Does PAAIA Support War With Iran? The Importance of Accountability

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Kabriat
by Kabriat
10-Sep-2012
 

In the past week, the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans has come under increased scrutiny for publishing a badly written report concerning the impact U.S.-Iran sanctions on Iranians and Iranian-Americans. The report implies that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and minimizes the impact sanctions have had on the Iranian people and the Iranian community in the U.S. Rightfully, many of us have now asked PAAIA to take a stand and to respond to two fundamental questions:

1) Do you, or do you not support U.S sanctions on Iran?

2) Do you, or do you not support military attacks on Iran?

So far, the organization has not responded to these questions. Forcing PAAIA to answer these questions is crucial. First, even though the organization has a policy against involving itself in foreign policy, it has clearly done so in this case and must now be forced to take a position so that we, the community, can decide whether or not to support the organization. Second, PAAIA's leaders have already taken positions on foreign policy. During a recent meeting at the White House, PAAIA leaders were asked whether they supported regime change in Iran. These leaders responded to that question. They didn't, as would be expected of an organization which claims to take no position concerning foreign policy, abstain to respond. How do we know this? Because PAAIA leaders have no problem gloating about the meeting in facebook posts. As a community, we have a right to know what that position was. Lastly, we know that PAAIA's Board of Directors is composed of at least one person who actively supports political opposition figures in the U.S. In particular, Nazie Eftekhari: a controversial figure in the community who is notorious for attacking other Iranian-American community leaders and an individual who has deep ties with the Pahlavi family. Her relationship with the Pahlavis makes it difficult to believe that PAAIA, an organization she is a leader is, is impartial on issues of foreign policy. Had PAAIA in fact wanted to be impartial, they would never had let someone with such dubious connections join their Board of Directors. Think about it, it's like letting a mullah join an organization that says it takes no position on religious matters.

PAAIA should be forced publicly to respond to the two questions above. And if in fact it chooses to not get involved in foreign policy, then it should stop publishing reports on foreign policy issues and, at minimum, remove elements within the organization that have political agendas or make remarks on foreign policy issue in private sessions with the government.

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by KabriatCommentsDate
Why Rudi Bakthiar Was "Kicked Out" of PAAIA
-
Jul 31, 2012
IABA Letter to Apple
1
Jun 27, 2012
PAAIA's Hypocritical Stance on Apple's Discrimination
7
Jun 25, 2012
more from Kabriat
 
MaryamJoon

Serious questions for PAAIA and Hafez4Beginners

by MaryamJoon on Mon Sep 10, 2012 04:31 PM PDT

Dear Afsaneh, I have posted an important open letter to PAAIA, its leadership and you at this link:  

PAAIA's Failure to Appropriately Respond Will Render it an Extremely Untrustworthy Organization - OPEN LETTER TO PAAIA


  •  
MaryamJoon

Serious questions for PAAIA and Hafez4Beginners

by MaryamJoon on Mon Sep 10, 2012 04:31 PM PDT

Dear Afsaneh, I have posted an important open letter to PAAIA, its leadership and you at this link:  

PAAIA's Failure to Appropriately Respond Will Render it an Extremely Untrustworthy Organization - OPEN LETTER TO PAAIA


  •  
Kabriat

@Hafez

by Kabriat on Mon Sep 10, 2012 07:56 AM PDT

I'll be honest, I have no idea what PAAIA's thinking is on foreign policy issues.  But thats the underlying problem and the issue I'm noting above.  You have an organization that says it won't take a position on foreign policy.  But then it does, in the report and in private comments by its leaders to representatives in the White House.  You also have dubious characters like Nazlie Eftekhari who, on behalf of PAAIA, participates in these meetings.  My point is we the community and especially individuals who are members of PAAIA have the right to know what those positions are and what is said.  And if anything, at least my comments above, and those by others, are bringing to light these issues.  But PAAIA itself, as an organization, should be required to respond.  Do they support sanctions?  Do they support military attacks on Iran?  These are critical issues for the Iranian-American community.  It's equally plausible that the mentality of the organization has shifted over time since Rudi's days and now.  But you can't know unless the organization is open about its positions.  I said this before, we can judge NIAC because we at least know where they stand.  We don't know where PAAIA stands officially, but we do know they are taking stances.

 

Not here's the other point, if it doesn't want to take a position because, as they suggest on their website, they don't take stances on foreign policy.  Well, then they should stay out and stop publishing stupid reports which don't do a good job of addressing the impact of sanctions.  But they cannot, like they currently are, use the ambiguity as a cloak to shield themselves from criticsm.

 

Thats the point.  We need transparency.


  •  
Hafez for Beginners

contradictions

by Hafez for Beginners on Mon Sep 10, 2012 07:47 AM PDT

Kabriat:

There are some contradictions in your anti-PAAIA posts.

I - In one, you said that Rudi Bakhtiar was let go, because she supported Human Rights issues in Iran and PAAIA let her go.

II - In another you're saying that PAAIA wants regime change in Iran. 

One organization wouldn't do I + II at the same time!! My feeling is that their board of directors is pretty diverse - (Republicans and Democrats) - and maybe they are not as Black and White as you're portraying them to be.  

I think you're being unfair - and doing what most of us Iranians do - try to but them in a clean box and then define them forever that way. The above is already terribly inconsistent, an organization that fires employees for being pro-Human Rights in Iran, doesn't also advocate regime change. At least my math says so...  Just a thought. 


  •  
MeyBokhor_Manbarbesuzan

Baba, ye pooppoli khordand

by MeyBokhor_Manbarbesuzan on Mon Sep 10, 2012 06:30 AM PDT

Veleshoon konid. Everybody has to pay rent.


  •  
MaryamJoon

PAAIA publicly discredited itself here

by MaryamJoon on Mon Sep 10, 2012 06:12 AM PDT

They need to change the group to become apolitical and to give Persian lessons to kids. That's the best they can do at this point.  

PAAIA fraudulently induced people to join a program that people never would have agreed to (NIAC and PDMI also use the same technique); the Iranian Canadian Group's leadership actually attended a memorial for a separatist terror leader!  

The problem with these groups is they are not up front.  They won't say what they really stand for and then later it comes out in the mix.  

Another big problem is that they don't exclude mischievous factions that are connected to foreign governments:  No member of AIPAC should be a PAAIA member; No member of the Bahai lobby should be a PAAIA member; no member or the MEK should be a PAAIA member.  Only a group with members who are SOLELY loyal to Iran, has any chance at legitimacy.  


  •