rssIranian-American Group Urges Diplomacy Despite Violence
Thursday, November 05, 2009 at 6:00 am
- 20 Comments
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Flickr: Daniella Zalcman)
Provocations from Iran accelerated this week, as the ruling Iranian ayatollah gave a speech that suggested Iran would reject a nuclear-fuel deal reached in Vienna last week, while his regime violently suppressed a new round of anti-regime demonstrations across several cities. Yet a group of former diplomats convened by a leading pro-opposition Iranian-American organization urged the Obama administration not to abandon diplomacy.
[Security1]Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program have been stalled over the Iranian leadership’s reluctance to endorse a deal offered by the United States and its allies — and accepted by Iranian negotiators in Vienna — to enrich 75 percent of Iran’s uranium stock in Russia and France, yielding a form of uranium suitable for civilian nuclear power but not an atomic bomb. Iran’s foreign minister said that it was not rejecting the deal, but wished to seek still-unspecified modifications. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, however, declared during a trip to Morocco that “we are not altering” the proposal.
Leaders of both countries issued heated rhetoric. President Obama, in a statement issued late Tuesday night, referred to the Vienna offer and said, “It is time for the Iranian government to decide whether it wants to focus on the past, or whether it will make the choices that will open the door to greater opportunity, prosperity, and justice for its people.” While not responding directly to Obama, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, Iran’s supreme leader, derided American outreach in a speech commemorating the 30th anniversary of the revolutionary siege of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. “Whenever they smile at the officials of the Islamic revolution, when we carefully look at the situation, we notice that they are hiding a dagger behind their back,” Khamanei said, deriding diplomacy with the U.S. as “naive and perverted.”
Yet at a forum in the Dirksen Senate Office Building convened on Wednesday by the National Iranian-American Council — an Iranian-American education and advocacy group that gained new precedence after denouncing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s election in June as illegitimate — a few retired diplomats urged Obama to give diplomacy more time to work, even if it meant retracting Clinton’s refusal to amend the Vienna offer. “Political isolation is something the Iranians are very much concerned about,” said Thomas Pickering, who served as undersecretary of state in the Clinton administration, arguing that continued diplomacy gave the U.S. the leverage of presenting Iran with a united coalition.
If Iran, in its formal response to the Vienna offer, rejects the idea of either Russia or France enriching uranium for it, “there are ways to get around that,” said Greg Thielmann, a former top nuclear intelligence official at the State Department.
There are several bills moving through the Congress to place new economic sanctions on Iran, including one sponsored in the House by Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) and another in the Senate from Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). But retired Amb. John Limbert, one of the U.S. diplomats held hostage at the embassy in 1979 and 1980, pronounced himself “very skeptical” of sanctioning Iran. “It’s easy to talk about smart sanctions,” he said, “but I don’t know if I’ve ever seen one.” Instead, Limbert contended, sanctions would most likely “create shortages and artificial, wonderful opportunities for hoarding” that benefit “those with the best connections to the regime” at the expense of the population. Thielmann agreed, saying sanctions risked “strengthening the regime, when it’s meant to do the opposite.”
The clash between the regime and the Iranian population was on display today in Iran, as demonstrators in Tehran, Shiraz, Rasht, and Tabriz defied a regime order not to use the anniversary of the embassy seizure to protest the regime. Police and regime militiamen beat demonstrators and fired tear gas canisters to disrupt the gatherings. It is unknown whether anyone was killed in the clashes. But at the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs said he “hope[s] greatly that violence will not spread.”
Trita Parsi, the head of the National-Iranian American Council, reiterated his support for the demonstrators. “The demonstrations and the reaction of the government shows the aspirations of the Iranian people for fairness, human rights and democracy has not been crushed,” Parsi told TWI. “It shows the opposition’s timeline is correct: this is not a hundred-meter sprint, but a marathon” to achieve Iranian democracy.
Yet in recent days, articles in The Weekly Standard and The Atlantic have accused Parsi of loyalty to the very Iranian regime he has opposed. The Standard’s online editor, Michael Goldfarb, called Parsi “the Iranian regime’s man in Washington,” while Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic blogged last week that Parsi “does a lot of leg-work for the Iranian regime.” When asked by Mother Jones to provide evidence for the accusation, Goldberg clarified that while he “assume[d]” Parsi didn’t “take Iranian government money or Iranian government instruction,” Parsi “does argue quite vociferously against sanctions, and he does tend to present, at least in my reading, a fairly benevolent understanding of Iran’s rulers and their motivations.”
