Political activist and human rights advocate
The campaigns against advocates of Tehran interests outside Iran is not about stifling debate but ensuring a balanced one, with dissenting voices challenging those more aligned with the Islamic Republic.
The most recent example is the cancelled event at the Berlin-based German Institute for Global and Area Studies (GIGA), scheduled to feature Trita Parsi, co-founder of the Washington-based Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, but much better known as the former head of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC).
Parsi, a longtime supporter of normalizing the US-Iran relations, was set to speak at GIGA earlier this month, but mounting pressure from activists, journalists, and the Iranian diaspora forced the institute to withdraw its platform.
Our position was clear: a figure with a clear history of advocacy for Tehran has to be presented as such, not as an impartial expert; he has to be contested, not granted the whole floor.
Such events as GIGA’s, we argued, undermine serious discussion about Iran and its future. It also raises concerns about why institutions like GIGA and the Körber Foundation continue to give credibility to individuals with well-documented ties to the Islamic Republic.
Parsi took Iranian journalist Hassan Daei to court over such allegations about a decade ago. Consequent US court rulings in 2013 and 2015 dismissed NIAC’s defamation lawsuit, revealing internal emails suggesting the body’s lobbying efforts against sanctions.
A troubling narrative
What we, Iranian dissidents and human rights activists, sought was never silencing someone we disagree with, but to hold accountable institutions that misrepresent as Iran expert figures promoting narratives aligned with Tehran’s interests.
GIGA did eventually cancel the event, citing security concerns. This is deeply problematic as it frames Iranian dissidents—many of whom have suffered the brutality of the Islamic Republic—as aggressors.
No one active in the campaign was a security threat.
The organizers could have opted for a balanced discussion, a forum with different perspectives on Iran. Instead, they planned a one-sided event with a speaker known for advancing Tehran’s talking points, and, when challenged, chose cancellation over honest engagement.
Think Tanks’ role
European think tanks, including GIGA and the Körber Foundation, have repeatedly platformed figures with ties to Tehran, such as Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian diplomat linked to human rights abuses.
Revelations from Iran International and Semafor last year detailed Tehran’s efforts to embed sympathetic voices in Western institutions to soften its image, oppose sanctions, and push engagement without accountability.
The influence operation, named Iran Expert Initiative (IEI) by those who designed it in Tehran, was reported to have had European support.
A core member of IEI based in Sweden, Roozbeh Parsi—Trita’s brother—said earlier this month that his Iran-related activities were backed by the UK government. This was quickly denied by officials in London.
"We have no record of funding for the IEI or any departmental work with them," the UK Foreign Office said in response to an Iran International inquiry.
So the question raised with the first IEI exposé last year remains: which European government—or governments—funded IEI?
The official inquiry launched by Sweden in response to allegations against Roozbeh Parsi and his employer, Swedish Institute of International Affairs (SIIA), may or may not answer that question. But it’s bound to bring to light more evidence about Tehran’s influence operations.
Would GIGA, SIIA and other such institutions in Europe continue to dismiss these findings or show more openness to criticisms that are ultimately aimed at more informative discussions about Iran?
Road ahead
Those of us involved in the campaign against Trita Parsi’s uncontested platform at GIGA consider its cancellation a positive step—not the balanced debate we sought but better than a free ride for voices that echo Tehran’s and help manipulate narratives in the West.
Institutions like GIGA must recognize that such events come at the cost of those fighting for Iran’s freedom and distort Western policy.
Stricter vetting of speakers is essential. Reputable centers should not leave unchallenged those pushing the agendas of authoritarian regimes. It is quite telling that such figures usually prefer to cancel rather than take part in a multi-voiced forum.
It is also essential that scrutiny is extended beyond individuals to institutions. Other western governments should follow the Swedish lead and investigate whether their public funds have fueled Tehran’s influence operations.
As Washington is set to intensify efforts to confront Iran’s rulers, officials in Europe’s capitals should join rather than undermine that campaign.
