The United States’ goal is to create a back door channel to the mullahs in Iran, a de-facto Iranian embassy. Nevertheless, this “embassy” is acting more like a Trojan horse than an ambassadorial channel. These former diplomats are field commanders for running the mullahs lobby machinery, rather than peace ambassadors bridging nations.
Shockingly, Balli Group represents the US Corporations Xerox and Caterpillar in Iran, and has numerous partnerships with other US corporations. How could the US companies enter the Iranian market while there are now more sanctions against Iran than there were a decade ago? These companies have profited from the loopholes in the sanction laws. Their actions have been possible because of the lack of political will in the US in enforcing the sanctions and closing its loopholes.
Couldn’t the Swiss ambassador deliver the message directly to the White House without asking for Ney and Parsi’s help? In reality, the Iranian regime had entrusted Parsi and his boss so much that when three years later, in 2006, the situation was worsening again for the regime of Tehran, Parsi was once again given a new (and different) copy of the 2003 offer and called upon to reconstruct the smoke screen.
The Iranian regime has always tried to frame its confrontation with International community and its own people, as a battle between Iran and Israel. This strategic campaign is the most visible in the US where Mullahs’ advocacy organizations have followed suit and repeated the same arguments, of course dressed up to fit within the boundaries of local laws and norms.
Through CASMII, segments of the left and the anti-war movement in the United States have channeled their critique of the war and the current US administration to support the most radical elements of the Iranian regime. These American personalities and groups have clearly crossed the line and have become ardent advocates of one of the most notorious dictatorships of the modern history, with no regards for the Iranian people, the prime victims of these dictators.
We note that the two Ohio congressmen have offered different justifications for their friendly gestures towards the Iranian mullahs. While Bob Ney claimed defense of US economic interests, Kucinich offers the more noble cause of preventing war with Iran. If this is indeed true, surely his peaceful inspirations could find a more suitable partner than Trita Parsi. Note that this individual was the advisor of Ney, a vehement defender of war with Iraq and the instigator of the “freedom fries” charade.
In 1999, Parsi and Namazi presented a joint paper titled, “Iranian-Americans: The bridge between two nations,” at the DAPIA conference organized by the Iranian government in Cypress.26 This report comprises the manifesto and roadmap of the new Iranian lobby in the US. In this paper, the authors suggest that: “an Iranian-American lobby is needed in order to create a balance between the competing Middle Eastern lobbies. Without it, Iran-bashing may become popular in Congress again.” The “competing lobby” was AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee).
Dr Takeyh’s writings are the prime example of pro-Iran cerebral advocacy. Through studying Takeyh’s works, we demonstrate how the pro-Iranian circles advance their campaign in the United States. The tactic for CFR and Dr. Takeyh is to fuel a permanent hope that the Iranian power structure is experiencing a self-transformation to a more pragmatic regime that will eventually accommodate international norms. For these pro-Tehran champions, whatever happens in Iran, there would be a pragmatic faction ready to have a deal with the U.S!
