PDA

View Full Version : The New Iran Man at the State Department's Iran Desk



phoenix80
11-11-2009, 05:20 AM
John Limbert will be the senior Iran official at the State Department, replacing Dennis Ross, who has moved to the National Security Council (and who has not been heard from publicly since). Should America be concerned? Yes. Limbert is not a neutral arbiter; he serves on the advisory board of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC).

What is the National Iranian American Council?

The Council is widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian regime in America. It opposes sanctions on Iran, soft-pedals any controversial events in Iran, and counsels "patience" regarding Iran's stance towards its nuclear program. The NIAC has been at the forefront of lobbying against continued congressional funding of the Voice of America Persia service, Radio Farad, and grants for Iranian civil society. To top it off, the NIAC has reportedly received funding from anti-Israel advocate George Soros, who at the very least was an honored guest and speaker at one of its symposiums. (He called for a more equitable Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and advocated for America to renounce regime-change as a goal).

The NIAC staunchly opposes any military attacks on Iran. In other words, it all but serves as Iran's embassy in Washington -- though the NIAC vociferously disputes this characterization. However, there is very little sunlight between the views of the regime and the NIAC....

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/the_new_iran_man_at_the_state.html

JJackson
11-11-2009, 12:32 PM
This sounds like great news. Some fresh thinking on Iran is long overdue.

PS
The author of the article should go back to his doctor and get his IV drip adjusted as his AIPAC levels are in danger of causing permanent brain damage.

Rex Brynen
11-11-2009, 12:49 PM
This is a truly bizarre piece, that says far more about the paranoid world that some ideologues live in than it does about anything else.

First, it characterizes NIAC as "widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian regime in America." Really? If so, it has an odd way of showing it:


NIAC Condemns Executions, Recent Human Rights Violations in Iran
Written by NIAC
Wednesday, 14 October 2009
Iranian-Americans speak out over death sentences for post-election detainees and execution of juvenile
For Immediate Release

Washington DC - The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) condemns a decision by the Iranian Justice Ministry to impose death sentences on three Iranians for allegedly participating in post-election protests. The three sentenced to execution, Mohammad Reza Ali Zamani, Arash Pour-Rahmani, and Hamed Rouhinejad, were not given adequate access to legal representation during their trials, and were coerced into giving "confessions" that were the basis for their sentences, according to Amnesty International.
This announcement came within days of the execution of Behnoud Shojaii, a juvenile offender who was hanged in Tehran's Evin prison on October 11. Shojaii was under the age of 18 when sentenced to death.

Iran ratified the International Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1994 which explicitly forbids the practice of executing juveniles, however executions have continued in Iran to such an extent that Tehran is the world's leader in the practice. In 2004, the judiciary proposed to effectively end the practice of executing minors; however, it was largely ignored by judges and officials. In recent years, Iran has come under increased scrutiny by human rights organizations for this gross human rights abuse, among many others.

or


NIAC Calls for New Election in Iran
Written by NIAC Staff
Saturday, 20 June 2009
Condemn Government's Use of Violence and Killing of its Citizens

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: GOLI FASSIHIAN
TEL: 202-215-0998

The National Iranian American Council (NIAC), the largest organization of Iranian-Americans in the US, released the following statement in response to ongoing violence in Iran:

The National Iranian American Council strongly condemns the government of Iran's escalating violence against demonstrators and reiterates its demand that the government cease using lethal force against unarmed protesters and bystanders.

The only plausible way to end the violence is for new elections to be held with independent monitors ensuring its fairness. Such elections would be consistent with the Iranian constitution.

We support President Obama's decision not to take sides in the disputed election, particularly in the absence of any candidate calling upon him to do so. At the same time, the White House needs to speak vociferously against the bloodshed taking place before our eyes.

While the Iranian people's struggle for democracy is not new, Iran will never find internal or external balance unless the human rights, will, and needs of its people are met.

or


NIAC Condemns Prison Sentence for Iranian American Scholar
Written by NIAC Staff
Thursday, 22 October 2009
For Immediate Release

Washington DC - The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) condemns the Iranian Justice Ministry’s decision to sentence Iranian American Kian Tajbakhsh to 12 years in prison. On July 9, Mr. Tajbakhsh, a scholar of urban planning, was arrested at his home in Iran.

