Page 7 – Nejat Society

Nejat Newsletter No.126

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

1. Conference of Nejat Society Albania in Pogradec
Nejat Society Albania, held a conference in Pogradec, Albania to convey the voices of mothers and families of members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). The conference was organized through the efforts and interest of Ms. Eshpersa, head of the Association of Intellectual Women in Albania.

2. The Incredible Disappearing of the MEK
Michael Rubin, an American journalist critical of the Islamic Republic and a staunch opponent of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), believes that Israel’s attacks on Iran and its plan to change for regime change are the causes for the destruction of the MEK.

3. Eurasia Times: MEK has no capacity or support inside Iran
To be honest, Israel’s so-called preemptive strikes on Iran show that Benjamin Netanyahu has gone beyond his government’s “Initiation Doctrine.” According to Netanyahu’s rhetoric to the Iranian nation while dropping bombs on Iranian citizens, he wants to change the Iranian regime and claims to stand with the Iranian nation.

4. International Law, the Silence of the West and the Paradox of the Iranian Opposition (MEK)
In recent decades, the world has faced a dramatic shift in the balance of power, where the permanent conflicts in the Middle East have served as a testing ground for major geo political interests. In this complex mosaic, the Iranian op position MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq), with its contradictory history and alliances, occupies a special and worrying place.

5. Newsweek: MEK cult lack any significant domestic constituency
As Israel claims that its unprovoked attack on Iran is aimed at regime change, analysts wonder which opposition group may be able to take over Iran after the so-called regime change. In this case, the MEK and the Monarchists are the two main oppositions to be analyzed.

6. My Aslan… Come Home
Soraya Abdollahi is the mother of one of the MEK hostages. Her son Amir Aslan Hassanzadeh was recruited by the MEK agents when he was very young. Ms. Abdollahi has been endeavoring to free Amir-Aslan from the hands of the MEK leaders, for over two decades. She has taken every kind of legal action to call on the international community for the release of their son.

7. About Nejat Society
Nejat Society consists of former members of the Mojahedin e Khalq Organization (MEK, MKO, Rajavi cult) and the families of the present members Nejat Society aims to: inform as widely as
possible about the real cultic nature of the MEK…

To view the pdf file click here

July 7, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Rudy Giuliani slammed by public opinion for embracing the MEK

Maryam Rajavi was prepared with an interim government when the ceasefire was brokered!

While the US president, Donald Trump announced the ceasefire between Isarel and Iran on the early hours of June 24th, 2025, Rudy Giuliani, claimed on his X account that “The NCRI and the MEK under Maryam Rajavi is prepared with an interim government for Iran”.

The former mayor of New York City went further and claimed that Maryam Rajavi had pledged to an election in months! This ardent supporter of the MEK said that the long-life president of the NCRI would bring “a non-nuclear, democratic Iran with freedom of religion and freedom for women and a 10 Point Program to create a modern liberal democracy.”

As the Israel Iran war was almost over, both leaders of the US and Israel claim that they do not seek regime change in Iran. No uprising happened in Iran as Iranians were united in opposing the foreign military invasion against their territory. Thus, how Maryam Rajavi was prepared to run her so-called “interim government”?

Rudy Giuliani is one of the numerous American former politicians who are on the MEK’s pay roll. According to the US Department of Treasury investigations, he is one of the high-profile officials who have met with or received payments to speak publicly about removing the MEK from the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

The less-than-fifty-word post written by Giuliani was seriously slammed by the X users addressing him with respectful or offensive comments, trying to enlighten him about the truth of the MEK.

The comments included warnings about certain characteristics of the MEK as a cult-like organization with communist ideals. Although the MEK’s cyber army from Albania made efforts to praise Giuliani’s stance, the adverse comments of angry users flooded their cheerful applauds for the MEK’s paid supporter.
The Iranian and non-Iranian X users tried to enlighten former America’s Mayor on several facts about the MEK:

MEK’s anti American attitudes

They asked Giuliani not to promote radical #MEKterrorists who have taken American lives referring to the assassination of 6 American military and business men by the MEK agents during the 1970s in Ira.
They supported the hostage taking of American diplomats in the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 and celebrated the 9/11 terrorist attack against US civilians.
Thus, Any member of the US Congress or administration supporting the group or marketing their propaganda is acting against American interests and national security.

