Open Letter to Andrew Rosenthal: Yet Another Leveretts Op-Ed in The New York Times

Dear Andrew,

Today, for the third time in less than eight months, The New York Times has again provided Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett with a pulpit in order to call for U.S. rapprochement with the tyrannical Islamic Republic of Iran. In a nutshell, their op-ed of today's date contends:

1. The Green Movement is leaderless.

2. The Islamic Republic is not about to implode.

3. Rapprochement with the existing Iranian regime is necessary.

Their op-ed concludes:

"As a model, the president would do well to look to China. Since President Richard Nixon’s opening there (which took place amid the Cultural Revolution), successive American administrations have been wise enough not to let political conflict — whether among the ruling elite or between the state and the public, as in the Tiananmen Square protests and ethnic separatism in Xinjiang — divert Washington from sustained, strategic engagement with Beijing. President Obama needs to begin displaying similar statesmanship in his approach to Iran."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/opinion/06leverett.html?pagewanted=2

Perhaps the Leveretts would have also sought rapprochement 70 years ago with Hitler's Germany; this was another savage regime that was not about "to implode." No similarity between Ahmadinejad's Iran and Hitler's Germany? Perhaps if you overlook Iran's treatment of its Baha'i minority - no mention of the Baha'is in any of the Leverett's three op-eds - you can ignore the parallels.

Personally, I am horrified that The New York Times, with its abysmal history of reporting the Holocaust, would allow Roger ("Iran is not totalitarian") Cohen and the Leveretts with so much op-ed space for their respective calls for "inertia" and "rapprochement", yet not allow anyone else to describe the suffering of Iran's Baha'is.

If you want to publish the opinion of the Leveretts three times in less than eight months, don't you think that for reasons of journalistic ethics The New York Times has an obligation to publish contrary opinion?

Or perhaps, by publishing their calls for rapprochement three times in less than eight months without permitting rebuttal, The New York Times wishes to signal that it has adopted the Leveretts' position. Nevertheless, it would behoove The Times to permit rebuttal.

Of late, The New York Times censored my response to its editorial entitled "Iran’s War on Its People". My response, which was "on-topic" and certainly not abusive, observed:

"It is gratifying at long last to see an editorial from The New York Times, which acknowledges the brutality of the ruling regime in Tehran.

It is disappointing, however, to observe that this editorial is incapable of observing the refusal of President Obama to offer, at a minimum, moral support to the dissidents and to bring this matter before the UN Security Council.

It is disappointing that The New York Times has been reluctant to permit contrary opinion to that of Roger ("Iran is not totalitarian") Cohen, who most recently issued a call for "inertia" with respect to U.S. policy pertaining to Iran.

It is disappointing that The New York Times has been reluctant to permit contrary opinion to that of the Leveretts, who in 2009 wrote two op-eds in The New York Times calling for "rapprochement" with Iran.

Finally, it is disappointing that The New York Times has not provided space on its op-ed page for a discussion of Iran's horrifying oppression of its Baha'i minority (Cohen over the course of many months of Iran-related op-eds only mentioned the Baha'is once.)"

See: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2009/12/iranian-dissidents-courage-obamas.html

Your "moderators" also would not permit a subsequent comment that I submitted in response to Roger Cohen's op-ed, "Change Iran at the Top". I remain baffled by this suppression of contrary opinion by The Times.

Once again, I kindly request an opportunity to respond to the Leveretts with my own op-ed piece. However, if you prefer someone else, I am certain there are many others, more learned than myself, waiting in line.

Best,
Jeffrey