could advance safely.

During his one day of war, Shirzad saw boys around him being blown up. He was blinded in one eye by a mine shard and captured by Iraqi troops.

"I didn't have any arms to fight," he recalls. "So I surrendered."

See also the 18 January 1988 article CHILDREN KHOMEINI'S CANNON FODDER from the Washington Post.

Community
  • 1
DavePhD
  • 103,432
  • 24
  • 436
  • 464
  • 2
    Theroux seems to imply that smaller children were involved ("running, tripping into the minefields to detonate the bombs with their tiny feet"). Is he perhaps misinformed or being somewhat disingenuous? – Robusto Sep 12 '22 at 19:18
  • 3
    The first linked article has a headline that doesn't match the narrative in the article's body. The whole article is speculating that they're just putting on a show with a few children, while the conditions in other camps may be much different. Why should one trust any part of Shirzad's story? – M.A.R. Sep 12 '22 at 19:54
  • 16
    I'm not entirely convinced by this CSM article. The essential passage, "ordered to be a human minesweeper", is not explained. It sounds like interpretation. Second, it is said in the article itself that various children in the camp tell the same story about certain events. The Iraqi wardens have an interest in letting the captured child-soldiers say certain things to Western journalists, so say aid organisations quoted in the article. – Cerberus Sep 12 '22 at 19:58
  • 15
    The WP article is more like an opinion piece, without mentioning any source or specific events, let alone time or place. The children mentioned also seem older than "small children". In addition, I think there is a difference between a.) using child-soldiers as regular minesweepers, the way normal soldiers in any army sweep mines, without harming themselves if things go well, and b.) sending them into minefields as suicide mine sweepers. – Cerberus Sep 12 '22 at 20:04
  • 5
    @Cerberus Is it really that much less horrific to use 12-year-olds than, say, 8-year-olds? I agree that they may be exaggerating for emotional effect by calling them "small children", but they're still children. – Barmar Sep 13 '22 at 16:25
  • @Barmar: I'm not sure I understand your point here, sorry. – Cerberus Sep 13 '22 at 20:39
  • @Cerberus You seem to be saying that it's significant that 12-year-olds are not "small" children. I think any use of children for purposes like this is horrible, and quibbling over whether they're actually small is splitting hairs. – Barmar Sep 13 '22 at 20:42
  • But I guess Skeptics often focus on every detail. – Barmar Sep 13 '22 at 20:43
  • @Barmar: Why is it splitting hairs? Children of 6 years with "little feet" and those of 12 or 16 years are very different. I also don't understand why you keep saying it's horrible, what does that suggest? – Cerberus Sep 13 '22 at 22:04
  • @Cerberus Child labor is consider wrong, surely children being used as cannon fodder in war is as bad as it can get. – Barmar Sep 14 '22 at 14:25
  • 2
    Agree with @Barnar about Cerberus’s criticism about “small children” being quibbling. The phrase “missing the forest for the trees” comes to mind. The horrors we are reading about here are among the worst crimes against humanity I can imagine. Somebody asked if these events really happened, and clearly they did. Whether a 12-year old counts as “small” or not is trivial and utterly unimportant by comparison. (On the other hand, pointing out that the WP article is unsourced and short on detail is a fair criticism.) – Dan Romik Sep 14 '22 at 14:47
  • @Barmar: Whom is this message for? Is there anyone here who would disagree with what you say here in the slightest? – Cerberus Sep 14 '22 at 16:14
  • 3
    @Cerberus You said *The children mentioned also seem older than "small children".* This suggests that it's important whether they're small children or big children. I don't see the point of that distinction in discussing the veracity of this claim. – Barmar Sep 14 '22 at 16:26
17

Yes.

This use of child suicide minesweepers by Iran seems to be well-documented and discussed by academic scholars in reputable sources. Here are some examples I found:

  1. Helen Brocklehurst, a social scientist from the University of Derby, in her 2006 academic book "Who's Afraid of Children? Children, Conflict and International Relations" (Chapter 2, the section titled "Warfare"), writes:

    During the Iran-Iraq war, children's immaturity was deliberately employed to the Iranian army's advantage. Thousands of children were sent out into the battlefields as 'kamikaze' mine-sweepers. 73 [...] As a human rights lawyer has observed: '[t]hey received inetnse religious indoctrination, emphasizing the value of martyrdom to the Islamic faith. These children were sent into the minefileds to clear mines for the advancing Iranian army, armed only with keys around their necks for opening the gates of heaven.' 75 [...]

    I viewed this excerpt on Google Books so I am unable to look up the references 73 and 75 (the footnotes being referred to are not shown by the Google Books preview feature), but it at least seems that the author has documented her sources to the standards of academic writing, so that anyone who wishes to pursue the trail of references knows where to go look.

  2. Matthias Küntzel, a German political scientist and historian, wrote a long article (which was published in 2006 in The New Republic) with several detailed references to the usage by Iran of children to clear and denotate mines, and considerably more detail about the cultural and religious context within which these events took place. It makes for fascinating (though quite disturbing) reading material, here are a couple of excerpts:

    [...] Khomeini sent Iranian children, some as young as twelve years old, to the front lines. There, they marched in formation across minefields toward the enemy, clearing a path with their bodies.