Marxist Islamist extremist ideology

The MEK’s original ideology is an unstable mix of Marxism, Islamism. Is that truly the future of Iran?

Forced Hijab

In the community led by Maryam Rajavi, women are forced to wear hijab. Users say that she can’t even free herself, yet claims to fight for a free Iran with religious freedom. The hypocrisy is staggering.

Child soldiers

The case of child soldiers recruited by the MEK is a new aspect of the group atrocities that has come to attentions in recent years. The group leaders separated families from their children to radicalize them when they grew up to teen age. The child soldiers of the MEK were trained and used in military operations. Critics think that the MEK leaders should be tried for indoctrination of Iranian children, into an armed extremist cult.

Hostages at Ashraf 3

According to the audience of Giuliani’s post, members of the MEK are poor and elderly people who are stuck in a delusional authoritarian cult at Ashraf 3, a remote camp in the village of Manez, north of Tirana, Albania.
Maryam Rajavi’s ten-point plan will not bring a democracy, not for her own followers, let alone the Iranian people.

Zero support in Iran

This isn’t a group with real support inside Iran. They’re viewed by actual Iranians as cultlike, terrorist, foreign-backed, and illegitimate. The Iranian people will never allow their country to be occupied again by an extremist terrorist cult.
The users ask Giuliani not to speak on behalf of 90 million Iranians, to stop pretending your opinion carries that weight.

Paid Supporters

The majority of comments share the idea that US supporters of the MEK are motivated by the money the group pay them. A user suggests that the money they pay them comes from the social welfare western governments pay MEK members residing their countries. The money is actually meant for medicine and diapers for these elderlies.
American users believe that the MEK pay for their lawmakers speaking engagements and that should stop.

Appeal to relist them

Users mention Donald Trump to ask him to make the USA and the world safer, by relisting the terrorist Islamist-Marxist MEK and NCRI on the U.S. terrorist list. They say that it’s time to put them back where they belong to and to investigate the dirty money the MEK has been paying to corrupt U.S. politicians, including Trump’s former friend, Rudy Giuliani.

Iranians do not want outsider’s force

“If your plan for Iran is to hand it over to a group hated by Iranians and distrusted by Americans, that’s not liberation. That’s a disaster waiting to happen.”
The Iranian people will never allow their country to be occupied by an outside force. It doesn’t need another imported savior. And it certainly doesn’t need another failed foreign project dressed up as “liberation.”
Iranians should decide for their future. History has already shown what happens when outsiders force regime change: In 2003, Saddam Hussein was toppled by the outsiders. The consequence was the rebirth of ISIS. Libya was allegedly liberated from Gaddafi in 2011, the country was left is anarchy. The US forces occupied Afghanistan for 20 years and finally, Taliban was back in power.

Although the MEK claims to be an independent secular democratic opposition to the Iranian government but it is mainly promoted by its paid supporters. Maryam Rajavi routinely visits western retired figures to buy their support. Giuliani promote her so-called interim government as soon as tensions escalated between Iran and Israel. To Iranians, neither war nor ceasefire mean that outsiders can push a hated cult of personality with violent background to acheive power in Iran.

Mazda Parsi

June 30, 2025 0 comments

Maryam Rajavi

On Maryam Rajavi’s Welcome to the Ceasefire and Reiteration of the Third Option

Following the announcement of the ceasefire between Iran and Israel, Maryam Rajavi, the surviving leader of Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), called the ceasefire “a step forward for the third option.”

According to her own claim, Maryam Rajavi has been proposing the “third option” since 2006. She reiterated this claim last week in a hall she had rented at the European Parliament with some people in attendance.

What is the third option?

The third option, according to the MEK, is the only option for confronting the Iranian government. The other two options are what the MEK refers to as “appeasement and foreign military attack.” Maryam Rajavi says that appeasement –negotiations with the Islamic Republic– has only served to strengthen Tehran and develop its nuclear program. The MEK also claims that they do not support foreign military intervention. They say war is not the answer to the “Iran problem.”
According to Maryam Rajavi, the MEK’s third option involves “democratic” change by Iranian “people” and the “resistance”. The term “resistance” refers to the MEK and its political front, National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
Presenting the third option confronts Maryam Rajavi with at least one fundamental question: How can the “Iranian Resistance” guarantee that this option is democratic?