Mr. Tajbakhsh appeared at the mass trial of accused opposition leaders following the unrest of the highly questionable June 12 election. He was accused of contacting foreign agents and promoting activities dangerous to the government. During the trial, Mr. Tajbakhsh provided a vague confession which rights groups suspect was coerced, and which outlined his role in fomenting resistance to the June election in Iran.


The NIAC website has pages (http://www.niacouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=94&Itemid=2) of condemnation of Iranian human rights abuses, electoral fraud, mistreatment of Bahais, etc

Second, it attacks the NIAC for having friendly relations with J-Street, the moderate American Jewish organization. J-Street is somehow labelled as "the anti-Israel lobby" despite having been endorsed by a former Israeli FM, a former IDF Chief of Staff, a former head of Mossad, a former israeli National Security Advisor, a former deputy head of the Israeli NSC, among others (http://www.jstreet.org/page/israeli-supporters-list).

NIAC's Trita Parsi is condemned for associating with the Middle East Institute, with MEI characterized as "one of the public-relations agencies for the Muslim world in Washington." Yet a quick glance at the latest issue of MEI's flagship Middle East Journal shows it has scholarly (NOT policy) articles on political authoritarianism in Egypt, Morocco, and Qatar. Some PR, that.

Finally, and most bizarrely, Parsi is also condemned for writing a book on Israeli-Iranian relations that was--oh the horror of it--praised by former Israeli FM Shlomo Ben-Ami. What greater evidence of "anti-Semitism" could there be?

phoenix80
11-11-2009, 09:20 PM
NIAC is a lobby for the Iranian regime. And this appointment shows how close the mullahs are now to the policy-makers in Washington DC. I am very frightened by this appointment.

Rex Brynen
11-11-2009, 09:31 PM
NIAC is a lobby for the Iranian regime. And this appointment shows how close the mullahs are now to the policy-makers in Washington DC. I am very frightened by this appointment.

In what ways does repeatedly condemning the Iranian regime's human rights record, supporting Iranian human rights activists, and calling for democratic elections, make it a lobby for the regime?

JJackson
11-11-2009, 09:47 PM
Before we get to your question we need to answer the question - So what?

AIPAC is a lobby for the Israeli regime. And the previous appointment shows how close the rabbis were to the policy-makers in Washington DC. I was very frightened by that appointment.
In fact I was very frightened by the whole regime (US that is).

phoenix80
11-11-2009, 09:52 PM
In what ways does repeatedly condemning the Iranian regime's human rights record, supporting Iranian human rights activists, and calling for democratic elections, make it a lobby for the regime?


It is a cover for them. They don't believe in what they say. They call for human rights abuses in Iran on one side and on the other they call for the US government not to fund human rights groups who monitor such abuses. The NIAC and Iranian regime's agenda are hardly different.

This website (non-Partisan, independent) monitors the Iranian regime's lobbyists such as NIAC in the US:

http://english.iranianlobby.com/


Before we get to your question we need to answer the question - So what?

AIPAC is a lobby for the Israeli regime. And the previous appointment shows how close the rabbis were to the policy-makers in Washington DC. I was very frightened by that appointment.
In fact I was very frightened by the whole regime (US that is).


I can't believe I am reading this here. Are you equating the Jews and the government of Israel with the Iranian regime?

JJackson
11-11-2009, 09:57 PM
Well yes - in as far as I don't see why one should be allowed to lobby and the other not.

phoenix80
11-11-2009, 10:03 PM
Well yes - in as far as I don't see why one should be allowed to lobby and the other not.

You know I thought a lot about what you said above. It borders anti-semitism. First you are unable to show me whether a Rabbi was appointed to anything in the US government before. 2nd your cartoonish/sarcastic way of characterizing such a thing is troubling.

Last but not the least you are really equating an evil regime like Iran with that of Israel. Seriously? You think evil should be able to further its agenda? Would you have allowed Nazis and Stalinists to do the same in 1940s and 1950s too?