Parsi described his opposition to sanctions and opposition to Ahmadinejad as two halves of the same coin. His organization “strongly stands for human rights, but also opposes war and sanctions for that reason, and favors diplomacy,” he said. He denied taking money from the Iranian regime, saying, “Our records are open and our tax returns are on our Website, and the only people who have made [such allegations] are people with a diametrically opposite political view.”
Parsi continued, “You can debate us on the merits of your policy prescriptions, or you can attack, smear and character assassinate us. Unfortunately, due to the weakness of their position, they’ve chosen the latter. That’s what’s motivating these attacks.”
At Parsi’s Hill forum, Limbert, the former U.S. diplomat held hostage by Iranian revolutionaries, said that the Obama administration had no choice but to negotiate with Iran and should not be too distracted by Ahmadinejad’s character. “I don’t buy the argument that you legitimize Ahmadinejad [through negotiation, since] Iran is more than Ahmadinejad, and he will not be there forever,” Limbert said. “What’s the alternative? To continue what we’ve done for 30 years? That has not had any results.”
Update: This story originally referred to the National Iranian-American Council as a lobby group, when in fact it is an education and advocacy association.
Follow Spencer Ackerman on Twitter
20 Comments
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 11:01 am
Any of you brilliant analysts thought about aiding regime change in Iran by actually HELPING the opposition? You also need a Farsi speaker to correctly translate Khamanei's speech where he said that the day Iran lets the West in, that's the day the regime needs to pack their bags. This regime is tottering and it needs a BIG PUSH to go – not Carter-like concessions.
You can't do business with lying, killing thugs.
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 11:43 am
Yes, “regime change” has worked so well where we've tried it elsewhere, including Iran…
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 11:55 am
Does Goldberg simply want the bombing to commence immediately? Would save him the pre-emptive denouncing of anyone insufficiently deferential to Israels right to bomb it's neighbors.
Or is this just some way to project on to any other organization, in this case one conveniently Iranian, what AIPAC is actually doing?
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 12:05 pm
Yes, a large shipment of money and arms from the Americans (maybe we could use the Israelis as couriers?) to the Iranian opposition would certainly strengthen them and give them legitimacy within Iran! Great idea! Or maybe what we need to do is find an Iranian Ahmed Chalabi to install (he's an Iranian agent, but he's Arab, so we can't just use him again), kill a few hundred thousand Iranians in a war of liberation, and enjoy the instant Jeffersonian democracy that arises out of the ashes! It will be McDonald's and Starbuck's and Hooter's in Tehran, just like we have in Baghdad!
Do you have any less stupid suggestions, iranee?
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 12:08 pm
Goldfarb wants the bombing to commence immediately, but Goldberg (and Berman, for that matter) wants to undermine diplomacy as much as possible so that no progress is made, which will eventually lead to bombing.
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 2:49 pm
If the US and the Zionists want Iranian nuclear transparency, then the Zionists better be just as transparent. Demonizing and warmongering Iran to protect the Zionists is wrong. The Iranian 'issue' is all about the Zionists.
It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that the Iranians have the right to a peaceful nuclear program in their country:
1) They are signatories to the NPT, a treaty respected by the United Nations, itself an organization the US must respect. The NPT gives the Iranians an internationally regarded right to a program.
2) It is completely unacceptable that the US or the Zionists attempt to dictate to Iran (or any nation) the basic parameters of Iran's energy program.
Iran has a basic right to decide its own domestic programs and to utilize natural resources found within its own boundaries. Or what's next, then? The Zionists are bothered that Iran processes iron ore into steel, from which it can fashion conventional weapons, so Iran cannot process iron upon threat of “crippling sanctions”?
Iran cannot utilize its own water resources, as the Zionists believe that Iranians with water might be a threat to them?
The US administration must clearly and openly respect Iran's right to a nuclear program as outlined by the NPT.
The concession that the Iranians made to process uranium outside of their boundaries is just that–a concession–and must be respected as the Iranians going out of their way to appease the Zionists and her US foil.
