By Benjamin Weinthal
A group of prominent experts on Iran, including the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Dr. Shirin Ebadi, issued a public letter to George Washington University last week urging an investigation of Dr. Sina Azodi, an Assistant Professor of Middle East Politics and Director of the Middle East Studies MA Program at GWU’s Elliott School of International Affairs. Azodi recently published a book titled “Iran and the Bomb: The United States, Iran, and the Nuclear Question.”
The US-based Alliance Against the Islamic Regime of Iran Apologists (AAIRIA) — a group of former political prisoners, relatives of executed political prisoners, and human rights activists — obtained the letter exclusively and published it on their website. The letter questions Azodi’s suitability as an academic at the university.
The letter addressed to the GWU administration was signed by:
-Dr. Shirin Ebadi, Iranian Nobel laureate, lawyer, writer, teacher, and a former judge and founder of the Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran;
-Dr. Houchang Hassan-Yari, Professor of Military and Strategic Issues & Middle East, Kingston, Ontario, Canada;
-Dr. Kylie Moore-Gilbert, British-Australian political scientist and former hostage of the Islamic Republic of Iran; and
– Dr. Farhad Keyan, Physicist and President of Netservia LLC.
According to the letter, Azodi defends the Islamic Republic’s repression of civilians. In a 2019 BBC Persian interview, Azodi said it was “the right of governments to use coercive force against their citizens, whether in the United States of America or in Iran.” https://x.com/hafezeh_tarikhi/status/1204126066639622149?s=20
“In other public comments,” the letter’s signatories write, “Dr. Azodi has suggested that states commonly respond to perceived threats by using lethal force against protesters. Such statements risk normalizing the violent suppression of civilian dissent and undermining the voices of Iranian citizens who have protested peacefully for freedom and political rights. Academic analysis should illuminate such abuses, not excuse them.”
The letter also links to “publicly available court records from Fairfax County, Virginia dated January 16, 2008″ which indicate that Sina Azodi “was charged with a prostitution-related offense under Virginia law.”
“The existence of such a record,” write the letter’s signatories, “raises legitimate questions about professional judgment and conduct for someone serving in a position of influence within a university environment and working closely with students.”
The title of the letter is: “Upholding Scholarly Integrity in Iran Studies: Call for Accountability Regarding Public Commentary by Dr. Sina Azodi.” It lists seven areas of concerns for which George Washington University (GWU) should probe Azodi’s scholarship and conduct.
“In his public commentary on Iran’s nuclear program, Dr. Azodi often begins the historical narrative at a point that suggests the Islamic Republic’s pursuit of nuclear capability is primarily a defensive response to external threats, particularly the Iran–Iraq War, “ say the signatories as they detail their first concern. “Such framing omits critical historical context that is essential for an honest analysis of Iran’s security posture.”
Azodi gave a talk about his book at GWU in April which was reported on by the GWU Hatchet student newspaper. During the presentation, he dismissed scholars who “depict Iranian leadership as irrational and zealots with apocalyptic aims.” He added: “I contend in this book that they are mostly concerned about survival in a world where might makes it right.”
Neither GWU’s communications department nor Azodi have responded to requests for comment.
The letter demands that GWU:
“1. Conduct an independent review of the hiring process and promotion of Dr. Sina Azodi within the Elliott School.
- Investigate the standards used in presenting faculty members as media experts on sensitive international security issues.
- Review the funding sources and external partnerships associated with the Elliott School’s Middle East studies programs to ensure transparency and independence.
- Evaluate whether Dr. Azodi’s public conduct and commentary meet the professional standards expected of faculty representing the university in international media.”
The signatories add: “Until these questions are addressed transparently, public confidence in the institution’s academic integrity will remain at risk.”
Many Iranian-Americans and Iranian dissidents around the world have voiced criticism of what they describe as Azodi’s efforts to make the Islamic Republic’s nuclear weapons program respectable and whitewash its crimes.
Nima Far, a human rights activist, said: “Azodi’s public interventions deepen the concern that he functions as a de facto apologist for the Islamic Republic in Western academic and media spaces. His commentaries routinely downplay the escalation represented by 60 percent [uranium] enrichment and recast the regime’s nuclear behavior in defensive terms.”
Far added that Azodi has a “tendency to normalize the use of lethal force against protesters as a standard state response,” and “has signaled more alignment with official talking points than with universal human rights principles.”
Reza Farnood, a researcher, writer and activist, said: “While academic freedom must be respected, the broader body of work associated with Sina Azodi, including [his book] ‘Iran and the Bomb,’ raises serious concerns that go beyond a single publication. His repeated framing of policy options, most notably the argument that the international community should ‘accommodate a nuclear-threshold Iran,’ does not read as neutral analysis to many observers, but rather as a consistent effort to normalize an outcome that fundamentally weakens deterrence as a guiding principle of non-proliferation policy.”
Benjamin Weinthal is an investigative journalist and a writing fellow at the Middle East Forum. He reports on the Middle East for Fox News Digital. He contributed this article to Kayhan London.