I am shocked...

Jedburgh
11-11-2009, 10:12 PM
Stay on topic. There is no need to drag in Israel, Stalin or the Nazis into this discussion.

This discussion is supposed to be about the characteristics of NIAC as a political lobby in the US. Does it or does it not support the current Iranian regime? Please keep responses substantive (i.e. Rex's response) and avoid the ridiculous political rhetoric which is better posted on other boards.

If this discussion thread spirals down in that direction, it will be closed and removed.

Thanks,

Ted

Schmedlap
11-11-2009, 10:24 PM
We've been in react mode in regard to Iran for years now. I don't see how NAIC or AIPAC can alter that. There is little that we can do to derail their underground and dispersed nuclear program. Our only concern is ensuring that Israel does not strike Iran and embroil the entire region into a war that destabilizes Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Count me as unconcerned about whether NAIC is a wing of the Mullahs' regime and whether it is lobbying Washington. Iran's economy is still garbage, they've got minor insurgencies in at least three regions, their currency is still play money, their youth bulge is still heavily dissatisfied with the Mullahs, they are wholly dependent upon oil exports for cash and oil imports for energy, and they are more paranoid than a dorm room full of tye-dyed hippies doing a clam bake.

JJackson
11-11-2009, 10:31 PM
I was trying to make a serious point. I am not American nor am I religious so I have no side. Which countries are allowed to lobby to get their point across and which are not. The US currently has good relations Israel and poor relations with Iran but if it had more dialogue with Iran and the two countries stopped assuming the other was on the verge of attacking it thing might move forward.

Rex Brynen
11-11-2009, 11:15 PM
It is a cover for them. They don't believe in what they say. They call for human rights abuses in Iran on one side and on the other they call for the US government not to fund human rights groups who monitor such abuses. The NIAC and Iranian regime's agenda are hardly different.

Frankly, I also think US funding of Iranian human rights organizations is a bad idea, since it facilitates the regime's efforts to paint activists as stooges of the Great Satan. There's no shortage of anti-regime Iranians who feel the same way, as you know.

Moreover, as I noted in my original post on the original article, efforts to paint NIAC as somehow anti-Israel because it has associated with an increasingly prominent liberal American Jewish organization (J Street) suggests that the American Thinker article (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/the_new_iran_man_at_the_state.html) that started this thread can hardly be considered a credible contribution on the issue.

I won't comment on this further, other to suggest that anyone who is interested have a look at the NIAC (http://www.niacouncil.org/) and J-Street (http://www.jstreet.org/) websites and draw their own conclusions. :D

phoenix80
11-11-2009, 11:38 PM
Frankly, I also think US funding of Iranian human rights organizations is a bad idea, since it facilitates the regime's efforts to paint activists as stooges of the Great Satan. There's no shortage of anti-regime Iranians who feel the same way, as you know.

Moreover, as I noted in my original post on the original article, efforts to paint NIAC as somehow anti-Israel because it has associated with an increasingly prominent liberal American Jewish organization (J Street) suggests that the American Thinker article (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/the_new_iran_man_at_the_state.html) that started this thread can hardly be considered a credible contribution on the issue.

I won't comment on this further, other to suggest that anyone who is interested have a look at the NIAC (http://www.niacouncil.org/) and J-Street (http://www.jstreet.org/) websites and draw their own conclusions. :D

The mullahs killed thousands of dissidents in 1980s when there was no funding of human rights groups from Great Satan. That claim is generated by mullahs' sympathizers in the west to dismiss the dissidents. Now you can say that again but it won't make much difference. As someone who lived in Iran for 25 yrs before moving to Canada in 2004 I firmly know that the Iranian people want more US support and want the US government not to negotiate with the mullahs or their reps in Washington.

Nuff Said!

Schmedlap
11-12-2009, 12:42 AM
In regard to press releases that decry human rights abuses - so what? If I were an organization trying to exert influence over an adversary, then I would issue press releases that echo concerns already existing in the public sphere if it made me appear less threatening or extreme. A press release really doesn't do anything, other than create a perception.

