Yes... it can be possible to do both of those things, but it's not remotely possible to create any credible equivalency between, them:
a.) your paper refuting those claims doesn't get widespread coverage
b.) your paper refuting those claims gets you beaten to death on the streets, or imprisoned and totured to death in prison (or even just imprisoned and released some time later)
I'd say it's pretty good whataboutism, the parallels are more than enough. Iran was a progressive country with flourishing science before nationalistic/religious fundamentalists took over, sadly the US taking its first steps on the same path.
Yeah, Iran was a more proimising country before cultists took over... and, um, so was the US.
OK, you may have found a point of commonality in our opinions. The US isn't yet as far down that road, but... yeah. It's catching up quickly.
But the present debate started with the false equivalence between science in "free countries" being influenced by various corporate and political interests, vs being influenced by theocratic dictatorship inclided towards torture and murder.
That the US is becoming increasingly more like Iran doesn't negate that, it just makes the US not the right example to demonstrate the point.
a.) your paper refuting those claims doesn't get widespread coverage
b.) your paper refuting those claims gets you beaten to death on the streets, or imprisoned and totured to death in prison (or even just imprisoned and released some time later)
This isn't even _good_ whataboutism