logo
America's largest Iranian diaspora is at a crossroads

America's largest Iranian diaspora is at a crossroads

Politico4 hours ago

Earlier this week, the Iranian-American Democrats of California held an emergency meeting to discuss the organization's next steps as President Donald Trump weighs whether to join Israeli strikes against Iran.
Leaders of the group had already hit the phones in the hours and days after Israel launched its first strikes on June 12, calling all the members of the state's congressional delegation, including California Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, and urging them to prevent U.S. involvement in the attacks.
For Southern California's Iranian diaspora, the nation's largest, the fast-moving conflict represents a critical moment for a politically and culturally diverse community that hasn't always gravitated to American political debates, or done so as a coherent bloc. It's also a potentially significant moment for Schiff and Padilla, who may be forced to weigh in on a deeply contentious foreign policy debate that could pit Democratic factions against one another.
'This is the time for the California politicians to speak up,' said Sudi Farokhnia, the Los Angeles-based president of the IADC. 'And not just speak up, but speak up fast and be very precise in making sure that they hold Trump to the rules and laws of this country.'
More than one-third of the nearly 400,000 Iranian immigrants in the United States are in the LA area, and more than half live in California. Polling conducted by the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans last year found Iranian-Americans nearly divided on the 2024 presidential election — 45 percent nationwide backed Kamala Harris, compared with 41 percent for Trump.
In heavily-Democratic California, Democratic-aligned members of the community are hoping to influence the state's Democratic elected officials.
But a diverse set of backgrounds — from Muslims to Jews to Christians to Zoroastrians — and what some Iranian-American activists describe as a hesitance to publicly engage in a deeply complex issue has left the community with a relatively subdued presence in politics.
And the current situation puts Iranian-Americans, many of whom fled Iran after the 1979 revolution, in a bind. They've been highly critical of the Iranian regime and would love to see it fall from power, but remain divided on what should be done to make that happen — namely, whether U.S. military involvement should be part of it.
'We are at a fall of the Berlin Wall moment in history,' said Sam Yebri, a former LA city council candidate who's been active in Iranian-American and Jewish-American organizations. 'We know that it is time for this regime to fall and for there to be a free and democratic Iranian government.'
Others, including officials in the IADC, are pushing California officials to back Sen. Bernie Sanders' No War Against Iran Act, as well as legislation from Rep. Ro Khanna and other House members that would block the administration from engaging in 'unauthorized hostilities' with Iran.
'The Iranian diaspora across the globe, particularly here in Southern California, has been calling for democracy in Iran and the oppressive authoritarian government there,' said Alex Mohajer, vice president of the IADC and a former state Senate candidate. 'And yet also we don't want military intervention, and we don't want military strikes on our loved ones.'
Speaking with CNN on Wednesday, Schiff reiterated his belief in Israel's right to defend itself but sharply criticized Trump for considering U.S. military action without authorization from Congress. A spokesperson for Padilla did not respond to a request for comment.
For the Iranian-American community in Southern California, the conflict between Iran and Israel may accelerate a shift toward more widespread political involvement. Mohajer said the Woman Life Freedom protests of 2022, which launched in Iran and worldwide in the wake of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini's death in the custody of Iran's morality police, 'really ignited the community, and you've seen a real, newfound sense of activism.'
But if Amini's death served as something of a wake-up call for young Iranians in the diaspora, activists say, now that they are engaged, they are more likely to be vocal — and speak out more forcefully for government officials, academic institutions and other organizations to push back on the Iranian regime's human rights abuses.
Beverly Hills Mayor Sharona Nazarian, the first Iranian-American woman to serve in that role, argued the Israeli strikes were important in preventing the 'grave danger' of a nuclear-armed Iran. But she also said the regime needs to be brought down from within Iran.
'True change in Iran,' she said in a statement, 'must come from its own people.'
This reporting first appeared in California Playbook. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every weekday.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's Gulf Arab allies race to avoid all-out war in Iran
Trump's Gulf Arab allies race to avoid all-out war in Iran

