- Published: Tuesday, 13 June 2017
By INU Staff
INU - Very recently, the attack on the Iranian parliament building resulted in the death of 17 people and the injury of many more. Such an attack would normally warrant sympathy for those who were injured and the families of the dead. The attack would normally be condemned. However, this is not the case with the Iran lobby who used it as an opportunity to speak out against Saudi Arabia and the United States.
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) issued statements and editorials, published numerous social media updates, and even took part in interviews in which it pinned the blame on the United States and Saudi Arabia. They even blamed the Iranian opposition.
The President of the organisation, Trita Parsi, said: “ISIS has had very little success striking inside Iran. Main reason is they can’t recruit Iranians easily, so no local knowledge. Only group with local knowledge that can slip into Iran easily is the Iranian terror group the MEK.
The MEK is part of the main Iranian opposition. As Parsi knows rightly, the opposition is involved in humanitarian efforts that help the people of Iran that have been subjected to brutal suppression for decades. It gathers information that makes the international community aware of what is really happening in the country and exposes how the government is running the country. So to call the opposition a “terror group” says a lot about the NIAC. The Iranian regime has a history of executing anyone that dissents and has called the opposition a terror group too.
Not long before the attack took place, the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, Adel al-Jubeir, reiterated that Iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism and made a call for action. Iran responded that the rise of Sunni extremist groups is because of Saudi Arabia.
Journalist Michael Tomlinson said: “Parsi has laid out the argument justifying military action against Saudi Arabia now that the mullahs in Tehran feel they have justification now to engage in even more provocative action. Whereas supplying the Houthis in Yemen to threaten Saudi Arabia’s border was seen as the extent of Iranian actions, Parsi is now laying the intellectual foundation for an ever-widening war. A curious position for the NIAC to take since its stated purpose is to help resolve differences among Iranian-Americans.”
He added that there is clearly a broader agenda because the US Senate is seeking to impose more sanctions on the Islamic Republic because of ballistic missile breeches. The Iran lobby clearly sees these sanctions as a large threat to the Iranian regime.
Was it possible that the Iranian regime engineered the attack to influence the Senate’s decision? Whether it did or not doesn’t matter because, as it is, the NIAC is fighting against the sanctions bill and is harming the fight against ISIS in the process.
It would be wise for the Tehran lobby groups to realise that the United States is basing its foreign policy on Iran’s actions. If Iran remains in Syria and all the other countries where it is involved, it will have to live with the consequences.