For the US administration to simply declare that the Iranians have no right to decide their own energy program and utilize their own natural resources would be for the US to declare that even the most serious international treaties, laws and conventions are irrelevant when we deem them politically inconvenient.
It is telling that President Ford, in 1976, encouraged Iran (then under the US-backed shah) to build both uranium enrichment as well as plutonium processing plants. How is it that what was permissible then under the 1970 NPT, has now become forbidden – under the very same treaty?
What the United States must do is respect Iranian rights, move forward with the external processing provision in place, and demand that the Zionists declare its nuclear arsenal, sign the NPT and disarm.
The Zionist's nuclear arsenal is one of the problems at the heart of the conflict, and the US will never be respected as an honest broker for peace if Israel is allowed to maintain a secret nuclear arsenal, while her neighbors are threatened with war if they so much as try to build a reactor.
The Zionists will not even deny or admit to its truly “clandestine” nuclear program. If you want to talk about nuclear ambiguity, look to the Zionist state.
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 2:53 pm
If you are really “Iranee”, you are nothing but a trader to your country.
Pingback posted November 5, 2009 @ 3:43 pm
[...] found this story through Andrew Sullivan’s [...]
Comment posted November 5, 2009 @ 10:52 pm
Darius the Great answer our question and said stop the war for languages
Please read below:
http://www.jaff-sassanie.com/ShowContent.aspx?i…
Thank you
Darius the Great answer our question and said stop the war for languages
First Greek scholars, second Jewish scholars, third Arab scholars, fourth those Jewish and Arab scholars whom they claimed to be one of us, through history they called themselves Persian and made Persian to fight other branches of their own under the name of false languages of Persian, Kurds, Elamitie, Lor, Lak, Giliany, Mazanderani, Bluch, Tajick, Peshtu, Taylish, Azeri and hundred more names.
Today let celibate for the finding of scholar Hamma Mirwaisi who found out that
BEHISTUN_INSCRIPTIONS by HAMMA MIRWAISI
http://sites.google.com/site/behistunmin/from-b…
Is not what we have been told as Old Persian language? It is Aryan language with 80 % are used today by Kurds in Turkey and 20 % by Persian and Elamitie.
“They called in purpose
OLD PERSIAN TEXTS
http://www.avesta.org/op/op.htm#amh”
Median Empire, Cyrus the Great, Darius the Great and Parthian Empire, Sassanid Empire used the language of Prophet Zoroaster called Aryan language of Avesta.
Those scholars lie, to make us fight for 2500 years. The Islamic Arab army used us to fight each other. Today the Islamic Republic of Iran (Arab Government) is using us to fight each other, about the language.
Thank you Oh God, for your kindness, you guide honorable scholars like Hamma Mirwaisi to find out the truth. Today is the beginning of the end of Jewish and Arab scholars plus those Persian traders whom they went along to make money by having our people fight each other because of language.
We are Persian apologizing on behave of our Persian people after we read the content of BEHISTUN_INSCRIPTIONS.
They use us to fight each other for language, for religion, for regional’s, for no reason so they can destroy our unity. Since Alexander the Great they never let us have peace.
We are calling on each one of you to read the content of BEHISTUN_INSCRIPTIONS by HAMMA MIRWAISI
And then understand those people calling them self Persian and see really whom they are. You will find out very fast that majority of them are working for Israel.
We are going to fight for the establishment of Aryan Economic Union for our Aryan people much better than the European Economic Union (EU). Support us as much as you can.
We are going to give what we had during Cyrus the Great and Darius the Great.
Sincerely,
Jaff Sassani
Comment posted November 8, 2009 @ 10:52 am
Ugg boots sale
Ugg sale boots
ugg boots cheap
<a href=” http://www.uggsmvp.com/ugg-bailey-button-c-2.html“ >bailey ugg boots
Ugg Classic Cardy
UGG Nightfall
UGG Classic Short
classic tall black uggs
ugg 5815
ugg 5819
nike
http://www.xiedu168.cn
http://www.uggsmvp.com
ugg sale boots
sale ugg boots
UGG Rainier Boots
UGG Persephone Sandal
Purple Ugg Tasmina
UGG Layback Slipper
UGG Ascot Men's Sand Slippers
purple ugg slippers
Ugg boots
Comment posted November 11, 2009 @ 4:35 am
Iran has no respect for us now that we have a weak President. This article shows that with all of Obama Appeasement Equals Weakness. Please bare in mind that this article is against Israel and I am Pro Israeli and support Israel in all that they do to protect there great Nation. Israel is one of Americas greatest Allies. I posted this article to show you how the world views Obama's weak Foreign Policy.
https://www.americanpatriotsprevail.com/Obama_A…
Reject Tyranny and Defend Liberty!