CNN

time6 minutes ago

  • CNN

Trump's Gulf Arab allies race to avoid all-out war in Iran

Fearing the repercussions of a total regime collapse in Iran, Gulf Arab states have intensified their outreach to the Trump administration and Tehran over the past week. The United Arab Emirates, a US ally that has long been opposed to an unsupervised Iran nuclear program, has been in contact with officials in Tehran and Washington to avoid further escalation, according to a top official, amid fears that instability in Iran could affect the region. 'We're following the situation very closely… our diplomacy is working hard like many other countries,' Anwar Gargash, adviser to the UAE president, said on Friday. 'Concerns have to be resolved diplomatically… there are many issues in the region (and) if we choose to tackle everything with a hammer, nothing will be left unbroken.' Israel began an unprecedented attack on Iran last week, killing its top military brass as well as several nuclear scientists and destroyed part of its nuclear program. Iran has responded with a barrage of missile strikes on Israeli cities. Gargash, who delivered a letter from US President Donald Trump to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in March calling for nuclear talks, said any military escalation to the conflict will be 'detrimental' for the whole region. 'This is setting us back. The language of conflict is overpowering the new language of de-escalation and economic prosperity for the region,' Gargash said. Across the Gulf, growing anxiety about the conflict is driving efforts to prevent further escalation. Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman spoke with Trump and called for a de-escalation hours after Israel struck Iran on June 13. The Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, also spoke to the president and called for the crisis to be resolved 'through diplomatic means.' 'We have been making all the possible communication between all the parties regionally and abroad. These talks between us have been about finding a way out of the rabbit hole when it comes to this escalation,' the Qatari foreign ministry spokesperson Majed Al Ansari said Tuesday. Last month, Trump was feted with grand welcomes and trillion-dollar deals when he visited three Gulf Arab nations for the first presidential visit of his second term. At the time, Trump praised the 'birth of a modern Middle East' and signaled his intent to sign a deal with Iran to prevent it from building a nuclear bomb. But after Israel struck and killed Iran's military leadership and nuclear scientists, Trump shifted his rhetoric, teasing a possible US military intervention on Iran. The president's threats have his Arab allies worried and fearing Iranian reprisal attacks against the US on their soil, where the US has a significant military presence. Major exporters of energy, the Gulf states also fear that Iran may shut the Strait of Hormuz on its southern shore, through which a third of seaborne oil passes. Gulf Arab states, long critical of Iran's nuclear ambitions and its support for proxy militias across the Middle East, have in recent years softened their stance toward Tehran, pivoting toward diplomacy and rapprochement to avoid conflict. Experts warn that a US attack on Iran could draw it into a quagmire even more challenging than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – a drawn-out confrontation that could last the duration of Trump's presidency and exact a heavy toll on American lives and resources at Israel's behest. 'Iran is large and could be fractured and divided along ethnic lines, (and it) has a considerable stockpile of missiles, UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles)… that essentially could fall out of central state control,' Hasan Alhasan, senior fellow for Middle East policy at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Bahrain, told CNN. 'I don't think anyone wants to see Iran slide to chaos, I think there is a broader desire and preference to deal with one bad actor rather than multiple bad actors,' he said. Firas Maksad, managing director for the Middle East at Eurasia Group, told CNN that Gulf Arab states are in a comfortable position seeing Iran weakened, but would much rather prefer diplomacy to avoid instability in the region. 'If there is in fact a diplomatic breakthrough… where Iran's nuclear ambitions towards a nuclear weapon at least are capped, Iran is much weakened and stability returns, that's a very positive outcome for (Gulf states),' he said. 'I would have to say, though, that the concern is that (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu drags the region and drags President Trump into further escalation by perhaps taking out Iran's ability to export oil,' he added. 'That might then take us in a much more negative direction in terms of blowback against Gulf (oil) facilities.' Trump's announcement on Thursday of a two-week diplomatic window now offers his Gulf Arab allies breathing space to push for de-escalation, following a week of unprecedented regional clashes that left the Middle East rattled and on edge.

