The Bishop of Coventry (Bishop)
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what response they have received from the government of Iraq to their 
representation requesting an investigation into the violence at Camp Ashraf on 1 September.
Baroness Warsi (Conservative)
The Government of Iraq has told our Embassy in Baghdad that a committee will conduct a full and open investigation into the attack on Camp Ashraf on 1 September, and that its findings will be made public.
Open Letter to Catherine Ashton
Dear Lady Ashton,
Iran Interlink closely monitors the ideological and behavioural activities of the Mojahedin Khalq organisation and recent information concerning this group forces us to be blunt in our warnings to you.
More than anyone else you are aware that alongside the optimism for a negotiated settlement of the long running nuclear issue between the United States and its allies and Iran, various parties – Israel, Saudi Arabia, members of the US Congress – are trying hard to prevent any moves toward rapprochement. In particular, since Israel’s political efforts have failed to do this, we believe we will now see the ugly face of Israel through its deployment of the terrorist Mojahedin Khalq cult.
In the past few days information from inside the MEK base in Paris has revealed that intense talks have taken place between the MEK and an Israeli handler about this issue. Although this is an Israeli initiative the MEK are negotiating with every option on their table; killing their own members in Iraq and western cities through self-immolations or deaths attributed to hunger strikes, and/or targeted killings and assassinations in Iraq and/or western cities for which others are blamed (the government of Iraq or Iranian opposition groups, or the Iranian government). The MEK’s role, based on its track record and current capabilities, will be to destroy trust by creating ‘evidence’ of violent and devious activity by Iran, backed up by a well-financed propaganda blitz to ‘prove’ its case.
Lest there be any doubt about the reality and seriousness of this potential threat let us recap events over the past few weeks to demonstrate how easily this scenario can get out of hand.
Following the September 1st killings at Camp Ashraf in Iraq the MEK made these two false claims which, through uncritical and paid media and lobbyist repetition, have unfortunately taken on the semblance of accepted facts.
1. Iraqi security forces stormed Camp Ashraf and killed 52 people.
2. Iranian Revolutionary Guards kidnapped seven MEK members from the camp and turned them over to the Iraqi Prime Minister’s office which has hidden and tortured them and still holds them.
Neither of these allegations have been found to be true and the Government of Iraq has repeatedly dismissed them as MEK propaganda. Instead, questions remain whether the killings were an internal MEK action. No independent agency dealing with the MEK on the ground – whether UNAMI or representatives of the American embassy in Baghdad – has offered any reason or evidence on which to base further investigation into the MEK allegations other than to establish what really happened.
However, you will remember that the MEK acting through one of their intermediaries in the European Parliament, Alejo Vidal Quadras of the Iraq Delegation, set you up to fall victim to affirming this false information through your letter to him, clearly issued in good faith, on 19 September. The intervention by Vidal Quadras was timed to coincide with your meeting with Iraqi FM Hoshyar Zebari and would no doubt have gone some way to increase mistrust.
On 10 October the European Parliament used your ‘corroboration’ as the basis for a resolution which repeats this misinformation: The European Parliament adopted a resolution which strongly condemned “the attack on Camp Ashraf on 1st September 2013 by Iraqi forces which left 52 Iranian refugees dead and the abduction of 7 residents including 6 women who, as stated by High Representative Baroness Ashton, are believed to be held in Baghdad, and calls for their immediate and unconditional release.”
Struan Stevenson, Chair of the Iraq Delegation and a long term MEK advocate, has shown himself happy to welcome and exploit any resulting breakdown in EU-Iraq relations. What interpretation are we to give this except corruption of the European Parliamentary system.
But so much for the use of propaganda. The real threat posed by the mercenary MEK terrorist cult is as a tool in the hands of the Israelis. Its role is to disrupt any diplomatic process involving Iran at any cost using any means at its disposal. In this respect the MEK’s capabilities are somewhat limited. They are capable of violence in the streets of Geneva through targeted assassination or self-immolation or a death attributed to hunger strike. But in Iraq, as the events of September 1st demonstrate, the MEK enjoys a free hand when it comes to controlling, and disposing of, the lives of its own members. Sadly, the MEK’s Iranian supporters in western countries are so befuddled by the group’s indoctrination process that they do not realise that the lobbying advocates are paid and do not have any stake in the group or its future. They sincerely believe that the MEK is a real opposition supported by important political and military figures in the American establishment.
Paid lobbyists without scruple demand UN blue hat protection for the members at Camp Liberty to prevent further attacks. However, this is far from the MEK’s intention. MEK tactics now demand more bloodshed to prove its victimhood. Whether this is achieved in Europe or in Iraq, MEK activity will directly impact your negotiation process. The residents of Camp Liberty are in danger because the MEK leaders want to shed their blood.
The security of meetings held in Geneva is not in your hands, nor is it in the hands of Iran, but violent activity will have dire consequences for all sides. It is important to put the MEK where it belongs – it has no place in the political process. The group is purely a brand and a tool. Once a group is named as a tool in the hands of paying masters then it loses its potency. The MEK has no independent existence. You must look to the people who issue the orders to find out how to counter its influence.
Close observation of MEK activity and recent key information points incontrovertibly to the use of violence to disrupt the Geneva meetings and destroy every effort to create trust between the negotiators. Our advice: talk to the MEK’s masters and warn them off this initiative.
posted on iranian.com
Secretary General of Habilian Association – an NGO formed of the families of 17,000 victims of terrorism in Iran – said the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO, also known as MEK, NCRI or PMOI) is the primary trainer of terrorists in Iraq.
Speaking in a meeting with members of Iraq’s Youth Parliament and a number of Ministry of Youth and Sports members, Seyed Mohammad Javad Hasheminejad said that Iran and Iraq share a common civilization heritage, adding that the convergence between the two nations, after the fall of Saddam, is very positive.
“The forty year gap between the two nations of Iran and Iraq was very bothersome,” he added. “The gap was due to an authoritarian government before the Islamic Revolution in Iran and a dictatorial government during the Ba’ath regime in Iraq.”
Son of late AbdolKarim Hasheminejad added that Saddam’s support for terrorist groups, including the MKO, was one of the excuses of the US for attacking Iran.
“But after the fall of Saddam we saw that not only this terrorist group was not destroyed, but it was placed under the direct support of the US government.” “This grouplet enjoyed the best conveniences, while most Iraqi people were deprived of many facilities.”
Hasheminejad went on to explain the role of the MKO in terrorist acts in Iraq and said, “This grouplet has trained suicide bombers at its military headquarters, which were under the protection of US troops, and the initial core of the terrorist operations in Iraq was created by this grouplet.”
With the world anticipating real progress at the next round of P5+1 talks set to start next week in Geneva, the MEK is getting desperate. Because they appear to only want a violent regime change in Iran, talk of actual 
diplomacy is their worst nightmare. Today, Reuters reports on the latest wild accusation tossed out by the MEK using the “umbrella” organization of the National Council of Resistance of Iran:
An exiled Iranian opposition group said on Thursday it had information about what it said was a center for nuclear weaponisation research in Tehran that the government was moving to avoid detection ahead of negotiations with world powers.
Reuters clearly was unmoved by the accusation, as they immediately pointed out that NCRI is biased and politically motivated. However, even in pointing out the bias of NCRI, Reuters perpetuates a myth that has been disproven:
The dissident National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) exposed Iran’s uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water facility at Arak in 2002. But analysts say it has a chequered track record and a clear political agenda.
Uhm, yes. Having your major group spend decades on the list of terrorist organizations (before eventually buying their way off the list and registering as a lobbying group) would indeed qualify as “a chequered track record”. But Reuters insists on repeating the falsehood that the NCRI and MEK were responsible for exposing the underground enrichment site at Natanz. That myth has been thoroughly debunked by Jeffrey Lewis:
The debate about whether Iran has constructed a clandestine centrifuge program drives me nuts.
You mean other than the one we already found?
And by we, I mean the United States—or at least its intelligence community. As I understand the sequence of events, the United States—knowing full well that Iran had a clandestine centrifuge program—watched Iran dig two MASSIVE HOLES near Natanz (see the big picture), then ratted the Iranians out to the IAEA. About the same time, someone leaked that information to an Iranian dissident group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which then released the second-hand dope in a press conference where they got the details wrong.
Lewis goes on to cite multiple independent sources to confirm that the intelligence community, not the NCRI, was responsible for discovering the Natanz facility. [It is also instructive to note the role ISIS played in the charade of promoting NCRI responsibility.]