    [...]

    “In the past,” wrote the semi-official Iranian daily Ettelaat as the war raged on, “we had child-volunteers: 14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds. They went into the minefields. Their eyes saw nothing. Their ears heard nothing. And then, a few moments later, one saw clouds of dust. When the dust had settled again, there was nothing more to be seen of them. Somewhere, widely scattered in the landscape, there lay scraps of burnt flesh and pieces of bone.” Such scenes would henceforth be avoided, Ettelaat assured its readers. “Before entering the minefields, the children [now] wrap themselves in blankets and they roll on the ground, so that their body parts stay together after the explosion of the mines and one can carry them to the graves.”

  3. The book "Defying the Iranian Revolution: From a Minister to the Shah to a Leader of Resistance", by Manouchehr Ganji, a scholar, political activist, and former Iranian government minister, also contains a reference to "children used as minesweepers" on page 126 (I got this from the index, Google Books won't let me view that page), as well as this captioned photograph on page 110:

enter image description here

Searching for "Iran child minesweeper" on Google Books brings up many additional references. To summarize, what Paul Theroux wrote in his book appears to be based on well-documented historical fact that no one is seriously challenging or denying.

Dan Romik
  • 4,548
  • 4
  • 16
  • 20
  • 1
    +1 Interesting find. Would be even better with the original Ettelaat but that requires knowing Farsi and probably access to paper archives of the newspaper... Aside: I see That newspaper won a photo Pulitzer for showing a mass execution of Kurds in Iran, so it has rep for not being squeamish with such details. – Fizz Sep 14 '22 at 08:15
  • 2
    A bit more googling finds that it's the 30 January 1982 issue of Ettelaat that has that passage, according to other citations of it. – Fizz Sep 14 '22 at 08:24
  • 2
    @Fizz I don't know. This Ettelaat newspaper is the kind of press we don't give any credibility at all, except when it suits our own bias. The idea of children wrapping themselves on blankets then rolling over 200 or 300m of a minefield looks like obvious war-time propaganda to enhance the fanaticism of the readers. Sure, Iran used human-wave attacks similar to the ones that the URSS and Japan made in WWII, so it's only logical many thousands of them died by mine, bullet or shell, but the claim of being specifically, or exclusivelly as minesweepers is an overstretch. – Rekesoft Sep 15 '22 at 11:50
  • @Rekesoft: from what I've read from Iraqi accounts, after a while they got annoyed/paranoid about infiltrations, so they made their mine fields really deep and dense, virtually guaranteeing a kill for anyone making a first pass. After that it's not inconceivable that the first Iranian guy would have been sent "armed" just with a blanket. Why give him a gun if it's virtually guaranteed to be blown up and (the gun) thrown aside where there are more mines... – Fizz Sep 15 '22 at 14:28
  • 2
    @Rekesoft it’s interesting that others are saying in the comments that we shouldn’t trust Iranian exiles since they are biased, and now you are saying we shouldn’t trust a pro-Iranian regime newspaper for the same reason. A bit of a catch-22, isn’t it? Anyone who was there would be biased in some way. But if both the Iranian government and their opponents claim that Iran used suicide child minesweepers, and no one is denying it, and this is documented in many places, what reason is there to doubt the claim? (As for the blankets specifically, I agree that detail may be reasonable to question.) – Dan Romik Sep 15 '22 at 20:33
  • @DanRomik: ironically, sometimes both sides of a conflict may have reasons to magnify the same issue/events, compared to reality. Recent example (IMHO): Zaporizhzhia. – Fizz Sep 16 '22 at 06:22
  • @DanRomik Our sources of information on Iran (or North Korea) are: iranian official propaganda, anti-iranian intelligence agencies and iranian defectors speaking to those intelligence services. That's why we end with ridiculous claims like if Kim Jong-un executed his uncle... with an anti-aircraft cannon! Or children rolling over in blankets through minefields. All the links provided in this or the other answers are: unsourced claims by western journalists (who weren't there), iranian defectors or prisoners (whose declarations are thought to be staged) or a piece of war propaganda. – Rekesoft Sep 16 '22 at 07:09
9

This is backed up by Terence Smith's 1984 NYT article:

THEIR TICKET TO PARADISE IS the blood-red headband and the small metal key that they wear into battle. "Sar Allah," ("Warriors of God"), some of the headbands read in Farsi script, identifying the wearers as divinely designated martyrs who will use their keys to go directly to heaven if killed in the holy war against Iraq declared by their leader, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. The headbands and the keys are worn by young boys, aged 12 to 17, who are recruited by local clergy or simply rounded up in the villages of Iran, given an intensive indoctrination in the Shiite tradition of martyrdom, and then sent weaponless into battle against Iraqi armor. Often bound together in groups of 20 by ropes to prevent the fainthearted from deserting, they hurl themselves on barbed wire or march into Iraqi mine fields in the face of withering machine-gun fire to clear the way for Iranian tanks.

