Trita Parsi: A Misguided Advocate Who Harms Iranian-Americans and Aids the Islamic Republic
By Bobby Darvish
darvishintelligence.blogspot.com
As an Iranian-American, a former Muslim, and a passionate defender of freedom, I’ve watched with frustration as figures like Trita Parsi gain influence in the U.S. under the guise of advocating for Iranian-Americans. Parsi claims to be a voice for Iranians in the diaspora, yet his record shows he has consistently aligned with policies that favor the oppressive Islamic Republic of Iran over the genuine interests of Iranian-Americans. I can speak to this firsthand, as I had the opportunity to meet him personally with my Islamist ex-wife. That encounter, combined with my understanding of his organization and political agenda, has only confirmed my concerns.
My Encounter with Trita Parsi
I met Parsi years ago during a time when I was still immersed in Islam and married to an Islamist partner who supported the regime's ideals. I recall Parsi being articulate and persuasive, seeming genuinely interested in the concerns of Iranians abroad. However, as our discussion unfolded, I could sense that his vision for Iran’s future was markedly different from what many Iranian-Americans desire—freedom from the Islamic regime’s grip, not a continuation of its oppressive influence cloaked in diplomacy. The way he interacted with us, particularly with my ex-wife, gave the impression that he leaned favorably towards those sympathetic to the Islamic Republic.
Parsi’s Track Record and NIAC’s Agenda
Parsi founded the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) in 2002, branding it as a pro-Iranian organization focused on promoting peace between the U.S. and Iran. However, under this banner of "peace," NIAC has often advocated for policies that ultimately benefit the Islamic Republic, especially in times of international tension. NIAC’s consistent push for sanctions relief, soft diplomacy, and “engagement” aligns directly with the regime’s interests, not with the well-being of the Iranian people or Iranian-Americans who fled to escape its tyranny.
Parsi’s positions often resonate with the regime’s talking points: NIAC opposes actions that would weaken the Islamic Republic’s influence and has actively lobbied against sanctions that put pressure on the regime. Parsi argues that such measures harm ordinary Iranians, but the truth is that sanctions are one of the few tools available to counteract the government’s oppressive agenda and to pressure it into respecting basic human rights.
NIAC’s Influence on American Policy
Parsi has managed to position himself as a prominent voice for Iranian-Americans in American media and political circles. However, this influence has largely been directed toward promoting a “pro-diplomacy” stance that neglects the regime’s human rights abuses. The nuclear deal, for instance, was a policy NIAC and Parsi fervently supported. While it was presented as a diplomatic breakthrough, the deal ultimately empowered the regime by providing financial relief that did little to benefit ordinary Iranians but filled the coffers of the state apparatus that continues to oppress them.
Moreover, the regime’s systematic repression of protesters—particularly during protests in 2009, 2017, and 2019—was never condemned by NIAC as forcefully as one would expect from an organization claiming to represent Iranian-American interests. When the Iranian people rose up in protest against their government, NIAC's response was tempered, focusing more on avoiding conflict with the regime than supporting the people’s demands for freedom.
Harm to Iranian-Americans
By misrepresenting the Iranian-American community and aligning his organization with policies that benefit the regime, Parsi undermines the efforts of those of us who seek a free and democratic Iran. His stance makes it harder for Iranian-Americans like myself to advocate for policies that genuinely counter the Islamic Republic’s influence.
In the process, he also tarnishes the image of Iranian-Americans by aligning our community with a brutal regime. This association not only distorts the narrative surrounding Iranian-Americans but also emboldens the regime by lending it an unearned legitimacy on the international stage. Iranian-Americans who value freedom, human rights, and democracy are thus left with an unwelcome representative in the public eye.
Conclusion
My experience meeting Parsi, combined with his pro-regime stance and NIAC’s lobbying activities, has convinced me that he is not a trustworthy advocate for Iranian-Americans. Instead, he enables the Islamic Republic to maintain its influence and spread its propaganda. Trita Parsi’s NIAC claims to stand for peace and diplomacy, but in practice, they stand in the way of freedom and democracy for Iranians. For Iranian-Americans who have escaped the regime’s oppression, his influence represents a setback to our shared mission of advocating for a free Iran. We deserve a voice that truly represents our community’s values and aspirations, not one that subtly echoes the rhetoric of the very regime we fled.
Citations
Kredo, Adam. “NIAC’s Ties to the Islamic Republic: The Shadowy Politics of Trita Parsi.” The Washington Free Beacon, April 10, 2019.
https://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-lobbyist-influenceAlavi, Reza. “NIAC and the Iranian Regime: An Analysis of Lobbying and Influence.” Iran Wire, September 22, 2020.
https://iranwire.com/en/features/iran-lobbying-influenceGhasseminejad, Saeed. “How Trita Parsi and NIAC’s Anti-Sanctions Stance Helps Iran’s Dictatorship.” Foundation for Defense of Democracies, October 30, 2021.
https://www.fdd.org/analysis
No comments:
Post a Comment