MEK Seeking Legitimacy

The MEK has never been seen as the legitimate resistance of the Iranian people. This is because they lack credibility and trust in the eyes of Iranians. The contradictions in their strategies and actions contribute to their discrediting, and as a result, they not only lose their legitimacy but also appear hypocritical. Therefore, it is difficult for the MEK to gain the support of Iranians and the international community and to convince them of the effectiveness of their ideas.
The little support the MEK receives among Western politicians seems to be based on the concept of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” The reality is that they provide the “right” answers for politicians seeking to justify their radical, violent policy against Tehran.

The MEK’s violent past and terrorist attacks undermine their claim of legitimacy based on their past struggles, and their reluctance to respond to criticism exacerbates this. They have never responded to criticisms for their collaboration with Saddam Hussein and killing their own compatriots in terrorist attacks. The MEK leaders are generally seen as short-sighted and despotic.

Legitimacy or charisma of the Rajavis?

Maryam’s charisma, especially in the international community, is effective to a certain extent. She presents herself as a representative of peace, freedom, and democracy. An appearance that would not seem typical for the leader of a terrorist group. However, the special and unattainable position that both she and Massoud have in the organization completely undermines their claim to be democratically elected, and thus reinforces the fact that the MEK is a cult of personality.
Although the MEK’s political institutions have some international momentum, they lack credibility. The so-called National Council of Resistance was supposed to be run on democratic principles, but the leadership—Maryam Rajavi as the president of the council—has far more power than all the council members. The structure of the council is absolutely authoritarian.
The MEK cannot prove its democratic intentions simply by declaring them through words. They must prove that the principles they claim to uphold apply to them as well, but to date they have failed to prove this.

The obvious failure of the third option

The MEK ideology has failed to gain popular support. Their radical actions, both at the organizational and external relations levels, prevent political reform, and as a result, they lose potential supporters rather than reaching a wider audience.
Their totalitarianism, which bases their arguments and actions on black and white, completely right or completely wrong, completely good or completely bad, contributes to their political isolation.
The contradictions in the MEK’s words and actions have led to their failure to gain legitimacy. They continue to struggle for recognition. Despite more than forty years of talking about the imminent overthrow of the Iranian government, their future remains uncertain and complex.

The Problem with the third option

The third option is problematic. It is presented as an answer to the “Iran problem,” but it raises more questions than it answers. The third option promises a lot, but it is difficult to understand how to implement it and how to reconcile it with reality.
Contrary to the severe and complex problems that the MEK claims Iran is facing, their solution is oversimplified and seems impossible to achieve. They give black and white ultimatums. They are caught up in good or bad, right or wrong thinking. In the real world, nothing is “either or.” The world has many shades of gray.
When Maryam Rajavi promises to realize her dream for a future Iran through third option, she is denying reality. The “Iranian resistance” is not real. The MEK’s legitimacy in the Iranian public is not real. The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) has failed to gain legitimacy, and consequently the third option proposed by Maryam Rajavi is meaningless.

Mazda Parsi

June 28, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Mossad-Backed MEK’s Footprint Exist in Tehran Explosions

On June 15, 2025, a series of bombings across Tehran shook the city, endangering the lives of ordinary citizens and evoking memories of the actions of the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) during the 1980s. The bombings were seen as a clear escalation in the ongoing violence, drawing attention to the MEK’s involvement in terrorist activities in Iran.

The Islamic Republic claims that the MEK, which failed to garner popular support by promoting concepts such as “rebel cells” and “uprisings,” has now aligned itself with foreign powers and warmongers. The MEK, which once relied on Saddam Hussein for support, is now believed to be working with Israel’s intelligence agency, Mossad, to carry out operations in Iran, including the recent bombings.

Following earlier attacks on Iran’s nuclear scientists, where several were killed, U.S. officials confirmed to NBC News that the attacks on the scientists were carried out by the MEK, which was financed, trained, and armed by Israeli intelligence. The latest wave of violence—targeting civilians through bombings—continues this pattern of terrorist activities.