I know little to nothing about NAIC's real or imagined powers or intents. My only point is that those press releases don't prove much.

Rex Brynen
11-12-2009, 12:57 AM
I know little to nothing about NAIC's real or imagined powers or intents. My only point is that those press releases don't prove much.

(Revisiting the discussion despite my promise not to.)

Lobby groups typically issue press releases and lobby in order to achieve what it is they want to achieve. They typically do not lobby Congress to do the exact opposite of what it is they want.

Really, we're making this far more complicated than it is. NAIC represents one set of the diverse views in the Iranian-American community. Those views are quite different from those articulated by the regime, and quite different from those articulate by some regime opponents.

Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor), folks.

tequila
11-12-2009, 12:57 AM
As someone who lived in Iran for 25 yrs before moving to Canada in 2004 I firmly know that the Iranian people want more US support and want the US government not to negotiate with the mullahs or their reps in Washington.

Nuff Said!


I'm sorry to inform you that your personal experience does not validate you as a good barometer of all Iranian people. Especially on the internet.

Schmedlap
11-12-2009, 01:16 AM
Lobby groups typically issue press releases and lobby in order to achieve what it is they want to achieve. They typically do not lobby Congress to do the exact opposite of what it is they want.
I am sure that is typically true. I'll see your Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor) and raise you a sweeping generalization (http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/sweeping-generalisation/).

Entropy
11-12-2009, 03:59 AM
Limbert was one of the embassy hostages in 1979. I don't know much about NAIC, but I find it difficult to believe Limbert is an Iranian stooge given his history.

As for lobby groups, we live in an American republic and I am against any lobby group that supports foreign interest whether or not they are allies or enemies.

JJackson
11-12-2009, 11:32 AM
As for lobby groups, we live in an American republic and I am against any lobby group that supports foreign interest whether or not they are allies or enemies.
I think this is the crux. Some groups are collections of Americans whose primary objective is to change US foreign policy - for the benefit of America - where they think it is misguide. Others may have started that way but have become infiltrated to the point they are trying to change FP to match the interests of a foreign power - regardless of the best interest of the host country. Where do AIPAC, NIAC, J-Street and others fall in this spectrum. Cuba is another country where the diaspora have a lot of leverage on US FP. The US has an enormous influence on my countries FP as the UK regime seldom risks going off the reservation, unless it has a very strong incentives to do so. My government seems to feel its best course of action is to follow the US's lead so what powerful lobby groups, with deep pockets, do in the US has global consequences. This includes Agri-Business, Big-Pharma and your weapons system manufacturers. I don't have the figures but I am assuming AIPAC's funds - as a proxy for influence - dwarf the other two.

Jedburgh
11-12-2009, 12:10 PM
....I don't have the figures but I am assuming AIPAC's funds - as a proxy for influence - dwarf the other two.
There is fairly lengthy discussion of AIPAC here:

Mandatory Reading For Anyone Interested in the Middle East: The Israeli Lobby (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=614)

Please continue any additional discussion of AIPAC in that thread.

JJackson
11-12-2009, 12:16 PM
Yes. Thank you I have read - and posted in - that thread.

phoenix80
11-12-2009, 01:26 PM
I'm sorry to inform you that your personal experience does not validate you as a good barometer of all Iranian people. Especially on the internet.

It does. In fact it puts me at a better position to judge it than it would ever put you or any one else for that matter.


(Revisiting the discussion despite my promise not to.)

Lobby groups typically issue press releases and lobby in order to achieve what it is they want to achieve. They typically do not lobby Congress to do the exact opposite of what it is they want.

Really, we're making this far more complicated than it is. NAIC represents one set of the diverse views in the Iranian-American community. Those views are quite different from those articulated by the regime, and quite different from those articulate by some regime opponents.

Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor), folks.

I hate to break it to you but they are on the side of the regime and they try to further the agenda of the Iranian regime in Washington DC.

Jedburgh
11-12-2009, 01:37 PM
Despite attempts to steer the thread, it is clearly past its useful point.

Individual biases are trending towards personal attacks.

This thread is closed.