 |
|
The Nixon Center's executive director Paul Saunders writes:
Posted with permission. Posted by Laura at September 13, 2007 12:25 PMDear Ms. Rozen,
Nick Gvosdev at The National Interest forwarded to me your inquiry about his identification in an article for our long-discontinued online weekly In the National Interest as well as your phone message asking about his statements regarding U.S. military contingency plans related to Iran.
First, I should tell you that Alexis Debat is no longer affiliated with The Nixon Center or The National Interest. He resigned yesterday for personal reasons. Also, strictly for clarification, his former role as a contributing editor to the magazine was unpaid and was not a staff position; he was compensated strictly for individual contributions on a case-by-case basis.
Regarding his 2003 piece for In the National Interest, Alexis Debat was not affiliated with the magazine or The Nixon Center at that time. Thus, like most publications dealing with outside contributors, we relied on him to provide a brief description of his background rather than conducting a detailed investigation of our own. Also, we knew independently about his affiliation with ABC--one of several he mentioned--and saw no reason to question someone essentially endorsed by ABC, which would have its own sources in Paris and considerable investigative capabilities. We later received confirmation of his work at Middlebury. More generally, we assumed, like most others in such circumstances, that someone writing in a public forum and seeking to maintain his credibility would provide accurate information. We also expect in these situations that there is a self-correcting mechanism available to us, namely, that if there were indeed errors, others would bring them to our attention. In this case, the piece was circulated widely and even sent to French Embassy officials. Other French Embassy officials have often attended our meetings. Yours is the first inquiry about his identification in that piece, which is now four years old.
Regarding the statements on Iran, they were his personal statements, not institutional ones, and were in a public meeting with other experts where they could be easily challenged by anyone with different information or a different perspective. We are certainly not in a position to pre-screen statements by experts during public events. Also, because we believed he was still at ABC at the time, we assumed that he could have access to sources not available to others. From what I understand, video of the discussion is available from C SPAN if you would like to see both his statements and the context in which they were made. Certainly, however, it is widely known that the U.S. military prepares contingency plans for a wide variety of eventualities and it is plausible that plans of some kind exist in relation to Iran. More broadly, individuals who make statements of this kind often attract scrutiny and, if they expect to maintain their credibility as experts over time, are careful about what they say.
I hope this is helpful.
Sincerely,
Paul Saunders