Iran’s government stresses that the MEK, as a group of exiled Iranian nationals familiar with the language, culture, and operational tactics, is an ideal tool for Mossad to execute covert operations like the recent bombings in Tehran. The MEK’s role in spying on Iran’s nuclear program and its involvement in the assassination of Iranian scientists have been documented by various investigative journalists.

Kevin Jon Heller, an international law and security professor at the University of Copenhagen, analyzed the NBC News article and stated: “According to the Terrorist Bombing Convention, ‘states cannot be terrorists’ only as long as bombings are carried out by ‘military forces’ of a state; bombings conducted by a civilian intelligence service like Mossad are not exempt from the definition of terrorism under the convention. Therefore, Mossad’s actions in using the MEK to kill Iranian nuclear scientists qualify as terrorism.”

In recent years, bombings in public spaces—aimed at destabilising independent governments—have often been attributed to ISIS, an entity created by Western powers and their regional allies. However, long before the rise of ISIS and al-Qaeda, it was the MEK that pioneered such acts of terror in Iran and the broader Middle East. For this reason, many consider Massoud Rajavi, the leader of the MEK, as the architect of these types of assassinations in Iran and the greater West Asia region.
The Alliance of Maryam Rajavi, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and Reza Pahlavi / WANA News Agency

WANA News Agency

June 23, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

International Law, the Silence of the West and the Paradox of the Iranian Opposition (MEK)

In recent decades, the world has faced a dramatic shift in the balance of power, where the permanent conflicts in the Middle East have served as a testing ground for major geopolitical interests. In this complex mosaic, the Iranian opposition MEK (Mujahedin-e Khalq), with its contradictory history and alliances, occupies a special and worrying place. Moreover, the stance of Western countries, especially the United States of America, has served as a catalyst for the escalation of tensions and the further destabilization of the region.

International Laws and Two-Faced Standards

Today, more than ever, it is essential to recall and demand respect for international law. These laws are the foundation on which the post-World War II world order was built and are intended to protect the sovereignty of states, guarantee human rights, and prohibit arbitrary interference in the internal affairs of other states.
However, it seems that for some countries these laws are just paper. Israel’s interference in the internal affairs of other states, especially Iran, is a clear violation of these laws. And while this is happening, countries that should be the guarantors of international justice, such as the US, remain indifferent. Their silence is more than a neutral position – it is a tacit approval, an invisible hand that gives Israel the green light to act according to its own strategic interests.

MEK and the Paradox of Alliances: “The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend”

In this complex scene, a non-state actor with strong political and propaganda influence emerges: the Iranian opposition MEK. Once a revolutionary organization that claimed to represent the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people, today the MEK has transformed into a blind instrument of foreign interests, completely estranged from any connection with the pubic will.
The phrase that they seem to follow meticulously – “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” – has become the philosophy of their political action. Considering the Iranian regime as their enemy, the MEK has chosen to openly cooperate with Israel – a state that is in direct conflict with Iran and that has killed thousands of Palestinian civilians over the past decades.
This act is more than political betrayal – it is a denial of any national feeling, a collaboration with a force that not only threatens Iran, but also contributes to the destabilization of the entire region. The MEK is no longer the opposition. They have become ideological mercenaries who represent no one but the interests of those who want division, weakness, and chaos in the Middle East.

Israeli Fear and Strategic Hypocrisy

Israel today expresses its fear that Iran could develop nuclear weapons. This fear has become the justification for attacks, sabotage, constant threats, and a strategy filled with military paranoia. But this justification does not stand up to the truth: Iran, despite all the accusations, has never directly threatened any country with nuclear weapons. On the contrary, Iran has remained within the framework of reserved diplomacy and has not undertaken aggression against its neighbors.
Is it right for a country like Israel, which itself has not ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and which possesses uncontrolled nuclear arsenals, to demand control and transparency from another country? This is pure hypocrisy. Every country has the legitimate right to defend itself and to develop technology for civilian and defense purposes. Nothing in international law denies Iran this right.