Aside from that major error on attribution of the discovery of Natanz, Reuters was so unmoved by the newest ploy from NCRI that they didn’t even rewrite today’s article very much from the last wild NCRI accusation in July (the link here is to CBC carrying the Reuters story):
But analysts say it has a mixed track record and a clear political agenda.
But in that July story, Reuters went further in linking that accusation to a desire to derail diplomacy:
The latest allegation comes less than a month after the election of a relative moderate, Hassan Rouhani, as Iran’s new president raised hopes for a resolution of the nuclear dispute with the West, and might be timed to discredit such optimism.
Yes, the MEK clearly sees diplomacy as the real enemy. That article also rehashed the abject failure of an accusation NCRI and MEK made in 2010:
In 2010, when the group said it had evidence of another new nuclear facility, west of the capital Tehran, U.S. officials said they had known about the site for years and had no reason to believe it was nuclear.
It would appear that NCRI and MEK need to step up their acts. They have reached a level of incompetence that is barely worthy of rewriting the standard dismissal that Reuters keeps on file.
by Jim White , EmptyWheel
The propaganda arm of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO) is a non
Solis criticizes the Prague candidate Daniel Herman for is a paid sponsor of the terrorist MKO. "Supporting dangerous foreign terrorist organization whose members have been up in arms operating in Iran, Iraq and Syria, is an unprecedented example of the perversion of some Czech politician", He writes.
As Solis puts, besides Herman, the deposed priest, probably for a high bribe, at least two other Czech politicians, namely Jan Zahradil and Richard Falbr support the MKO. Details of their support were described in the article: "Zahradil and Falbr in the payroll of Marxist terrorists"
Daniel Herman received from the terrorists in the same spirit precise instructions on what to say and how to proceed and how to use his network of contacts to support the Marxist Islamic movement, the author reveals.
Solis refers to Herman’s interview with a Czech radio show where he was questioned for his support for the MKO. The answer according to Solis was the repetition of the absurd rhetoric of lying neocons."Herman does not say what led him to it. He did not comment on the fact that the opinions and practices of terrorists cannot and are not compatible with Christian values, and the general culture of European politics. Herman simply tells that the terrorist organization was removed from two lists of terrorist organizations."
The author accurately notifies the terrorist record of the group and its role in the insurgencies in the Middle East ,"Herman foisted hypocrite logic is that the benefit of these terrorists is to fight against the Iranian government. In Iran Herman’s terrorists have killed more than 17,000 lives. How generous of a Christian that Herman pleads for murderers who are now fighting in Syria alongside Al Qaeda. There are reports that the terrorists were going to attack quite recently also in Europe".
Finally he warns his audience of the risk of a misled warmonger leader, "So beware of false prophets, who manipulate the public with false statements and untruths about international matters. Beware of those who are going for silver willing to sell his soul to the devil and propel the world into destruction."
http://www.parlamentnilisty.cz/
Over a decade after the fall of Iraqi dictator, the step father of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization and its main military, financial sponsor, the group is passing difficult days. It is widely detested by Iraqi nation and government who consider it the active arm of their former oppressor.
The MKO’s alleged “home of 26 years”, Camp Ashraf was finally evacuated following the recent deadly, suspicious clashes in the camp where 52 high ranking member of the group were killed. The survivors of the incident were relocated in the Temporary Transit Location Camp Liberty near Baghdad airport together with other members of the group. However, the group leaders were seriously insisting on return to Ashraf until the last attack.
Residents of the Camp Liberty are gradually –but reluctantly—transferred to European countries such as Albania and Germany. The dark background of the MKO in committing terror acts and its cult-like practices makes it hard for western states to simply accept some 3000 brainwashed zealots who may endanger their citizens. The most recent reaction to the resettlement of a number of MKO members in Koln, Germany was published in the city’s newspaper Kolner Stadt –Anzeiger. The United Nation representatives and German government agreed to transfer 97 resident of Camp Liberty. German government has ordered the city officials to receive 77 people of the refugees, according to the report. The German newspaper adds that the city officials including Mr. Guido Kahlen the director of city council seriously protested the decision. They consider the presence of those people with records of military, terrorist and cult-like activities as a risk to security of Koln citizens.
The other side of the equations over the MKO crisis is the Iraqi government that has so far shown enough tolerance to allow a foreign terrorist force to occupy a piece of its territory and to use its public utilities. The government is still offering services to the accomplice of the collapsed dictator! The undersecretary of US State Department for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman noted that the Iraqi government has provided 50,000 sand bags and physical barriers to protect the dissidents, now relocated to Camp Liberty in Baghdad. The group advocates in the US Congress who mostly belong to warmonger parties think Iraqi’s efforts are not efficient and threatened Iraq that it could face a sharp cut in aid if it continues to fail to protect the MKO forces.
Nonetheless, Sherman expressed concern but also noted that the MEK’s leadership in Paris was obstructing the process to resettle MEK members. This is not the first time that western authorities mention the MKO leaders’ resistance against leaving Iraq. Why such a reluctance? Because as what National Iranian American Council (NIAC) puts, “A key demand of the MEK’s leadership is that the group’s members be allowed to relocate together as a single unit, rather than to be relocated individually to different countries.”
This not only a key demand of the MKO leadership but also a vital element for the survival of their cult of personality. Once the MKO forces are relocated in different part of the world the cult hierarchy and manipulative control over members disappear. No mind control system – self criticism sessions, indoctrination meetings, peer pressure—no hegemony over the cult. This is what Maryam Rajavi and her disappeared husband Massoud fear the most.
Bad news for them: about 70 individuals among those who were relocated in Albania defected the group immediately after they were released from the mental bars of the cult of Rajavi. They announced their defection and were settled in a separate apartment although they are still irritated by their ex-comrades who try to recruit them again using their deceitful methods.
Definitely these days are not the worst days for the Rajavis. They deserve much worse days. They must see the gradual death of their dream that was built on the ruins of the lives of thousands of innocents killed by them physically or mentally.
Mazda Parsi
Iraq evacuates Camp Ashraf; the MKO symbol of resistance
State Department Advises Senate to Hold Off Iran Sanctions Until After Negotiations
Washington, DC – The top U.S. nuclear negotiator in UN Security Council negotiations with Iran urged the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday to hold off on further sanctions until new negotiations 
commence. Wendy Sherman, the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, said delaying sanctions ahead of talks scheduled for October 15 and 16 in Geneva would give Iran the opportunity to to take “real actions” at the Geneva meeting.
Many on the committee appeared skeptical and indicated they planned to consider new crippling sanctions despite positive signals from Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani. Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-NJ) was largely dismissive of Rouhani’s gestures, though he indicated he hopes concrete action will take place in Geneva. As for further sanctions, Menendez maintained that “as long as Iran is actively pursuing its nuclear program, we must actively work to increase the pressure.”
However, while the House passed a sanctions bill ahead of Rouhani’s inauguration in August, the Senate has yet to introduce its own version of the bill. It is all but certain that, given the government shutdown, new sanctions will not be introduced or considered before the Geneva talks.
Some Senators were dismissive of any new negotiations. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) told Sherman that the U.S. must not negotiate with “evil liars.” He challenged Sherman on what a deal with Iran would look like and whether the U.S. could “ever agree to ease sanctions in any negotiation that does not require Iran to abandon its enrichment and reprocessing capabilities.” Sherman refused to rule out a deal in which Iran retains enrichment—a point that many experts believe will be key to securing a verifiable solution but which is notably opposed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The position of the U.S. on enrichment is unclear—under President Bush, the U.S. refused to negotiate directly with Iran unless the enrichment program was first suspended. Secretary of State John Kerry, as a Senator in 2009, called the Bush position requiring zero enrichment, “ridiculous” and said Iran has “a right to peaceful nuclear power and to enrichment in that purpose.” In 2011, then Secretary of State , Hillary Clinton signaled a shift from the Bush approach when she stated “[Iranians] can enrich uranium at some future date once they have demonstrated that they can do so in a responsible manner in accordance with international obligations.”
According to Sherman, a deal with Iran would realistically include limitations on the “pace and scope” of enrichment and greater transparency with regard to Iran’s stockpiles of enriched uranium. If Iran does not pass the “Geneva test”, she said, they should expect harsher sanctions—something Sherman says she and Secretary of State Kerry made clear to the Iranians following the U.N. general assembly. In terms of what a deal would look like, Sherman said that “the onus is on Iran” to clarify how far they are willing to go.
At least two dozen supporters of the Mujaheddin-e Khalq (MEK) filled the hearing room, sitting behind the panel in matching yellow jackets emblazoned with pro-MEK slogans. Senator John McCain advocated for the MEK’s safety in Iraq, criticizing the U.S. for not protecting MEK members from deadly attacks that occurred in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf. Sherman expressed concern but also noted that the MEK’s leadership in Paris was obstructing the process to resettle MEK members. A key demand of the MEK’s leadership is that the group’s members be allowed to relocate together as a single unit, rather than to be relocated individually to different countries. Menendez interjected and told Sherman that the MEK should be invited to relocate to the United States.
Will the new Iranian president’s diplomatic opening survive the onslaught from detractors like Israel, Saudi Arabia and members of the U.S. Congress?
The new Iranian leader’s diplomatic moves have brought hope to those searching for an end to hostility between Iran and the U.S. In the days leading up to the annual gathering of world leaders in New York, Iranian president Hassan Rouhani proclaimed to NBC News that Iran would not seek nuclear weapons under any circumstances and penned a Washington Post op-ed in which he declared, “I’m committed to fulfilling my promises to my people, including my pledge to engage in constructive interaction with the world.”
It was all part of Rouhani’s effort to pave the way for a potential new chapter in U.S.-Iranian relations. After decades of mistrust sowed by a U.S.-backed coup in 1953 and the taking of American hostages in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Rouhani seemed to be trying to forge a different course. The new Iranian president’s United Nations speech continued the diplomatic opening, declaring that Iran was open to negotiations aimed at resolving “reasonable concerns” about Iran’s nuclear energy program. Rouhani’s UN talk came hours after President Barack Obama signaled an American willingness to engage in talks with Iran, though it’s far from a sure thing that meetings could bear fruit.
The details of a potential deal are fairly well-known. It would involve Western recognition of Iran’s right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes in return for an Iranian willingness to allow more inspections of its nuclear program, ending work on a water reactor that could produce a key element of a nuclear weapon and capping the levels of uranium enrichment. Iranian concession would be met with sanctions relief.
But will the diplomatic opening survive the onslaught of a wide array of detractors? That’s the big question.
On September 24, the day of Rouhani’s and Obama’s speeches, a large crowd of detractors virulently opposed to a thaw in U.S.-Iranian relations demonstrated outside the United Nations. Organized by the political branch of the Iranian expatriate group Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), thousands of Iranian-Americans gathered to denounce Rouhani and any chance of diplomacy. Also at the rally were non-Iranian Americans that were bused in from around the country, their tickets, food and lodging all paid for by MEK. “Some of the people don’t have a clue what it was all about,” one man from Michigan at the rally told AlterNet.
Waving trademark red, green and white MEK flags and chanting for the downfall of the Iranian regime, MEK supporters listened to former U.S. officials on the group’s payroll fall over themselves for the most hyperbolic statements about Iran’s new leader.
Former Democratic senator Robert Toricelli thundered, “there is no compromising with evil….Do not meet with terrorists.” Former chair of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele said, “do not shake hands with Rouhani,” a reference to the possibility that Obama would do just that with Rouhani (the handshake or meeting never materialized). The hawkish former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, told the crowd it would be “repugnant” for Obama to meet with Rouhani and that now was the time for “increasing” punishing sanctions on Iran which have wreaked havoc on their economy and led to medicine shortages. But it fell to former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to take the cake for the most ridiculous statement of the day when he tried to link Rouhani to a 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Argentina.
“Rouhani…was certainly aware of it, certainly involved. Their blood is on their hands, and just wishing people ‘Happy Rosh Hashanah’ doesn’t wipe away the blood of these Jewish martyrs from Iran’s hand or Rouhani,” said Giuliani. But while the Iranian government has been linked to the attack, the Argentine prosecutor on the case told the Times of Israel in June that Rouhani “did not participate” in the meeting that approved the bombing.
MEK and its supporters are hardly the only political force that wants to stop U.S.-Iranian negotiations over the nuclear program. Here are five others.
1. Israel
America’s number-one ally in the Middle East is the leading player in the drive to scuttle diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran. Israel has been hyping the Iranian threat in part “to distract attention from Israel’s occupation of Palestine,” as the Palestine Center’s Yousef Munayyer put it last year. The Jewish state has warned of the danger of an Iranian nuclear bomb since the early 1990s, when then Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said that “Iran is the greatest threat and greatest problem in the Middle East because it seeks the nuclear option while holding a highly dangerous stance of extreme religious militancy.”
The warnings haven’t let up. Iran has declared that it does not seek nuclear weapons and both U.S. and Israeli intelligence have stated Iran does not possess a nuclear weapon and has not made a decision to pursue them. That’s not enough for Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “red line” on Iran is the country achieving “nuclear weapons capability,” a hazy term meaning the country has the technical ability to produce a weapon if it decided to do so. Some experts say Iran has already reached nuclear weapons capability.
Another reason why Israel is wary over diplomacy with Iran is that it could lead to recognition of Iran as a major regional player and thus pose a more potent challenge to Israeli regional hegemony.
Predictably, Israel reacted negatively to Rouhani’s United Nations speech. In an indication of just how distasteful they feel about the prospect of speaking to Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “Iran thinks that soothing words and token actions will enable it continue on its path to the bomb. Like North Korea before it, Iran will try to remove sanctions by offering cosmetic concessions while preserving its ability to rapidly build a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing.” Netanyahu also claimed that Israel “would welcome a genuine diplomatic solution,” but his demands amount to a complete Iranian cave-in, something that is not going to happen.
Israeli officials at the UN went so far as to boycott Rouhani’s speech.
2. The U.S.-Based Israel Lobby
Taking their cues from Israel, pro-Israel groups in the U.S. are also demanding the impossible from Iran, and in effect, trying to scuttle real diplomacy. The Israel lobby’s number-one group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, launched a broadside against Rouhani in a memo released before the General Assembly opened.
The memo urges the West to keep the “military option”—a strike on Iran—on the table and increase sanctions so talks would be more effective. But Iran has bristled at the military option and wants sanctions reduced in exchange for Iranian concessions, making AIPAC’s asks a surefire way to close the possibility of a deal. “The international community should only consider sanctions relief if Iran complies with United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions that require suspending its nuclear activities,” the AIPAC memo states, indicating that only full Iranian capitulation on its nuclear program would suffice.
The Emergency Committee for Israel, a neoconservative group run by Bill Kristol, is also dismissive of Rouhani. It set up a website dedicated to showing that Rouhani “is no moderate” and that he is a “career terrorist.”
3. U.S. Congress
Congress works hand in hand with the Israel lobby, and both Democrats and Republicans have wasted no time blasting Rouhani. A letter sent from senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and John McCain to President Obama echoed AIPAC’s memo. “We respectfully urge that any diplomatic outreach to Iran re-emphasizes that the United States will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapons capability and that any relief from crippling economic sanctions on Iran will only be provided if Iran takes meaningful and verifiable actions to halt its nuclear activities,” the hawkish senators wrote.
But no deal can come by demanding that Iran “halt its nuclear activities.” Iran sees enrichment of uranium as a key part of its identity as an independent state able to deter enemies like Israel.
Democrats like Eliot Engel in the House had a similar message. According to Al-Monitor, Engel, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, responded to Rouhani’s UN speech by saying that the Iranian leader missed an opportunity… to set a new constructive tone demonstrating Iranian seriousness in addressing its nuclear program. Far from engaging in a ‘charm offensive,’ he repeated too many of the same old talking points blaming the United States and our allies for all of the world’s ills.”
The dismissive statements directed toward Rouhani were no surprise. In the immediate aftermath of Rouhani’s election—a time that sparked hope for a diplomatic resolution over Iran’s nuclear energy program–the House passed a new sanctions bill aimed at slashing Iran’s oil exports, a key source of income for the Islamic Republic. Other sanctions passed into law by the U.S. Congress have led to Iran’s economy suffering, with inflation and medicine shortages increasing.
4. MEK and Supporters
The September 24 rally held by Mojahedin-e-Khalq outside the UN was only the latest salvo in its effort to pressure the U.S. to do more to help overthrow the Iranian regime. It’s been lobbying and enlisting U.S. officials to do just that for years now. It positions itself as a sort of “government in exile,” a movement ready to take the reins of power in Iran once the regime is overthrown. But MEK is widely detested within Iran.
MEK participated in the revolution that brought down the U.S.-backed Shah in 1979. But soon after the ayatollahs of Iran took over, they turned on MEK and an armed crackdown began. The Islamic Republic drove Mojahedin-e-Khalq and other left-wing forces underground. Mojahedin-e-Khalq responded by bombing Iranian government facilities and killing members of the Iranian military. The violent Iranian group has been characterized as a “cult.” Its violence landed them on the State Department list of terrorist organizations.
It was eventually driven out of Iran, and Mojahedin-e-Khalq went on to back Saddam Hussein’s government while Iraq waged a brutal war with Iran.
Fast-forward to the past decade, when a high-profile lobbying campaign was waged by Mojahedin-e-Khalq and former U.S. officials to get the group off the U.S. terror list. MEK, which was trained by the U.S. military in 2005 and reportedly colluded with Israel to assassinate Iranian nuclear scientists, paid millions of dollars in speaking fees to former U.S. officials to speak on its behalf. The lobbying campaign bore fruit in 2012 when the State Department took MEK off its terrorist list.
MEK is still at it, as the September 24 rally showed. Its supporters at the rally called for a halt to the drive for diplomacy with Rouhani and the overthrow of the government.
5. Gulf Arab States
Israel is the foreign country everyone talks about as fearing a diplomatic deal with Iran and the easing of pressure on the country. But Gulf Arab states equally fear Iran and want the pressure to be kept up—putting those Arab states in league with Israel, a country disliked by much of their populations.
Countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain are bent on curbing Iranian influence in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and Iran have been locked in a battle for regional power in the Middle East ever since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. The geopolitical battle stems from Iran’s oil production, which puts them in competition with Saudi Arabia, as well as both countries’ attempts to place friendly political forces in power in other nations. Those attempts have led to proxy battles being fought in Lebanon, Bahrain and now Syria.
As a major oil exporter to the U.S., Saudi Arabia is likely to be skeptical of a grand U.S.-Iran bargain. But Rouhani has also pledged to improve Saudi-Iran ties, so it’s possible a thawing in relations between the two countries could result from the new Iranian leader’s election.
By Alex Kane , Alternet
++ Mohammad Reza Rohani, former member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), published the third part of his series of articles titled ‘The Smell of Joseph’s Shirt’. This third part answers questions raised in the first two articles. Rohani says the main objections against him have been as to why he writes against the MEK and he reminds these people that he didn’t start it. He only resigned and wished the MEK good luck. But for months after this the MEK did nothing but swear at him. He didn’t think this would happen but now he knows what they are really like.
++ Ashraf News reported on a statement issued by Ban Ki Moon’s Press Office following a meeting between the UN Secretary General and Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zibari. Moon announced in the statement that the MEK must be removed from Iraq asap.
++ In a meeting with Catherine Ashton at the UN meeting in New York, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zibari said Europe should think about finding a place for the MEK asap. ‘They will be thrown out and you have to take them’, he said.
++ Several articles were published about how isolated the Israelis and also the MEK were this time in New York during the UNGA meetings.
++ Irandidban website has an article about Massoud Rajavi’s latest proclamations, which were not in his voice but were read out as a general rant. During the broadcast Rajavi claims that everyone who was killed in Camp Ashraf had loved to be martyred and he clearly stated that they were there for that purpose. Irandidban reminds us that the MEK had publicly demanded that they stay in Camp Ashraf in order to sell their belongings, not to get killed.
++ An Open Letter to Mr Samir Tahiri, Interior Minister of Albania, was published in English and signed by many former members and critics of the Mojahedin Khalq. Warning that the MEK is trying to send its trusted henchmen to control the new arrivals the letter asks Tahiri to ‘prevent the entrance of Mrs Masoumeh Malekmohammadi to Albania. She should be handed over to the Iraqi courts of justice for her criminal activities in Iraq’. And concludes, ‘We urge you and your government to allocate and designate a place for the separated members of the PMOI away from those who are loyal Mojahedin members in Albania in order for them to be safe and sound from the psychological tortures and pressures of the PMOI.’
++ An article by Amir Hossein Panahi from Aryia Association in Paris titled ‘Rajavi’s group and what they gained in New York’, discusses those individuals who were paid to make speeches to beggars in New York during the MEK’s mock demonstration. He concludes that the speakers would be better off if they hadn’t exposed like this how empty handed they are.
++ Sahar Family Foundation has translated several Iraqi newspaper articles into Farsi. These are some examples of what is covered: Iraq’s Foreign Minister declared again that the government of Iraq had no involvement in the disappearance of any MEK members and if Catherine Ashton or anyone else has any concerns they can of course talk with him and he can explain more about this issue; The Badr faction spokesman in parliament has declared that there is overwhelming evidence that the MEK massacred Kurdish people during the era of Saddam Hussein and that they have to be prosecuted before their deportation; Some Iraqi newspapers reported that while searching Camp Ashraf they have found mass graves some of which appear to contain Kurds and some Kuwaitis. A joint American-Kuwaiti team are investigating this and apparently one of the victims is a child princess related to the ruling royal family of Kuwait; another paper has said that, contrary to what the MEK claims, the American government has denied visiting the seven allegedly lost people and the government of Iraq also dismisses such claims.
++ A. Rayhani has written to Iraj Mesdaghi, a vocal critic of the MEK, giving many reasons why he and his colleagues who have deserted the MEK should start a separate MEK group so that other like minded people can join with them. Mesdaghi has answered this by reminding Rayhani that ‘you can’t start an opposition group from Sweden, all we can do from outside Iran is to help the opposition there. Mesdaghi says people can’t believe in an army without arms and they can’t believe in fighters who have suddenly become asylum seekers, and nor can they believe that MEK are warriors when they are working from Paris. In the same way such people wouldn’t accept us if we announced ourselves as the new MEK but this time from Sweden. Mesdaghi says ‘I am no Don Quixote! I am a realist. Let Rajavi make his wild claims’. Mesdaghi refers to Rajavi’s claims that the 3000 old and sick men and women in Iraq are going to play the role of Robin Hood from Camp Liberty, and that from there Rajavi will break down all the walls and go against the wishes of the UN and the international community, and he will break the chains of Imperialism and then destroy the army of Iraq and topple the Iraqi government…!
++ This week many have written articles marking the anniversary of America removing the MEK from its terrorism list. They commonly remark that contrary to what Rajavi claimed to the MEK forces, that being on this list was why they couldn’t topple the Iranian regime, now we see that this wasn’t the problem after all as the MEK are in a worse state than then. Some writers analyse the situation as ‘how the Americans use everything without hesitation’ – such as adding the MEK to the list then taking them off again just as easily. They point out that Hillary Clinton promised to remove the MEK if they agreed go to Camp Liberty. In Tehran, Dr Sajadi, Head of the Society for the Defence of Victims of Terrorism in Iran, says that although Clinton – wrongly – promised such a thing to a group of terrorists and kept her word, we saw that the terrorists did not keep their word and did not empty Camp Ashraf which has cost many lives until now. He says that the fact that the cult leaders have not been able to come back and are in a worse situation now is cannot be credited to the Americans since they have tried their best to use terrorism and groups like the MEK which has spent millions of dollars on Senators and ex-officials, etc.
++ A delegation from Faryad Azadi Association visited the Albanian embassy in Paris to discuss the MEK arrivals in Tirana. The delegation thanked the government of Albania for its humanitarian act and went on to explain the behaviour of the MEK, how they operate as a cult and offered consultancy as to how Albania can deal with them.
++ Ghorban Ali Hosseinejat wrote about the MEK’s so-called hunger strike in Camp Liberty which has apparently not affected the health of any of them after four weeks. (Hosseinejat points out this is a known sham tactic and the MEK typically do this for propaganda purposes.) He poses the question to Rajavi that if what you claim is true and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard was responsible for the attack on Camp Ashraf and the deaths of 52 people while letting the remainder take photographs and films to be sent immediately to Paris for propaganda, and if meanwhile they take seven random people and put them in the hands of the Iraqi government – while most people believe this whole event has been an internal act – then, if this is true, isn’t it even more ridiculous that the MEK have gone on hunger strike asking the IRG to release them or they will kill themselves? If what you say is true, why would the Iranian Revolutionary Guard want to stop you killing yourselves?
++ According to Nejat Bloggers, Cologne city officials have objected to moves to bring 77 MEK from Camp Liberty to their city. Citing security concerns Mr Guido Kahlen, director of Cologne City Council seriously protested the decision. The Council considers the presence of those people with records of military, terrorist and cult-like activities as a risk to the security of Cologne’s citizens, he said.
