The Islamic Republic of Iran is currently reeling from a seismic shift in its internal landscape. Last month, the regime met peaceful dissent with staggering lethality, claiming the lives of thousands — by some accounts, exceeding 30,000. What began as a cry for economic relief has transformed into a profound, nationwide mandate for systemic change. For the international community, this bloodshed imposes a solemn duty: to bear honest witness to the regime’s brutality and to safeguard the Iranian people’s right to define their own democratic destiny.

For five decades, Iranians at home and across the globe have waged a tireless campaign against theocratic absolutism in favor of a secular, pluralistic republic grounded in popular sovereignty. In such volatile moments, independent journalism is more than a service; for millions denied a free press at home, the Voice of America (VOA) Persian Service is a vital artery of truth.

I commend the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) for recently articulating a clear, principled directive: “No outside news outlet should choose the next leader of Iran.” This is not merely an editorial policy; it is an affirmation of the bedrock democratic principle that U.S.-funded media exists to inform, not to anoint — to amplify authentic voices, not to manufacture a vanguard.

However, a concerning shadow has emerged. Reports suggest that a political faction affiliated with the remnants of the deposed Pahlavi monarchy is exerting pressure on VOA Persian to abandon this neutrality. Such efforts do not constitute legitimate advocacy; they represent an attempt at editorial coercion that threatens to compromise the mission of American public diplomacy.

During the recent uprisings, Mr. Reza Pahlavi, the son of the deposed dictator of Iran, moved with alacrity to position himself as the face of the opposition on the global stage. While many international outlets initially amplified his claims, subsequent scrutiny has invited significant skepticism. Much of the purported “groundswell” of monarchist sentiment was bolstered by digitally altered footage, a facade that crumbles when compared to the reality on the streets. Since 2017, the slogans echoing through Iran’s urban centers have been remarkably consistent in their rejection of all forms of autocracy: “Death to the dictator, whether Shah or Supreme Leader.”

The attempt to cast Mr. Pahlavi as the presumptive successor risks reviving the most painful ghosts of Iran’s history. It evokes a colonial-era paternalism in which outside powers presumed to engineer Iran’s political architecture — from the imposition of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925 to the restoration of the monarchy in 1953. These interventions did not bring stability; they entrenched autocracy and created the vacuum that enabled Ayatollah Khomeini to hijack the leadership of the 1979 revolution. More recently, this trajectory mirrors the “Chalabi scenario” in Iraq, where exile-driven narratives and inflated claims of domestic support led to a decade of strategic miscalculation — at a cost of 5,000 American lives and trillions of dollars.

To be clear: in a democratic society, Iranians of all political persuasions are entitled to a seat at the table. However, a publicly funded broadcaster must never be pressured into becoming a megaphone for a single faction. To do so would violate the VOA Charter, which mandates accurate, objective, and comprehensive reporting.

The regime in Tehran has long sought to delegitimize dissent by framing it as either foreign-instigated chaos or a desperate bid to return to the ancien régime. When Western platforms appear to privilege a movement associated with past dictatorship, they inadvertently gift the regime a propaganda victory and undermine the credibility of the genuine democratic movement.

The role of the United States is not to referee a leadership contest from afar. It is to provide a credible forum where Iranians can evaluate a full spectrum of perspectives. That credibility is a fragile asset, entirely dependent on steadfast independence.

I urge the leadership of USAGM and VOA to remain resolute. Attempts to intimidate journalists or monopolize coverage must be rejected with the same vigor regardless of their source. The Iranian people are risking their lives for the right to choose. They deserve a media landscape that reflects their courage and complexity, not one tailored by the best-connected lobby.

At this pivotal juncture, the United States must stand not with any specific claimant to power, but with the principle that only the Iranian people can determine their future. Protecting the independence of VOA Persian is not a secondary concern; it is essential to ensuring that the voices demanding a secular republic are heard — uncensored, unmanipulated, and unmistakably their own.

I have worked in this space as the former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, Chairman of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems and as the President of the Council for National Policy. This is a matter that commands our attention!