The Real Danger: Not Iran, but Policies of Isolation and Destabilization

If we must speak of a real threat to regional stability, then the finger should be pointed not at Iran, but at isolationist strategies, unilateral interventions, and irresponsible alliances. The threat from Israel, if it exists, is a threat that stems from its own foreign policy, from the fear that comes when a state does not accept coexistence but follows the logic of total domination.
While the MEK rubs its hands in anticipation of some major conflict that could bring them to power through a violent overthrow, the Iranian people remain double victims: of an authoritarian regime and of an opposition linked to foreign interests. Sadly, this opposition has lost any moral right to represent the nation it claims to save.

Conclusion: The Need for Justice and Diplomatic Caution

The world needs a sincere return to the principles of international law. States cannot support violent groups that act as temporary allies against their strategic rivals. Nor can they remain silent in the face of direct interference in the sovereignty of other states.
Israel must stop the logic of aggression and fear. The MEK must understand that cooperating with a power that has bloody hands in Gaza will not make it more acceptable in the eyes of the Iranian people. And the US must wake up from its strategic silence and play the role of peacemaker rather than silent supporter of conflicts.
Only then can the region have a future with less blood, more respect, and more justice.

Aldo Sulollari

June 23, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The Incredible Disappearing of the Mujahidin al-Khalq

Michael Rubin, an American journalist critical of the Islamic Republic and a staunch opponent of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), believes that Israel’s attacks on Iran and its plan to change for regime change are the causes for the destruction of the MEK.

Although his analysis in his recent article in the Middle East Forum is not without flaws, his view on the nature of the MEK and his criticism on the performance of this treacherous and violent group, is worth to know:

Imagine talking about regime change for decades, hosting posh conferences that cost millions of dollars, paying five- and perhaps even six-figure honoraria to retired politicians, cabinet secretaries, and ministers from across the United States and Western world, all the while claiming that a veiled septuagenarian leader who never won an election and consistently polled with less than 1 percent support was Iran’s future popular leader. Then Israel strikes at Iran to end the Islamic Republic, inflicting the regime’s greatest crisis in forty-six years and… crickets. Pro-forma statements that do little and certainly do not call for meaningful regime change. That describes Iran’s Mujahedin al-Khalq (MEK, MKO).

Perhaps the MEK or its political umbrella, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, is upset. After all, despite their rhetoric of opposition, the MEK cannot erase their history. Their leadership embraced Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini prior to the Islamic Revolution and worked fist-in-glove with him until Khomeini sought to discard them alongside other allies as he consolidated control. The MEK then fled into exile and offered their services to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, both to strike into Iran and to help Saddam’s Republican Guards suppress Iraqi Kurds. This is why ordinary Iranians despise the group.

The MEK has always been problematic

The MEK has always been problematic. It operates like a cult, its children notoriously isolated and absent from schools where they might mix with other students from outside communities. Its American proxy groups’ tax forms make little sense. This is problematic given how the MEK channels honoraria for American politicians. When not enticing American officials to endorse them, the group indoctrinates its members in anti-Americanism.

Still, it has long insisted that it was Iran’s most popular movement. It used that repeated claim as a means to block or besmirch other opposition groups or co-opt initiatives such as the referendum movement that called for a new referendum to allow Iranians to endorse or denounce Islamic Republic as form of government more than 15 years ago. The group’s leaders and officials seem more obsessed with the son of the late shah than they do with bringing down the Islamic Republic.

MEK more talk that substance

Traditionally, the MEK has claimed they so deeply penetrated the regime that they could expose intelligence no other groups could. Essentially, the MEK said they were the real deal, and other Islamic Republic dissidents and oppositionists were more talk than substance. In reality, there were red flags. A quarter-century ago, for example, the MEK put a supposed defector it identified as Ahmad Behbahani in touch with CBS’ 60 Minutes for an interview, in which Behbahani claimed he oversaw Iranian terrorism and said that Iran, not Muammar Qadhafi’s Libya, was responsible for the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The alleged Behbahani made several other spectacular charges. The problem was that Behbahani was a fraud; physically, he could not have been the real suspect because the man the MEK put forward was several inches too short.

Nor was this the only MEK fraud. MEK representatives often would shop fraudulent documents around Washington; as a Pentagon desk officer, I and my colleagues intercepted several. The MEK goal seemed clear: While they claimed opposition, they hoped Bush administration hardliners who sought regime change in Iran would bite only to be subsequently discredited when the fraud was exposed.