Comment posted November 17, 2009 @ 1:53 pm
Israel needs to over there and blast that place. Can't wait.
Comment posted November 19, 2009 @ 9:17 am
Well let us assume that all fingers pointing at Trita Parsi, as a spy for Islamic republic, are evil ones and wrong.
As an Iranian I know the Islamic regime. They are very subversive. They plan for their moves in phases. And they are merciless when they have the overhand and they have a lot of money.
They differentiated themselves from other fractions of the opposition to the Shah by the trust they had in lobby.
The history of this goes back into the time of constitution revolution in Iran 1905 when Islamic opposition to that sought support at the Tsars court thanks to a tiny lobby they had. But they failed.
Back in the cold war days USSR backed the communist party of Iran. The Islamic movement sought back up in Egypt 1963 pointless and failed.
It was only in 1971 when they started lobby acting on US soil for real. This time a great success. Google on the name of MR Ibrahim Yazdi as the father of Islamic lobby in US.
That was the beginning of an era of clash of ambitions in my country way over the head of laymen. USSR made some influences and partly provoked the hostage taking of US personal in Tehran1980. Since then the Islamic Republic invested astronomic amount of money in regrouping and reconstruction of its lobby on US soil. In fact not just one but a meshwork of structures with vast levels and missions.
The lobby they had between 1971-1980 was made of students with clear Islamic agenda. But they turned their backs to the regime when they grasped the reality of the monster they helped to release from the Pandora box.
The reinvestment surged 1996. With clear inspiration from the Israeli lobbies and encouraged by the experience of Kuwait in making US react fiercely against Saddam in gulf war. So there is a strong meshwork of lobbies working for them. You defend Trita Parsi. Cool. But do not deny the existence of such. The real falsifiers would be those who deny the whole concept
Comment posted November 19, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Well let us assume that all fingers pointing at Trita Parsi, as a spy for Islamic republic, are evil ones and wrong.
As an Iranian I know the Islamic regime. They are very subversive. They plan for their moves in phases. And they are merciless when they have the overhand and they have a lot of money.
They differentiated themselves from other fractions of the opposition to the Shah by the trust they had in lobby.
The history of this goes back into the time of constitution revolution in Iran 1905 when Islamic opposition to that sought support at the Tsars court thanks to a tiny lobby they had. But they failed.
Back in the cold war days USSR backed the communist party of Iran. The Islamic movement sought back up in Egypt 1963 pointless and failed.
It was only in 1971 when they started lobby acting on US soil for real. This time a great success. Google on the name of MR Ibrahim Yazdi as the father of Islamic lobby in US.
That was the beginning of an era of clash of ambitions in my country way over the head of laymen. USSR made some influences and partly provoked the hostage taking of US personal in Tehran1980. Since then the Islamic Republic invested astronomic amount of money in regrouping and reconstruction of its lobby on US soil. In fact not just one but a meshwork of structures with vast levels and missions.
The lobby they had between 1971-1980 was made of students with clear Islamic agenda. But they turned their backs to the regime when they grasped the reality of the monster they helped to release from the Pandora box.
The reinvestment surged 1996. With clear inspiration from the Israeli lobbies and encouraged by the experience of Kuwait in making US react fiercely against Saddam in gulf war. So there is a strong meshwork of lobbies working for them. You defend Trita Parsi. Cool. But do not deny the existence of such. The real falsifiers would be those who deny the whole concept
Comment posted April 29, 2010 @ 2:57 pm
If the law is the laws of nature shoots, no doubt it is good law. This can be good in law. – Alexandre Dumas
cheap mbt shoes for sale MBT Tunisha Women Brown
Comment posted August 23, 2010 @ 1:55 am
They plan for their moves in phases. And they are merciless when they have the overhand and they have a lot of money.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