The article continues, specifying the source of the information:

In dozens of interviews conducted by this reporter in recent weeks with Iranian exiles, academics and government and intelligence officials in the United States and Europe, the blind faith of these teen-age martyrs was frequently cited as symbolic of the fanaticism that is part of life today in the Islamic Republic of Iran. An East European journalist who witnessed one of these human-wave assaults, in which tens of thousands of young Iranians have gone willingly to their deaths, could hardly believe what he was seeing, as first one boy, and then another, detonated a mine and was hurled into the air by the explosion. "We have so few tanks," an Iranian officer explained to the journalist, without apology.

I found similar information on Refworld citing "The Abuse of Human Rights in Iran, London: House of Commons, Parliamentary Human Rights Groups, 1986, p.41." but I couldn't find that to follow up. It says they used "[b]oys as young as nine".

Fizz
  • 57,051
  • 18
  • 175
  • 291
Laurel
  • 30,040
  • 9
  • 132
  • 118
  • 4
    I have read that article as well, but it seems to rely on information by an unnamed source. I wish we had a named source, more specific data such as place and time, a detailed account, and reason to think this happened on more than one occasion. In short I am not convinced by what Smith suggests happened in Iran in the war. – Cerberus Sep 12 '22 at 19:49
  • 14
    Iranian exiles are not an unbiased source. I find the whole 'Kool Aid' argument -- that they ran through minefields so they would go to heaven -- unconvincing. The version depicted on Iranian media is of voluneers clearing a path through a minefield, when no minesweepers are available, so the rest of the troops can move through unharmed, and I find that a more reasonable explanation. Of course, the young age of most of the Iranian army during the war (say, 15 to 20 yo, even 13) is well-known. – M.A.R. Sep 12 '22 at 20:02
  • 2
    It's well known that the Iranians used "[human wave](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_wave_attack)" tactics such as sending minimally-trained troops running toward enemy guns hoping to use force of numbers to get past them. Running through minefields might fit with that - but the goal is that some will get through, not that they will all blow up. – Stuart F Sep 13 '22 at 13:27
  • 1
    @M.A.R. please read the [article by Küntzel](http://www.matthiaskuentzel.de/contents/ahmadinejads-demons) that I also cited in my answer. He provides a lot more nuance about how the Iranian military leaders took very cynical measures to overcome the natural fear of dying of their soldiers. Sure, you are right that it's not as simple as "they drank the kool aid", but I think you're underestimating how successfully people (even adults, not to mention impressionable children) can be brainwashed and manipulated even to put themselves at a near-certain risk of dying. – Dan Romik Sep 14 '22 at 07:07
  • 4
    "Backed up" is strong: The NYT article talks about *teenage* soldiers, in a country where probably many kids pretty much do adult work starting at 14 or so, the same way it was in Europe until the 1900s. The claim "small children [...] with their tiny feet" is simply not supported by the NYT article. It's terrible and abominable and an abuse of religion and power and everything -- but it's not small children with tiny feet. – Peter - Reinstate Monica Sep 14 '22 at 15:56
  • 1
    @Peter-ReinstateMonica Twelve year old boys on average are less than five foot tall. It depends on your definition of "small". – Laurel Sep 14 '22 at 16:10
  • 1
    @Laurel "Small children" in the context of "tiny feet" are not twelve. – Peter - Reinstate Monica Sep 15 '22 at 08:06
  • How big does a child need to be to trigger a mine? I mean, how many kilos? – RedSonja Dec 05 '22 at 12:11
  • @RedSonja A cursory search says that it depends on the mine. On the more sensitive side of the spectrum, there are [mines that can be triggered by squeezing them a little with one's fingers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PFM-1_mine). On the other side of the spectrum, some [tank mines](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M15_mine) seem to be designed so that adults can walk over them (but not tanks). Not sure what was used here. – Laurel Dec 05 '22 at 13:43
6

There's an interview with a 14-y.o. soldier (Mehrdad Azizollahi) filmed by Iranian armed forces themselves in which he says he took part in demining (and names battles etc. where he did this--Operation Ramadan etc.), although details of what demining entailed exactly are absent from that interview. "Running over" mines will probably not be easily confirmed from Iranian government sources themselves, I suspect. I'm posting this in case you're looking for some kind of confirmation from non-Western/non-exiled sources.

Fizz
  • 57,051
  • 18
  • 175
  • 291
  • 11
    [Demining](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demining) is an utterly different thing from "running, tripping into the minefields to detonate the bombs with their tiny feet, to be blown to pieces" "because children are numerous, portable, and expendable". – benrg Sep 13 '22 at 08:02
  • 1
    [Ramadan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ramadan) used human wave attacks where you send a lot of troops in, expecting some will die and some will get through by force of numbers. This would be effective against minefields (if you don't mind losing some soldiers), but is very different to the OP, which specifically suggests sending children in to demine, rather than as part of a general human wave attack. (And there's the fact that you lose the element of surprise if you send in deminers before an attack.) – Stuart F Sep 13 '22 at 13:32