That is not to say that the MEK does not break news. They were the first group to expose publicly the then-covert Natanz enrichment facility in 2002, and have since announced various other sites. Especially now, such announcements appear much more likely a mechanism for foreign intelligence services—most likely Israel’s and/or Saudi Arabia’s—to publicize findings without their own fingerprints.

The MEK will be exposed as frauds

With the regime teetering, the MEK is as well. The group opposed Ayatollahs Khomeini and Khamenei not because they opposed the Islamic Republic, but because the MEK wanted to be in charge of the Islamic Republic. As Iranians make their voice heard, the MEK knows they are toast. They will be exposed as frauds, and those supporting them will rightly have their judgment questioned, much like the many American academics who once embraced the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia as progressives, a phenomenon that scholar Guenter Lewy documented.

As the Islamic Republic collapses, the MEK will fade away as well—for three reasons. First, the regime no longer will need then group as its tool. Second, foreign intelligence agencies have dispensed with shadow boxing and are now at blows.

Once again, the MEK has lost its role. Finally, the Iranian people will speak and put the mutated mixture of Islamism and Marxism to bed, for as Iranians move forward, they will seek democracy.

June 22, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization

Eurasia Times: MEK has no capacity or support inside Iran

To be honest, Israel’s so-called preemptive strikes on Iran show that Benjamin Netanyahu has gone beyond his government’s “Initiation Doctrine.” According to Netanyahu’s rhetoric to the Iranian nation while dropping bombs on Iranian citizens, he wants to change the Iranian regime and claims to stand with the Iranian nation.

As expected, the leaders of the MEK, as one of the opposition groups, are delighted with these fantasies. The sect’s disappeared leader, Massoud Rajavi, expresses his enthusiasm for Israel’s attacks on his compatriots in a new message every day. But whether the MEK really has a place in this equation is a question that an Indian journalist has addressed in the Eurasia Times.

Prakash Nanda, who seems to have a good understanding of Iranian society and the conditions of the Iranian opposition, first poses the question: “Will the Iranians respond to Netanyahu’s request?” and he himself answers: “Given the history of recent unsuccessful attempts to change the regime in Tehran, it is very difficult to answer this question.”

By enumerating and examining the oppositions existing in these conditions, the author of this article also addresses the situation of the MEK organization and provides a relatively comprehensive analysis of this group:
The People’s Mujahideen, also known as the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) or People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), is primarily based in exile. It began in the 1960s as an Islamist-Marxist student militia, which played a decisive role in helping to topple the Shah during the 1979 Iranian revolution.

Anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, and anti-American, MEK fighters had killed scores of the Shah’s police in often suicidal street battles during the 1970s. The group targeted US-owned hotels, airlines, and oil companies, and was responsible for the deaths of six Americans in Iran.

“Death to America by blood and bonfire on the lips of every Muslim is the cry of the Iranian people,” went one of its most famous songs. “May America be annihilated.”

Such attacks helped pave the way for the return of the exiled Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, but he quickly identified the MEK as a serious threat to his plan to turn Iran into an Islamic republic under the control of the clergy.
The well-armed middle-class guerrillas, although popular among religious students and intellectuals, proved to be no match for Khomeini’s organization and ruthlessness.

Khomeini used the security services, the courts, and the media to choke off the MEK’s political support and then crush it entirely. After it fought back, killing more than 70 senior leaders of the Islamic Republic – including the president and Iran’s chief justice – in audacious bomb attacks, Khomeini ordered a violent crackdown on MEK members and sympathizers. The survivors fled the country.

For almost two decades, under their embittered leader Massoud Rajavi, the MEK staged attacks against civilian and military targets across the border in Iran and helped Saddam suppress his own domestic enemies. But after siding with Saddam, who indiscriminately bombed Iranian cities and routinely used chemical weapons in a war that cost a million lives, the MEK lost nearly all the support it had retained inside Iran.

After the US invasion of Iraq, the MEK launched a lavish lobbying campaign to reverse its designation as a terrorist organization, despite reports implicating the group in assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists in 2012.
In 2009, the UK delisted the MEK as a terror group. The Obama administration removed the group from the US terror list in 2012, and later helped negotiate its relocation to Albania.

