Thread by @JoostHiltermann

As @CrisisGroup's head of MENA, I have a pretty good understanding of what we publish, how we conduct research and how our findings are received, including on the Iran file.

This @nytopinion piece by Bret Stephens is shamefully inaccurate: 1/

2/ My colleague @AliVaez has been smeared for one line mentioned in the piece - the only line actually translated - in a much longer email from 2014 about our @CrisisGroup work to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

Let me set the record straight:

3/ At @CrisisGroup, we talk to all sides, present their views fairly & propose compromise solutions to the world’s conflicts. This requires non-partisanship & independence. Parties often disagree with us but (we hope) respect us for our integrity and willingness to listen.

4/ In the lead-up to the JCPOA, we @CrisisGroup talked to everyone, incl. the US & Iran. We urged both sides to moderate positions. Neither was completely happy with us. Iranian officials tended to especially grumble that our positions were too close to those of Western capitals.

5/ Among the documents quoted by Bret Stephens, first published by Iran International, is an email from Ali to Iran’s then-foreign minister, Javad Zarif. One line has been seized upon as evidence of Ali’s purported allegiance to Iran.

6/ Have any of these critics read the whole email? Here it is, FULLY translated, written in response to the Iranian government’s criticism that our analysis had been overly harsh & biassed toward the West.

Ali defends our non-partisanship and analytical independence.

7/ Ali explains to FM Zarif that while we’re committed to reflecting Iran’s views along with those of the other parties, our recommendations won’t fully satisfy anyone as we tend to pursue a middle ground.

This is how Crisis Group works.

8/ Iran International did not translate any of this because they didn’t want you to know that. Ali wasn’t doing Iran’s bidding. He was defending our independence against Iran’s criticism. And he does so politely, in line with diplomatic decorum.

9/ Cultural formalities differ in the West & in Iran.

What they highlight is one sentence stating the simple fact that Ali, then only an Iranian citizen, cared for the condition of his country and its people.

10/ I hope we can all agree that the Iranian people deserve a better future.

The very following sentence reminds FM Zarif that Ali works for a non-partisan organisation, and our reports & analysis are independent.

11/ Two months later, a senior Iranian official once again expressed discontent with Crisis Group’s work and insisted our recommendations were, as he put it, “consistently worse [for Iran] than the offers by the U.S.”

12/ Any serious person can see how ridiculous these attempts to malign Ali are. Read our work! The Iranian government certainly does. In 2014 and now, state media regularly accuse us of all sorts of things.

13/ To contend that our work isn't transparent is absurd.

The officials we speak to know we speak to all sides.

Those who read our work will see every assertion backed up by extensive documentation of who we've met with.

14/ We @CrisisGroup belong to no other constituency but one: those caught in the throes of conflict.

And in pursuit of peace, our experts engage directly with all parties to a conflict, even governments demonised by some in the U.S.

And here is @CrisisGroup's official statement on the smears against the organisation and particularly against @AliVaez and @DEsfandiary.
crisisgroup.org/crisis-group-r…