Could you invest your own FICA taxes? The new Social Security proposal explained
Could you invest your own FICA taxes? The new Social Security proposal explained

USA Today

time7 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Could you invest your own FICA taxes? The new Social Security proposal explained

As Elon Musk took a figurative chainsaw to the Social Security Administration earlier this year, there were those, like U.S. Rep. John B. Larson (D-Connecticut), who suspect the move had a lot to do with a desire to privatize Social Security. Social Security privatization refers to transforming the current Social Security system, primarily a government-run program, into a system that allows Americans to invest their Social Security contributions into private accounts rather than paying into the federal program. The challenge If you've ever looked at a paycheck and wondered what FICA stands for, it's the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. Of your gross wages, 6.2% goes into FICA to pay for Social Security and another 1.45% goes toward covering Medicare. Your employer matches both amounts, resulting in a total contribution of 15.3% of your wages. Contributions made today support benefits for retirees, people with disabilities, and survivors of workers who have died. Think of it as today's employees helping fund the benefits of today's retirees. Since Social Security was first established in 1935, the understanding has been that each generation of retirees will be supported by younger workers still on the job. A perfect storm of demographic changes in the United States put the Social Security system in a vulnerable position. Between the declining fertility rate and increased life expectancies, there are fewer workers to support an ever-growing group of retirees. As of this year, 12% of the total population is 65 or older. By 2080, it will be 23%. In other words, the worker-to-beneficiary ratio is expected to drop dramatically, potentially impacting the SSA's ability to fulfill promised benefit payments. A move away from FICA? Among the proposals being made is the suggestion that Americans retain the 6.2% of their wages currently allocated toward FICA. Instead, they can invest it in private investment vehicles and decide how the money should be allocated. Supporters of Social Security privatization argue that the change would give individuals greater control over their retirement savings and potentially allow them to earn returns higher than those provided by the current system's fixed benefits. They also see it as a way to reduce the financial burden on the federal government. On the other side are those who worry that some Americans may not have the financial literacy or resources to manage investments on their own. Not everyone has experience managing assets, and it's concerning to think about throwing millions of people into the investment pool who may never have learned to manage their finances effectively. Another concern involves what happens to those who spend years investing for retirement only to hit a string of bad luck. That may mean making bad investment choices or even facing losses due to uncontrollable setbacks, like a recession or bear market. Opponents worry about what will happen to those who hit retirement age with little money put away through no fault of their own, and point out that the current Social Security system offers fixed benefits that retirees can count on. Countless issues to work through Even if Congress were able to come to a consensus and privatize Social Security, there are thorny issues that would need to be managed. For example: Partial privatization? Some supporters of Social Security privatization suggest allowing workers to invest a portion of their current Social Security contributions in private accounts, with the remainder allocated to the traditional pay-as-you-go system. While this model would lower the Social Security benefits earned by workers who choose this path, they would have a safety net of some sort to look forward to in retirement. Given how difficult it can be to get Congress to agree on anything, there's no doubt that deciding to upend the entire Social Security system will be an uphill (and long-fought) battle. In the meantime, the more immediate goal is to find a way to shore up the current system so that retirees will receive every dollar they've been promised. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook Offer from the Motley Fool: If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known "Social Security secrets"could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. JoinStock Advisorto learn more about these strategies. View the "Social Security secrets" »

Vance travels to LA amid immigration protests
Vance travels to LA amid immigration protests

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Vance travels to LA amid immigration protests

Vice President JD Vance is traveling to Los Angeles on Friday as protests against the Trump administration's immigration crackdown continue to grip the city. Vance, a Marine veteran, will tour a multi-agency Federal Joint Operations Center as well as a Federal Mobile Command Center. He will also meet with leadership and Marines before giving remarks, according to his office. His visit comes as protests and law enforcement clash in Los Angeles over Immigration and Customs Enforcement's raids and deportations -- a key part of President Donald Trump's agenda. MORE: Trump has made a number of claims about the LA protests. Here is the context. Another conflict in the city stems from Trump's decision to deploy thousands of National Guardsmen and hundreds of Marines to LA against Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's wishes. A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that Trump can keep the National Guard in Los Angeles for now -- allowing the president to continue to use the military to quell protests against his deportation plans. Trump called the decision a "BIG WIN" in a social media post. MORE: LA protests timeline: How ICE raids sparked demonstrations and Trump to send in the military Earlier this month, Vance attacked the protests and used the events unfolding in LA to push for passage of the megabill that would advance Trump's legislative agenda. "Insurrectionists carrying foreign flags are attacking immigration enforcement officers, while one half of America's political leadership has decided that border enforcement is evil," Vance wrote in an X post. "Time to pass President Trump's beautiful bill and further secure the border." Many Democrats have spoken out against the Trump administration's immigration practices. Last week, California Sen. Alex Padilla, a Democrat, was forcibly removed from a Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's news conference on the topic after he said he was trying to ask a question.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store