However, in Albania, the MEK is struggling to hold on to its own members, who have begun to defect. No strategic analyst thinks that the MEK has the capacity or support within Iran to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

After examining the Pahlavis and the Green Movement as two other options to replace the Islamic Republic, Prakash Nanda concludes that none of the three groups seem to have the power or support to overthrow the government.

For this to happen, the journalist believes, Israel would have to be in a position to win the war against Iran decisively and without any compromise, something that cannot be assured in the absence of American support and endorsement.

He also acknowledges that the Iranian military is still strong enough to push Israel back, as seen in its missile counterattacks on Israeli cities on June 14 that passed through its powerful Iron Domes. In addition, he believes that there is a possibility that the Israeli attacks will unite all Iranians against this government.

If we assume the above analysis is correct and the latter possibility comes to pass, then the MEK is the only group that will not unite with any other Iranian of any ideology. They remain on the Israeli front.

Mazda Parsi

June 21, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Newsweek: MEK cult lack any significant domestic constituency

As Israel claims that its unprovoked attack on Iran is aimed at regime change, analysts wonder which opposition group may be able to take over Iran after the so-called regime change. In this case, the MEK and the Monarchists are the two main oppositions to be analyzed.

Tom O’Connor, Senior Writer of the Newsweek suggests that “as Israel eyes regime change, Iran’s opposition is divisive and divided. He asserts that a number of observers argue that neither Pahlavi nor the MEK hold the necessary influence in Iran to substantially affect the country’s future.

In case of the MEK, he quotes Ali Alfoneh, senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington. Alfoneh told Newsweek, “The NCRI/MEK, which relocated to Iraq and collaborated with the Iraqi Army throughout the war against Iran, has been reduced to a cult-like political sect lacking any significant domestic constituency.”

O’Conner also has interviewed Muhammad Sahimi, professor at the University of Southern California, who has outlined a difficult situation for both MEK and monarchy supporters.

“The MEK has had long-standing relations with Israel, and they too hope that they can come to power, although they are universally despised by Iranians from all walks of life, due to their siding with Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq during its war with Iran,” Sahimi told Newsweek about the MEK. “At the same time, their members are all in their 60s and 70s, and in exile. They are a spent force.”

The author also talked to Sina Toosi, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy. Toosi argued that propping up either Pahlavi or the MEK could ultimately harm efforts for democracy in Iran.

“While these groups will likely seek to use the current crisis to boost their visibility and present themselves as viable alternatives, empowering them would be a grave miscalculation,” Toosi told Newsweek. “It would further discredit any externally backed initiative for political change and would undermine the broader Iranian pro-democracy movement, which overwhelmingly rejects foreign interference and sectarian or authoritarian alternatives.”

“Paradoxically, some of the strongest opposition to U.S. or Israeli interference often comes from grassroots civil society actors and reformist or moderate political currents, not the security establishment,” he added. “Undermining those internal voices—who support democratic change but oppose war and foreign manipulation—could inadvertently strengthen the very forces Israel and the U.S. claim to be opposing.”

June 18, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

The MEK’s clear cooperation with Israel in espionage and terror

The approximate coincidence of the latest MEK propaganda show with the Israeli attack on Iran is not surprising. These two organizations, enemies of each other, are therefore friends. Although this friendship is not obvious, it has been manifested in many espionage and operational matters.

After the MEK’s recent show in Washington DC to supposedly expose an Iranian nuclear weapons program, entitled “Kavir Plan,” Newsweek magazine, publishing a report on Alireza Jafarzadeh’s claims at that meeting, considered the MEK and Israeli efforts to obtain information and spy on Iran’s nuclear program to be parallel:
“The MEK’s efforts to in expose Iranian nuclear secrets dates back to at least 2002, when the group revealed the existence of the Natanz uranium enrichment site and Arak heavy water plant. The campaign has run in parallel with efforts by Israel to target and unveil covert Iranian nuclear activity, including a 2018 raid by the Mossad intelligence agency through which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed to have obtained up to 100,000 documents related to Iran’s nuclear program.”

