Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another

The Immigrant

Trita Parsi, the second pillar of the U.S. Iran lobby, wants to the be the public face of Iranian-Americans

Print Email
Trita Parsi appears on CNN on December 28, 2009. (
Related Content

Iran’s Man in Washington

How Flynt Leverett and his wife, Hillary Mann Leverett, became leading advocates for doing business with Tehran

The is the second in a two-part series. Read the first part here.

Trita Parsi, head of the National Iranian American Council, wants to be the face of the Iranian-American lobby in Washington. The other pillar of Washington’s Iran lobby, Flynt Leverett and his wife, Hillary Mann Leverett, have accumulated power and influence by executing the insider two-step to perfection: they have drawn close to the repressive power centers of the Iranian regime at the same time that they counsel Washington policymakers to deal with the Iranian regime we have, not the one we want. Parsi, as recently released documents disclose, has nurtured a relationship with regime insiders close to Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani—the so-called “reformers” in Tehran—who have squared off against the faction favored by the Leveretts, which includes Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and the Revolutionary Guard Corps. But Parsi’s story involves not only Washington infighting over the looming conflict in the Persian Gulf but also the equally murky world of diaspora politics and immigrant ambition.

Whether Parsi is a good guy or a bad guy, or simply an immigrant on the make, depends in part on where your political allegiances lie. In November of last year, The Washington Times, a paper typically described as right-wing, published a story arguing that Parsi’s NIAC had violated its nonprofit status and served as a lobbying organization for the Iranian government. The article was sourced to emails between Parsi and other correspondents that had been made available during the discovery process of a libel suit Parsi had brought against the Iranian émigré journalist Hassan Daioleslam, who had claimed that Parsi was close to the regime. They described Parsi’s relationship with Siamak Namazi, an Iranian businessman who was formerly managing director of an Iranian consulting firm called Atieh Bahar, which served as an intermediary for Western companies, especially in the energy and financial sectors, that wanted to do business in Iran. “The Rafsanjani clan controlled access to the oil industry until they were moved out by the Revolutionary Guards,” Daioleslam told me.

“Siamak Namazi is a friend,” Parsi explained to me in an email. “He used to run Atieh Bahar consulting, Iran’s premier consulting firm (a private company). Critics have smeared AB and claimed that they work for the Iranian government and that are part of some fictitious oil-mafia.”

Parsi labeled the story’s author, Eli Lake, as a “neo-conservative activist,” a designation that he characteristically uses to describe his political adversaries; it’s a habit that, in addition to his litigiousness—he has also threatened Voice of America with legal action—indicates a nature sensitive to scrutiny. His critics contend that his name-calling obscures the facts. “Trita tried to dismiss this [lawsuit] by disparaging the defendant,” says Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute. “But it wasn’t the defendant talking in the emails. It was Trita himself.”

Parsi’s reputation around Washington took a hit, but is he really an Iranian agent, as some of his opponents have appeared to suggest?

Trita Parsi, who holds a U.S. green card, came to the United States in 2001 from Sweden, where his family found refuge in 1978 before the full onslaught of the Islamic Revolution. Some of his critics complain that his biography alone compromises his ability to write about the Islamic Republic. “Trita was 4 years old when he left Iran,” says Sheema Kalbasi, an Iranian-American blogger based in the Washington area. “He studied Iran, but he didn’t live under the current regime in the ’80s, like I did.”

An outsider twice over, Parsi found a home in Washington, a city amenable to politically savvy international talent. He earned a doctorate at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies under Francis Fukuyama and worked on Capitol Hill for Bob Ney, the former Ohio congressman who went to jail for his role in the Jack Abramoff scandal. From his bleacher seat in Congress, Parsi saw his main chance—to establish an ethnic lobby for Iranian-Americans. Like the Jews, he thought, Iranian-Americans were wealthy and successful, but they lacked a powerful organization that they could use to display their communal clout and aid their homeland. They needed something like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful Washington organ of another American immigrant community.

In 2002, Parsi formed NIAC hoping to give voice not only to the diaspora’s talents and resources but also its growing resentments. “Iranian-Americans are well respected in Los Angeles and throughout California,” says Pooya Dayanim, president of the Iranian-Jewish Public Affairs Committee. “But elsewhere there are Iranian-Americans who feel like they’re looked down upon. They feel as if they’re treated like Arabs.”

In the post-Sept. 11 climate, the timing was perfect for an organization appealing to the ethnic pride and fears of young Iranian-Americans who wanted to feel a connection to Iran—even if, like Parsi, they had little or no firsthand knowledge of the Islamic Republic. NIAC’s recruitment pitch, that the Bush administration was going to drag the United States to war with Iran, also won Parsi support of the antiwar left—one NIAC project was supported by George Soros’s Open Society Institute—as well as a hearing from a Washington policy establishment concerned that President George W. Bush and the neoconservatives were squandering America’s prestige in the Middle East, and putting lucrative commercial arrangements at risk.

Opinion leaders and policymakers in Washington during the first term of the Bush presidency “showed very bad judgment in accepting the analysis of what you might call the Iranian left,” says Reuel Marc Gerecht, an Iran specialist at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a former CIA case officer, and frequent contributor to the New York Times op-ed page. Yet even as it steadily became clear that openness and liberalization were not on Tehran’s agenda, the luster had not yet worn off of then-President Mohammed Khatami’s reform movement. Iranian democrats and émigrés alike still held out hope for a better tomorrow in a country that was crucial to America’s efforts in Iraq—and to the supply of oil from the Persian Gulf.

Parsi’s award-winning 2007 book Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the United States might most charitably be described as emblematic of the delusionary thinking about Iran that took hold in Washington during the Bush years. The book’s errors and omissions are all in line with Parsi’s optimistic, and untenable, thesis: despite its anti-American and anti-Israeli actions rhetoric, the Islamic Republic is not incorrigible. What Tehran has long wanted, the book argued, is merely a serious negotiating partner in Washington who could help Iran to build fruitful relationships with both the United States and Israel. “These Iranians,” says Gerecht, “badly misjudged the ruling establishment of their own country.”

Parsi was not the only Iran analyst connected to the ruling establishment in Tehran, even as many around Washington were quick to ditch him in the wake of his public troubles. As I discovered in my interviews with Iranian émigrés and Iranian-Americans, it is not just a diverse community, but also a fractious one. “In the Iranian community, everyone accuses everyone else of being a spy,” says Daioeslam. “What harmed Parsi was the documents. He couldn’t deny his relationships with the regime.”

The consensus on Parsi among Washington’s Iran hands and Iranian activists is that he would do anything to have himself front and center. However, ambition is hardly a crime—especially in Washington, where it is a staple regularly inhaled with one’s morning latte at Starbucks. It should also be said that there are certainly worse things to do in life than to give your immigrant community a voice in shaping public policy.

“He wants to empower Iranian-Americans as a civic community,” says Sohrab Ahmari, a Northeastern University law student who moved to the United States from Iran in 1998. “This is really admirable, to model it after how Jewish-Americans are organized. What’s disappointing is what he’s advocating. If the Islamic Republic could hire a lobbying firm, I couldn’t imagine it doing a better job than NIAC.”

One problem may be Parsi’s apparent choice of a model for his lobbying organization. Throughout the Middle East and in Middle Eastern circles in Washington, I am frequently asked about the fantastic power of AIPAC. What this line of questioning betrays is not only a failure to understand how policy is made in Washington, but also the fact that AIPAC reflects not just the material wealth and energy of Jewish-Americans but also the political coherence of the state of Israel. Before the State of Israel was created, there were a number of Jewish organizations competing with each other to be heard in the American capital. It was only after statehood and the larger questions surrounding the state’s existence were resolved that the Jewish-American community consolidated its support in a single mainstream lobbying organization. (In an email, Parsi attempted to explain that AIPAC was not exactly his model for NIAC. “We didn’t create a lobby, we created a 501(c)3 with no initial aim of lobbying,” he wrote. “You may be confusing NIAC with another organization that I was involved in trying to set up, but that organization was never launched. Critics of NIAC have deliberately sought to conflate the two.”)

Compared to the size of Iranian-American community at large, NIAC membership is miniscule, with Parsi claiming 3,000 and other estimates ranging from 500 to 1,000, depending on how “membership” is defined. Yet size is not the main determinant of a lobby’s success. A diaspora lobby designed to support the ethnic homeland only works if there is a coherent state to support, and the Iranian-American community is notoriously divided, comprising representatives of every possible ethnic grouping—including Baha’is, Iranian-Jewish Americans, and Iranian-Armenian Americans—and every political orientation, from monarchists who wish to install the shah’s son to democrats to supporters of the Islamic Republic who have made the Great Satan their home. The only way to circumvent the cacophony of the Iranian-American diaspora is to ignore the fissures in Iranian society that it mirrors, and vouch for a regime that fewer and fewer Iranians—and very few Iranian-Americans—are actually willing to defend.

After the Iranian regime started cracking down on protestors in the wake of the June presidential elections, Parsi was hardly alone in the realization that he was caught on the wrong side of a historic divide. “If you look at the evolution of a lot of these Iran analysts since June the common denominator is that they have friends in jail now,” says Pooya Dayanim. “In October, Genieve Abdo”—an Iran analyst who lived in Tehran as a journalist for several years—“was making fun of the demonstrators. Not anymore.” Parsi wrote a series of articles documenting his growing concern with the Tehran government’s human-rights abuses. “He had to maintain a level of credibility, he could not deny the truth,” explains Dayanim. “His membership pushed him into it. Human rights is one of the few things that Iranian-Americans agree on across the board.”

Parsi counters that human rights was always one of his main priorities. “I believe and have written on the need for a much clearer human rights policy,” he wrote me. “At times there was too much silence from Obama on that front. Only days after the elections, I wrote in the Christian Science Monitor that Obama needed to add the word ‘condemn’ to his vocabulary. And this goes for the international community as a whole, not just the U.S.” Parsi now concludes that sanctions are worthwhile, provided they are leveled against the Revolutionary Guards, or that faction of the regime that has taken control of the entire country.

“I am proud of my accomplishments as an analyst [and] of my work in getting Iranian Americans to participate and contribute to the great American democracy,” Parsi explained in his email. “This is a community that contributes so much, but due to both fear of involvement and lack of education about the American political system, often put themselves on the sidelines.”

For Parsi, a desire to lead his community corrupted his analysis of conditions inside Iran. He misunderstood not only the Iran he wrote about but also the Iranian-Americans that he hoped to represent. Iran’s true Washington lobby is the Leveretts—two American-born former U.S. government officials who were charged with sensitive portfolios affecting the security and welfare of their fellow citizens and then traded their government experience and intellectual credibility for access to the worst elements of a regime that continues to murder its own people in the streets. Washington is still sorting its way through the damage that the Leveretts have done in polluting the debate over Iran policy. And while the Leveretts enjoy their influence in Washington policy-making circles, the Iranian people will continue to pay the price.

Parsi’s dual role—attempting to speak for elements within the Iranian regime and also for Iranian émigrés in the United States—made it hard for him to see conditions inside the Islamic Republic with clarity. But when he was finally compelled to face reality, he did. Trita Parsi should be praised for that, not condemned.

Print Email

Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180

Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

NIAC and Trita Parsi are front organization/man for the murderous Iranian regime in the USA. Their role as lobbyists for the Iranian regime is known to everyone with a grain of brain cells in his/her head. Trita Parsi is no body but an agent of influence in the United States. Shame on NIAC and Parsi and those who give this idiot a platform to further his agenda.

“Throughout the Middle East and in Middle Eastern circles in Washington, I am frequently asked about the fantastic power of AIPAC.”

“AIPAC reflects not just the material wealth and energy of Jewish-Americans but also the political coherence of the state of Israel.”

Actually, a great deal of AIPAC’s power can be attributed to its willingness to break important laws (FARA, the logan act, election laws) and ability to corrupt the DOJ into dropping or not prosecuting. How else to explain….THIS?!

MariamM says:

Parsi is a shameless self-promoter and liar. Sohrab Ahmari is absolutely right:

“If the Islamic Republic could hire a lobbying firm, I couldn’t imagine it doing a better job than NIAC.”

Arash Irani says:

Wow! If a Swedish Immigrant with only a green card could have such an influence in Whashington, can you imagine what Iranian American Citizens do?

Trita Parsi should be praised for what he has accomplished as a young Iranian living in the U.S. Goes to show you that this is indeed the land of opportunity. Is he perfect? No but then neither are any of his bashers. Show me what they have done for the Iranian people?

dee-kaye says:

The larger question’s surrounding Israel’s existence have been resolved? The Jewish-American community has consolidated its support in a single mainstream lobbying organization?

Lee Smith, you’re an intern, right?

Trita Parsi continues to promote the US-Iranian diplomatic ties. This is
not in the best interest of the pro-democracy movement in Iran. The protesters
have clearly asked Obama to choose sides. How did you conclude that Trita is
finally realizing the reality of the situation in Iran and is no longer trying
to push the IRI’s interests? He needs to prove that by his actions and not
just by saying he cares about the human rights issues in Iran. I believe that
is a front to further push his agenda as an Iranian lobbyist.

Anthony says:

Neocons (and their Chalabi like Iranian friends – MEK, Monarchists, Commnists) are trying to get us to another war in the middle-east. This article works to that end by shutting up anyone who disagrees with the neocon point of view.

Shahrokh says:

Trita Parsi is Indian Born, so how can he represent people of Iran. Hew should go and represent Indians, but they do not hire his type of individuals.

It is like asking a Mexican to be the face of China or Russia

The Congress in United States is such that as long as some one has the funds for political contribution, they can get in and say what ever bull shit they want to say, any way at the end of the day that is not going to be worth much no matter what, not this time

Arash says:

The trilateral relationship between Israel, Iran, and the United States is complex. Alas, Treacherous Alliance does not explain it. Based on the Johns Hopkins University doctoral thesis of Trita Parsi, best known as a Washington-based Iran lobbyist who trades on his connections to officials within the Islamic Republic, the narrative wallows in half-truths and conspiracy rather than fact.
Parsi begins, for example, by stating that neoconservatives “desperately wish” for a U.S. war with Iran. Perhaps Commentary’s Norman Podhoretz does, but he is in a minority. Further, Parsi suggests that foreign policy hawks worry about Iran itself, rather than the Islamic Republic’s covert nuclear program and terror sponsorship, an obvious mistake.
Basing his research largely on interviews, Parsi picks and chooses what he wants to include. The result is a hodgepodge.
He emphasizes Iranian pragmatism and dismisses the role of ideology. Iranian support for Hezbollah, in his rendering, has more to do with regional power ambition than ideology—this would come as a surprise to Hezbollah, which defines itself in opposition to the Jewish state and whose secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah, on October 23, 2002, encouraged Jews all to gather in Israel, thereby saving Hezbollah “the trouble of going after them worldwide.”[1]
Parsi breaks no new ground in his treatment of the early relationship between Iran and Israel, offering little more than a potted history. He omits the role of Ziama Divon, the first Israeli to visit the shah and confidential assistant to Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion.
He treats as a primary source the views of Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, without ever bothering to ask whether Wilkerson has direct knowledge of events he describes. Had Parsi asked, Wilkerson would have had to admit he attended none of the interagency policy meetings and lacks firsthand knowledge of them.
Parsi suggests that in 2003 Tehran offered to disar

If you want to add in my list please reply this email.and go our site:

Thanks for the posting. My partner and i have generally observed that almost all people are eager to lose weight simply because they wish to appear slim and attractive. Nevertheless, they do not continually realize that there are more benefits just for losing weight additionally. Doctors assert that over weight people are afflicted by a variety of health conditions that can be instantly attributed to their own excess weight. The good thing is that people who’re overweight and suffering from a variety of diseases can reduce the severity of the illnesses through losing weight. It is possible to see a steady but noted improvement in health as soon as even a moderate amount of fat reduction is accomplished gywl512.

Thanks for the post. My spouse and i have often seen that the majority of people are desperate to lose weight because they wish to look slim in addition to looking attractive. On the other hand, they do not constantly realize that there are many benefits for you to losing weight also. Doctors assert that overweight people are afflicted by a variety of disorders that can be instantly attributed to their particular excess weight. Fortunately that people who are overweight and suffering from various diseases can reduce the severity of the illnesses by way of losing weight. You are able to see a steady but noticeable improvement with health when even a slight amount of weight-loss is achieved gywl512.

Fantastic goods from you, man. The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life I have understand your stuff previous to and you are just extremely great. I actually like what you’ve acquired here, certainly like what you are saying and the way in which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still take care of to keep it sensible. I cant wait to read much more from you. This is actually a tremendous The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life informations.

I really like the items you put in here. Very relevant information. Consider yourself bookmarked.

Fantastic goods from you, man. The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just too excellent. I really like what you have acquired here, really like what you are stating and the way in which you say it. You make it entertaining and you still care for to keep it sensible. I cant wait to read far more from you. This is actually a terrific The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life informations.

I would like to show appreciation to you for bailing me out of this difficulty. After surfing around throughout the the web and meeting recommendations that were not helpful, I assumed my life was well over. Living minus the solutions to the problems you have resolved as a result of this site is a critical case, and ones which could have badly affected my career if I hadn’t come across your web site. Your primary competence and kindness in playing with all the stuff was important. I am not sure what I would’ve done if I had not come upon such a step like this. I am able to at this time relish my future. Thanks for your time very much for this skilled and result oriented guide. I won’t hesitate to suggest your site to anybody who ought to have guidelines about this subject matter.

Magnificent goods from you, man. The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life I have understand your stuff previous to and you’re just extremely fantastic. I really like what you’ve acquired here, really like what you are saying and the way in which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still care for to keep it sensible. I can’t wait to read much more from you. This is really a great The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life informations.

Excellent goods from you, man. The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life I’ve understand your stuff previous to and you’re just extremely fantastic. I really like what you’ve acquired here, certainly like what you’re stating and the way in which you say it. You make it enjoyable and you still care for to keep it wise. I can not wait to read far more from you. This is really a terrific The Immigrant – by Lee Smith – Tablet Magazine – A New Read on Jewish Life informations.

I’ve said that least 2845633 times. The problem this like that is they are just too compilcated for the average bird, if you know what I mean

HarmsMarcus says:

Dear Mr. Smith-


I am disappointed on
your both articles quiet long with no directions and boring did you write these
two articles to prove a point that Mr. Parsi is an immigrant. Truly as an
editor I would not use the word immigrant on Mr. Trita Parsi FYI America is
built on immigrants I am sure your background is not Indian American or is it?

Tablet Magazines
being funded by Rupert Murdoch?

Do you know Mr. Hassan Daioleslam,was a
Mojahedeh Khalgh and now he has changed his position perhaps you should google
him before writing anything on his behalf. Here: if you cannot open it just
copy and past it on your bar

shove with your non-sense opinion and penetrate in the Iranian Jewish magazines
and the Iranian Magazine shove it the Iranian media and etc..

I don’t think it’s about Mr. Parsi anyone in his position would have been
attacked by your conservative magazine.


is wrong for having a scholar like Mr. Parsi to be a mediator between Iran and
America? Do you have a problem? I am not defending anyone but enough is enough!
Are you saying America should attack Iran because of its nuclear plant? Do you
feel safer

Pakistan, Russia, China and North Korea for having a nuclear plant?

you know Cyrus the Great rescued the Jewish Religion Just to let you Iranians always welcomed and protect Jewish community.

do you have to divide people with their faith? By naming agents of influence!
Did you know by any chance Mr. Parsi is not even a Muslim!
Did you really think Sara Palin would be great vice President?
Or do you think Mit Romney would be your ideal president?

you comfortable when you go to bed?

your article is amazingly stupid do you why because you just

information from here and there then paste them all together.


The Weekly Standard is an American neoconservative[2][3][4][5]
opinion magazine[6]
published 48 times per year. Its founding publisher, News Corporation,
debuted the title September 18, 1995. Currently edited by founder William Kristol and Fred Barnes,
the Standard has been described as a “redoubt of neoconservatism”
and as “the neo-con bible”.[7][8]
Since it was founded in 1995, the Weekly Standard has never been profitable,
and has remained in business through subsidies from wealthy conservative
benefactors such as former owner Rupert Murdoch.[9]
Many of the magazine’s articles are written by members of conservative think
tanks located in Washington, D.C.: the American
Enterprise Institute, the Ethics and
Public Policy Center, the Foundation
for Defense of Democracies, and the Hudson Institute. Some
individuals that have written for the magazine include Elliott Abrams, Peter Berkowitz, John R. Bolton, Ellen Bork, Ed Gillespie, Roger Kimball, Harvey Mansfield, Joe Queenan, Wesley J. Smith, David Brooks
and John Yoo. The
magazine’s website blog, titled the “Daily Standard”, is edited by
John McCormack and Daniel Halper and produces daily articles and commentary.


Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.

The Immigrant

Trita Parsi, the second pillar of the U.S. Iran lobby, wants to the be the public face of Iranian-Americans

More on Tablet:

Cruelty & Perversity: Postprandial Reflections on the PEN Protesters

By Paul Berman — The grim satire of the ‘Charlie Hebdo’ controversy, in context