We do know that there are numerous reports of intelligence and operational cooperation between the MEK and the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad. Following the first wave of attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists, which killed several of them, US officials confirmed the allegations made by Iranian leaders, telling NBC News that the deadly attacks on Iranian nuclear scientists were being carried out by an Iranian opposition group (the MEK) that was financed, trained and armed by Mossad.
In fact, the MEK, as an opposition force with Iranian nationality, familiarity with the Iranian language and culture, and very experienced in organized operations, is the best choice for Mossad.

The role of the MEK organization in spying on the Iranian nuclear program and assassinating nuclear scientists was later confirmed in reports by other investigative journalists. Kevin Jon Heller, professor of international law and security at the University of Copenhagen, discussed the potential role of Israel and the MEK in the assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. Specifically, Heller addressed the NBC report that suggested Israel and MEK were responsible for these killings and that Israel was sponsoring the MEK’s actions:

“Under the Terrorist Bombing Convention, “states cannot be terrorist” only insofar as bombings are conducted by the “military forces” of a state; bombings conducted by a civilian intelligence service such as the Mossad are not excluded from the Convention’s definition of terrorism. So yes, the Mossad’s actions in using MEK to kill the Iranian nuclear scientists qualify as terrorism.”

Today, about 13 years after the publication of the above-mentioned analysis, the Newsweek reporter asks Jafarzadeh about the MEK’s cooperation with Israel at a press conference:
“Jafarzadeh declined to comment on whether or not the MeK was cooperating with Israel on the issue. However, he confirmed that the information was being shared with President Donald Trump’s administration as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”

Gareth Porter, an American investigative journalist, has published numerous reports and even a book on the fabricated intelligence by Israel and the MEK and their collaboration to undermine Iran’s nuclear program.

After the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, another Iranian nuclear scientist, he suggested that Israel’s Mossad had spent years on a propaganda campaign aimed at convincing the world that Iran had a nuclear weapons program and legitimizing the assassination of Iranian scientists. According to Porter’s research, the MEK is also the operational arm of Mossad in its propaganda against Iran to justify its assassinations.

According to Porter’s article, “in their 2012 history of Israel’s intelligence service,” Mossad: The Greatest Missions of the Israeli Secret Service”, Michael Bar-Zohar and Nisham Mishal pointed to Mossad as the culprit behind the appearance of the supposed Iranian nuclear documents. The writers recounted how Mossad gathered the personal information on Fakhrizadeh that was later released to the public through the MEK, including his passport number and his home telephone number.”

“This abundance of detail and means of transmission,” Bar-Zohar and Mishal wrote, “leads one to believe that… ‘a certain secret service’ ever suspected by the West of pursuing its own agenda, painstakingly collected these facts and figures about the Iranian scientist and passed them on to the Iranian resistance [MEK].” Porter asserts that this is “a pattern of assassinations justified by disinformation”.

It is obvious that the MEK organization, which has failed to gain the support of the Iranian people by repeating concepts such as “resistance units”, “uprising” and “democracy”, is forced to hang itself in the hands of superpowers and warmongers, just as they once considered Saddam Hussein their master and landlord. Thus, the MEK’s footprint in the tragedies that are occurring in Iran today is evident.

Mazda Parsi

June 16, 2025 0 comments

Ebrahim Khodabandeh, the CEO of Nejat Association

The cult of Rajavi

Tehran Times Interview with Ebrahim Khodabandeh- Part 3

In the second part of the interview of Ebrahim Khodabandeh, the CEO of the Nejat Society with Tehran Times, he explained about the tactics the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) use to infiltrate western governments buying the support of their politicians and to raise funds among their citizens. He described cult-like attitudes of the group leaders who violate the basic rights of their own members.

In part 3 of the interview, Khodabandeh describes the actions taken by Nejat society in order to warn the Albanian government about the presence of the MEK in their country. He suggests that the MEK has built a state in state with its autonomy at Ashraf 3.

According to Khodabandeh the MEK, Nejat Society’s goal is to rescue people: those who are stuck at Ashraf 3, Albania and those youngsters in Iran who are at risk of being manipulated by the MEK fake accounts on social media. He warns about the risk of MEK’s cyber army on the Internet.

June 16, 2025 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts