Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
Nejat Society
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip
© 2003 - 2024 NEJAT Society. nejatngo.org
Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

US-Backed Terrorists Seeking to Undermine Iran-Iraq Ties

An Iraqi political analyst said on Sunday that US-affiliated groups and terrorists are seeking to stir tension in relations between Tehran and Baghdad. US-Backed Terrorists Seeking to Undermine Iran-Iraq Ties

"The recent explosions are aimed at stirring tension and portraying Iraq as an insecure country through operations by terrorists and US-affiliated agents," professor of Baghdad University Hazem Shemri told FNA, commenting on recent terrorist attacks on Iranian pilgrims in Iraq.

He underlined success of the Iraqi security forces in restoring securing in the country, and added, "The occupiers’ interest is in keeping Iraq in a security crisis and their support for the al-Qaeda agents and the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) is aimed at striking Iraq’s security and progress."

Twenty Iranian pilgrims were among at least 58 people killed when two women suicide bombers attacked a Shiite shrine in Baghdad on Friday. Some 80 Iranians were among the 125 people wounded.

Another 52 Iranian pilgrims were among at least 56 people killed in a suicide attack on a roadside restaurant in Muqdadiyah, northeast of Baghdad, the previous day.

Elsewhere, Shermi reminded Iran’s significant role in stability and security of the region, and added, "Concerns of the US and its allies about Iran’s role have caused them to resort to different ways to stir tension in Tehran-Baghdad relations."

Thai News Service, April 27, 2009

And:

MP says USA behind attacks on Iranian pilgrims in Iraq

Text of Majid Mo’afi’s report by Iranian newspaper Qods website on 26 April headlined "The deputy head of the Majlis National Security Committee in an interview with Quds: Americans must be held accountable for security tension in Iraq"

The final days of last week were bloody days for Iranian pilgrims at holy sites. In two separate terrorist attacks against Iranian pilgrims in [Iraq’s] Dialeh Province and at the holy sites of Imam Musa Kazem and Imam Javad (peace be upon them) a great number of our citizens were martyred and injured. There is various speculations about these attacks, however, the deputy head of the Majlis National Security Committee believes that these attacks were orchestrated by America and the Zionists in retaliation for their defeat in the Durban-2 summit [UN anti-racism conference] in Geneva.

In an interview with our correspondent Mohammad Esma’il Kowsari added: "These bombings are plots of America and the Zionists following Mr. [Iranian President Mahmud] Ahmadinezhad’s presence in Geneva and his speech about racism which had extensive coverage in the world media." He continued: "Mr. Ahmadinezhad’s revelations against Zionism and racism in the Durban-2 summit in Geneva were a blatant defeat for the Zionist officials, America and the countries which either did not take part in this summit or decided to leave the session during Mr Ahmadinezhad’s speech."

This MP from Tehran believes that Wahhabi elements, Al-Qa’idah elements and Monafeqin terrorists [Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization, Iranian opposition group in Iraq] who receive their orders directly from America and the Zionists were behind these attacks. The MP maintains that when confronted with Iran’s solid logic and rationalization, America and the Zionists cannot do anything else but kill innocent people.

Kowsari referred to the presence of the American troops in Iraq and their claim to maintain security in this country and said: "Undoubtedly, Americans are to blame first for these events; although reportedly, Iraq’s security has been handed over to the Iraqi forces, in reality American forces have the last say with regard security in this country. Therefore American forces were responsible for these terrorist attacks." He believes that the occupiers of Iraq must leave this country as soon as possible so that Iraqis can look after security in this country. The deputy head of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee maintained that as American troops are not prepared to accept responsibility for the terrorist attacks and Iraqis do not have full responsibility over security in their country; the best thing that we can do to avoid such terrorist events is to stop sending Iranian pilgrims to this country until full security is established in Iraq.

BBC Monitoring Caucasus, April 27, 2009

April 29, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

US should stop supporting Terrorists

New York Friday prayer leader: US should stop supporting Terrorists

New York Friday prayer leader meets Secretary General of Habilian New York Friday prayer leader: US should stop supporting Terrorists

According to Habilian Association (terror victims’ family) database, in a meeting with Feisal Abdol Rauf, New York Friday prayer leader, Secretary General of Habilian Association disclosed new aspects of MKO crimes inside Iran as well as Iraq.

Mr. Abdol Rauf who is a prominent Islamic leader in the West is also an Associate Professor of Islamic Studies at St. Joseph’s College’s Brooklyn Campus in Brooklyn, New York and founder of the Cordoba Initiative which aims to connect the Muslim world with the West. He has also founded American Society for Muslim advancement.

In this meeting and along with enumerating MKO crimes in both Iran and Iraq, Seyyed Mohammad Javad Hshemi Nejad asked Abdol Rauf:”How is it thatin a meeting with Feisal Abdol Rauf, New York Friday prayer leader, Secretary General of Habilian Association disclosed new aspects of MKO crimes inside Iran as well as Iraq. America hails change and establishing relationships with Iran while takes advantage of terrorist groups in order to cause insecurity and instability inside Iran? Isn’t it America’s double standard to designate a group as terrorist and support it at the same time?

Secretary General of Habilian Association referred to the last year report by distinguished American journalist and news writer Seymour Hersh which unveiled that the U.S Congress had agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars in order to covertly destabilize the Islamic Republic in Iran via applying terrorist groups like MKO, Jundollah and P.K.K and said: after the downfall of Saddam, it was supposed that terrorist groups be uprooted from Iraq;

but not only it didn’t happen but also America changed into major support fro terrorists in Iraq making obstacles on the way of their expulsion from Iraq.

In this meeting Feisal Abdol Rauf condemned, in his turn, terrorism in all shapes and demanded the expulsion of all terrorist groups from Iraq. He also hoped that he could enlighten American politicians and make those who have been deceived by terrorist groups not to support them anymore.

Note worthily New York Friday prayer leader also had a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Sunday.

April 29, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraq

Maliki’s meeting with MKO ringleader denied

“An advisor to Iraq’s prime minister rejected Nouri Al-Maliki’s meeting with the ringleader of the terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization, Masoud Rajavi”, as posted on a number of Persian websites in the past two days. 

Speaking to IRNA in Baghdad Sunday, Yasin Majid expressed doubt whether Rajavi was in Iraq and added that the news is wrong and no meeting has taken place.

He also denied news and reports on Maliki’s visit to Tehran.

Another unnamed source in Iraqi Prime Minister’s Office also said that if Maliki was due to meet a person, it would be announced officially.

All his meetings with local and foreign figures are declared through official statements, it noted.

April 29, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Iraq is adamant about expelling terrorists

Iraq blasts were engineered from abroad: security advisor

TEHRAN – A top Iraqi security official has said foreign hands were behind aAl-Rubaie also said his government is adamant about expelling the terrorist MKO group from the country. recent wave of terror attacks across the country which left at least 140 people dead, half of them Iranians.

“Recent blasts in Iraq were directed by foreign agents,” Iraqi national security advisor Muwafaq al-Rubaie said, according to Alforat TV.

“It is impossible that a terror group can continue its operation in a country unless it gets logistical and financial support from abroad,” the security official noted after a meeting with Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani.

Iran has faulted the U.S. for the murder of pilgrims in Iraq, accusing it of failing to establish security in the country.

Al-Rubaie said he briefed the ayatollah about the national security issues. However, he said, “We believe that the general atmosphere is very good in the country.”

Al-Rubaie also said his government is adamant about expelling the terrorist MKO group from the country.

“It is impossible that we allow this group stays in Iraq because this issue contradicts our constitution.”

He added the MKO had “committed crimes against the Iraqi people.”

He said the only alternative facing the MKO is returning to Iran or going to a third country.

Al-Rubaie announced in March that Iraqi security forces have besieged Camp Ashraf housing members of Mojahedin Khalq Organization. The camp is home to 3,500 people.

On a visit to Iran on Jan. 23, Rubaie said Camp Ashraf would be ""part of history within two months"".

MKO immigrated to Iraq in the 1980s and fought alongside Iraqi forces against Iran during Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).

The group has claimed responsibility for carrying out numerous terror attacks against Iranian nationals and officials, and has also been accused of assisting former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the slaughter of thousands of Iraqi civilians in the 1990s

http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=193351

April 29, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
MEK Camp Ashraf

Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions

Dowlnoad The PDF File

Library of the House of Commons

In brief: Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions

Standard note: SN/IA/05022

Last updated: 20 March 2009

Author: Arabella Thorp

Section: International Affairs and Defence Section

What is Camp Ashraf ?

Ashraf is a settlement in Iraq’s Diyala province, near the border with Iran, which houses the headquarters of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI), also known as Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK) or Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organisation (MKO). The PMOI is the main body in the coalition of Iranian opposition groups known as the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), and is regarded as a terrorist organisation by a number of states but has now been removed from the UK and EU lists of terrorist organisations. It sided with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, but following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 the PMOI surrendered to US forces and 3,800 PMOI members were disarmed and cantoned in Camp Ashraf. Some 370 have since been voluntarily repatriated to Iran , and in 2004 restrictions and controls were removed. The Iraqi government has stated its intention to close the camp and expel all PMOI personnel from Iraqi territory.

Who is responsible for the inhabitants of Ashraf?

The main responsibility to protect civilians lies with the states that have effective control over them. From 2003 until 31 December 2008 US forces protected Camp Ashraf. Then on 1 January 2009, control passed to the Iraqi Government, under the new US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. Both the US and Iraqi governments have given assurances that, within the framework of Iraqi national legislation, Ashraf residents will be treated in accordance with international humanitarian law and with the principle of non-refoulement in particular. The UK considers the issue primarily a US rather than a UK responsibility.

What are the main concerns?

Lliving conditions at Ashraf are not generally a cause for concern, although an explosion damaged Ashraf’s water-supply station in February 2008. The main concern is that its inhabitants would be at risk of torture or other serious human rights violations if they were to be returned involuntarily to Iran. Iraq has reportedly given Ashraf’s inhabitants two options: return to Iran or find a third country for exile. Iraqi officials have however stated that PMOI members would not be forcibly repatriated to Iran and have called upon the international community to offer asylum to Ashraf’s occupants.

People who have left Camp Ashraf voluntarily have reported ‘brain-washing’, forced indoctrination and rough treatment by the PMOI of those who wanted to leave the camp.

This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.

Do the Geneva Conventions apply?

In July 2004, the PMOI forces in Ashraf were declared by the US to be ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, because they had not been belligerents during the Iraq War. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians who, as the result of an international armed conflict or of occupation, find themselves in the hands of a country of which they are not nationals. It states that in no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.

In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004.

What other international law is relevant?

Under the international law principle of non-refoulement, no-one should be deported, expelled or repatriated if there is a real risk that they may be subjected to any kind of ill-treatment, or that they may face persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The US has ratified international conventions embodying this principle (the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1984 UN Convention Against Torture), but Iraq has not. However, non-refoulement is widely recognised as a principle of customary international law that binds all states.

Further reading

–      Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre, Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), 5 March 2009 [available through the Parliamentary Intranet]

          Juan-Pedro Schaerer, Iraq: ICRC activities in behalf of Iranian nationals living in   

            Ashraf, 3 December 2008      

–      Zouhair Al Hassani, ‘International humanitarian law and its implementation in Iraq ’, International Review of the Red Cross Vol. 90 No. 869, March 2008

–      Knut Dörmann and Laurent Colassis, ‘International Humanitarian Law in the Iraq Conflict’, German Yearbook of International Law 47 (2004), 293–342

–      International Committee of the Red Cross, Protected persons and property and international humanitarian law [viewed 20 March 2009]

–      Amnesty International, Iraq: No Iranians in need of protection should be sent to Iran against their will, 28 August 2008

–      Amnesty International, Security agreement puts 16,000 Iraqi detainees at risk of torture, 28 November 2008

–      Massoud Khodabandeh (former member of PMOI), Camp Ashraf: a test of US-Iraqi relations, 7 April 2008

–      Iran Interlink, Nejat Society Asks UK to Support Iraqi Government Plans for Camp Ashraf Victims, 11 December 2008

–      Hon. David Kilgour, J.D., ‘Catastrophe on horizon for Camp Ashraf refugees’, Middle East Times 8 October 2008

–      House of Lords debate, Iraq: Ashraf City, HL Deb 2 March 2009 cc504-6

    Dowlnoad The PDF File

Download Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions
Download Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions

April 27, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The cult of Rajavi

The walls have ears

In Camp Ashraf and camp Maryam all the walls have ears. As a member of MKO cult one can never talk to a colleague. Every working group includes a superiorIn the destructive cult of Rajavi like any other mind control cult, the members should observe each other. member and a minor one because the latter should be supervised by the former .”They even force the most high-ranking members to move jointly. They say that there shouldn’t be any exclusions.” according to Ms. Batoul Soltani former member of MKO leadership Council. She escaped from the cult after she found out a report of false allegations about herself on the computer. The report was written by her colleagues and was supposed to be sent to Maryam Rajavi.

In the destructive cult of Rajavi like any other mind control cult, the members should watch each other. They should report everything they learn about their colleagues to increase their own credit near the leaders. The mind Control system makes them think that a perfect cult member is the one who shows more loyalty for the leaders.

In a mind control cult like in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia you must be careful of what you say and do;”The walls have ears”. Everyone is encouraged to watch out for”struggling”brothers and sisters and report what they see to leadership. Often information given in deepest confidence is automatically reported to leadership. Cult leaders will then use this information to convince their members that they have a supernatural link, the trusting member does not suspect the very natural mechanism behind the supernatural revelations they are given.

People in a mind control cult will also hide their true thoughts and feelings, and instead wear a mask which presents them as a perfect cult member. This mask is a defense against being reported to leadership and being punished for not measuring up (cult members never feel like they measure up to the cult’s ideals, and yet often believe the other members around them do, when in reality the others feel the same as them). Hence cult members are trained not only to deceive outsiders, but also to deceive their fellow cult members. Rarely can close friendships form in cults, and if they do the cult’s leaders may see them as a threat and move those people away from each other. Nothing is allowed that can be more powerful than the cult members’ allegiance to the group and its leaders.

Key Point 

Is Information you expected to be kept confidential reported to leadership? If so then it’s a cult

There are various cult jargons in MKO destructive cult. They serve the main objective of the cult. Some of them are called “Current Operation”, “cleansing meetings” and “nil-nil” meetings. These jargons include different forms of reporting system. As you read in memoirs of Batoul Soltani,” Masud Rajavi calls the current operation as “spiritual Jihad” and even “higher than Martyrdom.”, so he convinces the members to confess their own thoughts or to report their comrades’ affaires. The reporting system makes the members more dependent on the group’s leader.

By Mazda Parsi

Reference: HowCultsWork

Also Read:

Mujahedin-e-Khalq as a religious political cult
Exclusivism in the mind control system of the cults
The Mind Control Gun of Mujahedin Leadership  
Cults, wonderful on the outside, manipulating on the inside 
PMOI’s Intimidating Leadership 
Required Recriuting Tool
Information Control within MKO Cult
April 27, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Auver-sur-Oise

Who care about the stronghold on the Oise

Although characterizing an oasis in the scorching desert of Iraq, for sure Camp Ashraf is only an appendage of MKO’s superb heaven located on the green bank of d’Oise in France. In spite of the fact that Camp Ashraf is recently the focus of the group’s propaganda and MKO strenuously attempts to attract all attentions to the presence of MKO members therein, and that is just what the organization intended to pull off, the attention seems to have considerably fallen off the main stronghold in Auvers-Sur-Oise.

In any struggle, being it military or political, protection of the headquarters, commanders and leaders has the highest priority. The headquarters usually remain undetected and hardly their whereabouts are mentioned, otherwise highly guarded and protected, and the media plays the role of an efficient guardian by diverting attentions to subdivisions. That is much because of the leaders and policy-makers who are of the great magnitude than those who are executers of the policies and orders. When a solder dies, there are more at hand and easy to recruit to be replaced. It is not the same with chief commanders and figures that lead others for good or evil.

Making pillars of its first headquarters in Val d’Oise in France after the escape of its leading figures from Iran, MKO turned the district into a center of plotting terrorist operations against the Iranian regime. Being granted political asylum by French government as well as police protection, no better location could MKO have attained to reorganize. Of course no armed terrorist team marched out of the Val d’Oise’s gates; the teams positioned in other concealed dwellings on the Iranian borders and cities were the operators to carry out the orders delivered to them. Years later, it turned to be a great convenience when Saddam allocated a military camp and other facilities to them just close to Iranian borders. Taking advantage of the occasion, MKO temporarily moved to the provided camps in Iraq but kept the headquarters in Val d’Oise active with some cadres energetically guarding the backbone.

In fact MKO’s settlement in Iraq was the successful outcome of a quest for a military and operational bastion wherein the group could freely train its army and operational teams and have easy access to multitudes of arms and ammunition depots provided by Saddam. There it was accountable to no international organization for its anti-human and cultic practices and enjoyed freedom of action since it was under the constant surveillance of no counter-terrorist system and intelligent service as it was getting in the way of the organization in the European countries.

The significance of the second abodes of Mojahedin located in Iraq, however, lies in the fact that there has been a heavily constructed bridge between them and those in the Val d’Oise district in France. Mojahedin never broke it when they relocated to Iraq but rather have reinforced it. The rush of many ranking cadres and leaders of MKO, including Maryam Rajavi, back to their headquarters in France after the invasion of the coalition forces indicate the cunning farsightedness of the group in safeguarding the main bastion in France. Of course, the big return did not go unnoticed by French intelligence. As Pierre de Bousquet, the director of the Directorate for Territorial Surveillance, France’s counterintelligence service, said in an interview “French intelligence noticed the arrival of an increasing number of Mujahedeen members and, after the Iraq war, of many of its soldiers”.

Now securely resettled in her palatine headquarters in Auvers-Sur-Oise, MKO’s queen needs scapegoats to be sacrificed for the sake of the organization itself rather than any other political cause like overthrowing the Iranian regime. No more on the list of the European terror list, MKO is deprived of its potentiality as an armed group but is availing itself of the high potentialities of a dangerous cult that has already displayed what it is capable of doing in the heart of the modern world. Many are of the opinion that Mojahedin have managed to build another Camp Ashraf in France. An erroneous observation! Camp Ashraf is product of Auvers-Sur-Oise, the heart and the head. It is the root that can develop Camp Ashrafs everywhere in a new land.

Alas! Nobody seems to be taking the danger and menace of the seemingly courteous people of the Auvers-Sur-Oise palais serious. While they are reinforcing and heavily defending the robust walls of their stronghold in Auvers-Sur-Oise, all attentions are directed at the falling walls of Camp Ashraf!

April 26, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
UK

Some sensible answers to Mojahedin claims

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Written answers We have seen no evidence to support the allegations[on alleged attacks on residents in Ashraf City by members of the Iraqi secret service].

Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iraq: Mujahedin-e Khalq


David Drew (Stroud, Labour)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received of alleged attacks on residents in Ashraf City by members of the Iraqi secret service; and if he will make a statement.


Bill Rammell (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Harlow, Labour)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>holding answer 20 March 2009

‘ font-size: 10pt”>We are aware that such allegations have surfaced in the Iraqi media. We have discussed these allegations with the US, who retain a presence inside Camp Ashraf, and with the Iraqi government. We have seen no evidence to support the allegations.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

Written answers

Monday, 20 April 2009

‘ font-size: 10pt”>House of Lords

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iran

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass (Crossbench)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they have taken to ensure that Camp Ashraf residents who are members of the People’s Mujaheddin Organisation of Iran are not expelled to Iran by the Iraqi authorities; and what alternatives to that they have proposed through the United Nations.

Lord Malloch-Brown (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Labour)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Responsibility for the security and administration of Camp Ashraf was transferred on 1 January 2009 from the US to the Iraqi authorities. Prior to this handover the US received assurances from the Iraqi authorities towards their clear commitment to the humane treatment and continued well-being of the camp residents. The US retains a presence at the camp in an advisory/monitoring capacity.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>The Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights visits the camp and has delivered assurances to a representative body of the residents. The International Committee of the Red Cross follows developments at the camp closely and continues to visit. It also discusses on a confidential basis all of the issues surrounding the camp with the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MEK) and the Iraqi and US authorities.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>The UN High Commission for Refugees has previously determined that Camp Ashraf residents do not qualify as refugees. While there is no evidence to suggest that the Government of Iraq intend forcibly to relocate the residents, our Embassy in Baghdad has requested a call on the Ministry of Human Rights to make known the level of interest in this issue in the UK and to remind the Iraqi Government of their earlier assurances. Our Embassy in Baghdad is also pursuing the possibility of a visit to the camp by a consular official.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

Written answers

Tuesday, 21 April 2009

‘ font-size: 10pt”>House of Lords

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iraq

Lord King of West Bromwich (Labour)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the Government of Iraq to safeguard the human rights and safety of Iranian residents in Ashraf City; and with what results.

Lord Malloch-Brown (Minister of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; Labour)

‘ font-size: 10pt”>The US held responsibility for the security and administration of Camp Ashraf until 1 January 2009. Responsibility was then transferred from the US to Iraqi authorities. The modalities of the transfer had been discussed by both sides with UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq. Prior to the transfer, the US received assurances from the Iraqi authorities towards their clear commitment to the humane treatment and continued wellbeing of the camp residents. The US retains a presence at the camp in an advisory/monitoring capacity.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>The Government of Iraq have stated that no Camp Ashraf residents will be forcibly transferred to a country where they have reason to fear persecution. The Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights visits the camp and has delivered assurances to a representative body of the residents. The International Committee of the Red Cross follows developments at the camp closely and continues to visit. It also discusses on a confidential basis all of the issues surrounding the camp with the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (MeK) and the Iraqi and US authorities.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>While no specific representations to the Government of Iraq have been made, our embassy in Baghdad has requested a call on the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights to make known the level of interest in this issue in the UK and to remind the Iraqi Government of its earlier assurances. In addition to this, as stated by my honourable friend, Bill Rammell, Minister of State for the Middle East, during an adjournment debate in Westminster Hall on 25 March 2009 (Hansard, col. 90WH) "the British embassy in Baghdad is pursuing the possibility of a visit by a consular official to Camp Ashraf" to ascertain whether any of its residents might be entitled to consular assistance.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

Library of the House of Commons

In brief: Camp Ashraf and the Geneva Conventions

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Standard note: SN/IA/05022

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Last updated: 20 March 2009

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Author: Arabella Thorp

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Section: International Affairs and Defence Section

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

‘ font-size: 10pt”>What is Camp Ashraf ?

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Ashraf is a settlement in Iraq’s Diyala province, near the border with Iran, which houses the headquarters of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI), also known as Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK) or Mujahideen-e-Khalq Organisation (MKO). The PMOI is the main body in the coalition of Iranian opposition groups known as the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), and is regarded as a terrorist organisation by a number of states but has now been removed from the UK and EU lists of terrorist organisations. It sided with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, but following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 the PMOI surrendered to US forces and 3,800 PMOI members were disarmed and cantoned in Camp Ashraf. Some 370 have since been voluntarily repatriated to Iran , and in 2004 restrictions and controls were removed. The Iraqi government has stated its intention to close the camp and expel all PMOI personnel from Iraqi territory.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Who is responsible for the inhabitants of Ashraf?

‘ font-size: 10pt”>The main responsibility to protect civilians lies with the states that have effective control over them. From 2003 until 31 December 2008 US forces protected Camp Ashraf. Then on 1 January 2009, control passed to the Iraqi Government, under the new US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. Both the US and Iraqi governments have given assurances that, within the framework of Iraqi national legislation, Ashraf residents will be treated in accordance with international humanitarian law and with the principle of non-refoulement in particular. The UK considers the issue primarily a US rather than a UK responsibility.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>What are the main concerns?

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Lliving conditions at Ashraf are not generally a cause for concern, although an explosion damaged Ashraf’s water-supply station in February 2008. The main concern is that its inhabitants would be at risk of torture or other serious human rights violations if they were to be returned involuntarily to Iran. Iraq has reportedly given Ashraf’s inhabitants two options: return to Iran or find a third country for exile. Iraqi officials have however stated that PMOI members would not be forcibly repatriated to Iran and have called upon the international community to offer asylum to Ashraf’s occupants.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>People who have left Camp Ashraf voluntarily have reported ‘brain-washing’, forced indoctrination and rough treatment by the PMOI of those who wanted to leave the camp.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is required. This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Do the Geneva Conventions apply?

‘ font-size: 10pt”>In July 2004, the PMOI forces in Ashraf were declared by the US to be ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, because they had not been belligerents during the Iraq War. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians who, as the result of an international armed conflict or of occupation, find themselves in the hands of a country of which they are not nationals. It states that in no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004.

‘ font-size: 10pt”> 

‘ font-size: 10pt”>What other international law is relevant?

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Under the international law principle of non-refoulement, no-one should be deported, expelled or repatriated if there is a real risk that they may be subjected to any kind of ill-treatment, or that they may face persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The US has ratified international conventions embodying this principle (the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1984 UN Convention Against Torture), but Iraq has not. However, non-refoulement is widely recognised as a principle of customary international law that binds all states.

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Further reading

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre, Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), 5 March 2009 [available through the Parliamentary Intranet]

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Juan-Pedro Schaerer, Iraq: ICRC activities in behalf of Iranian nationals living in Ashraf, 3 December 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Zouhair Al Hassani, ‘International humanitarian law and its implementation in Iraq ’, International Review of the Red Cross Vol. 90 No. 869, March 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Knut Dörmann and Laurent Colassis, ‘International Humanitarian Law in the Iraq Conflict’, German Yearbook of International Law 47 (2004), 293–342

‘ font-size: 10pt”>International Committee of the Red Cross, Protected persons and property and international humanitarian law [viewed 20 March 2009]

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Amnesty International, Iraq: No Iranians in need of protection should be sent to Iran against their will, 28 August 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Amnesty International, Security agreement puts 16,000 Iraqi detainees at risk of torture, 28 November 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Massoud Khodabandeh (former member of PMOI), Camp Ashraf: a test of US-Iraqi relations, 7 April 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Iran Interlink, Nejat Society Asks UK to Support Iraqi Government Plans for Camp Ashraf Victims, 11 December 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>Hon. David Kilgour, J.D., ‘Catastrophe on horizon for Camp Ashraf refugees’, Middle East Times 8 October 2008

‘ font-size: 10pt”>House of Lords debate, Iraq: Ashraf City, HL Deb 2 March 2009 cc504-6

April 26, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iraq

Letter to Mr. Al Maliki Prime Minister of Iraq

Dear Sir,

Today the European Parliament adopted a resolution on ‘the humanitarian situation of Camp Ashraf residents’.

Although the expectations in the resolution fall far short of what the Government of Iraq has actually done since 1st January 2009 in order to pursue a humanitarian path toward dismantling the camp and freeing its residents, we feel certain that you will welcome this resolution as an expression of concern by members of the European Parliament that your government be protected from malicious accusations of wrongdoing in pursuing your sovereignThe Government of Iraq is not only fulfilling the articles of the resolution but has without a doubt exceeded expectations in its humane treatment of the residents of Camp Ashraf ... rights and responsibilities.

Unfortunately the resolution contains some regrettable factual errors (as you are fully aware, the Fourth Geneva Convention has not applied to Camp Ashraf residents since June 2005 and the UNHCR has determined that Camp Ashraf residents do not qualify as refugees), but in spite of this we must warmly congratulate the Government of Iraq on the fact that it has already over-exceeded the requirements of the resolution in guaranteeing the humanitarian treatment of Camp Ashraf residents.

Indeed, the plan pursued by your National Security Advisor, Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie, has shown a profound understanding of the real problems faced by residents in the camp. The enlightened and humanitarian actions, in the face of severe provocation by the MEK leaders, which have already been put in place will, I am sure, become an example for other national governments which may be faced with the task of dismantling a dangerous, destructive cult as is the MEK.

The Government of Iraq is not only fulfilling the articles of the resolution but has without a doubt exceeded expectations in its humane treatment of the residents of Camp Ashraf.

However, I am sure you will agree that your Government faces two main obstacles in fulfilling the obligations which you have set for yourselves and which are repeated in the resolution.

The first is that the MEK has created various obstacles and mounted severe provocations which demonstrate that the group’s leaders will not cooperate in any way with your government’s efforts to safely secure the individual futures of the residents. Indeed, through their continued refusal to abide by Iraqi and/or international law the people residing in camp Ashraf have regrettably defined themselves as outlaws.

The second obstacle is that the expected help and cooperation from other national governments, particularly those of the European Union in fulfilling their obligations under article 4 of the resolution, has not been forthcoming. It is becoming clear that although western governments are willing to talk about their support for the MEK, none are willing to accept the residents as refugees in their countries.

In light of the failure of western democratic governments to offer concrete help to the people of Camp Ashraf in the form of places of refuge, may we urge your government to look further afield.
 

April 25, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Auver-sur-Oise

Warnings that frustrate Mojahedin Khalq

The already made comments on Auver-Sur-Oise seem to have worried Mojahedin greatly to the point that has made Mr. Amir Aram, a member of NCRI, to ignore the ethical codes and to desperately devote almost half of his 600-words article to badmouthing and use of bad language against the authors of these comments. He has totally disregarded the fact that he is living just in the centre of one of the greatest civilizations of the world and hometown of those like Hugo and Rolland, etc that were symbols of art and decency. It seems that Mr. Aram is far from all these aspects. The deep anger of Mojahedin and other artists of NCRI like Hamid Taherzadeh against a few simple notes imply the significance of this issue for MKO’s leadership. We are not concerned about the abusive language used by Mr. Aram and his fellows since commonly all critics of Mojahedin have to bear some consequences like hostile reactions and cliché swearwords in MKO websites. In fact, the criterion of significance of an issue for Mojahedin is the extent to which they initiate propaganda blitz around it.

Disregarding the insults of Mr. Aram, the reaction of the organization under the banner of NCRI and the writings of its members like Hamid Taherzadeh signify some points that confirm our claims about Mojahedin haven in France. In an article entitled “The objective of intelligence ministry of mudslinging against Auver-Sur-Oise” Taherzadeh has tried to pervert the claims in some points to achieve his own objectives. But he also brings up accusations that has never been mentioned and accounts for them.

To the best of my knowledge, we have never claimed that the high walls of the fortress and high voltage barbed wires around have surrounded dissident Mojahedin. And that there are numerous dissident Mojahedin kept in its dark dungeons. There is no doubt that Auver-sur-Oise has captured MKO members by means of cultic mechanisms and brainwashing techniques. However, the presence or absence of these dungeons has hardly ever been mentioned in our articles since it is an irrelevant issue. We argue that Auver-sur-Oise has turned into the second Camp Ashraf for Mojahedin following their imminent expulsion from Iraq and their willingness to reside therein. In other words, the ideological bastion of Mojahedin is to be relocated to Auver-sur-Oise. Finding the characteristics of this camp is very easy since there is no difference between Mojahedin’s two ideological bastions in Iraq and France. Our main warning is that the transfer of Ashraf residents to Auver-sur-Oise may have inevitable costs and negative consequences for French officials that are to be anticipated and prevented in due time before being late.

The second point is concerned with the security systems of Auver-sur-Oise and its equipments like high voltage barbed wire. It has been denied by Hamid Taherzadeh whereas this is not a claim made just by Mojahedin critics and dissidents yet even Mojahedin themselves have maneuvered on these features of Auver-sur-Oise and crow about their achievements therein. Their publications are full of these points to the extent that there is no need for our review. However, some instances describing the security systems of their fortress in Auver-sur-Oise are mentioned here. All these excerpts are quoted in Mojahedin journals and publications.

According to Italian News agency (ANSA) and DAP:

He (Rajavi) was speaking in one of the reception rooms of his dwelling in Auver-sur-Oise in Paris suburb that was surrendered by barbed wire and French police officers. A place where no one (even the insiders) can enter unless fully inspected and under highly control measures. 1

As noted by another Italian reporter, the main residence of the Rajavis and the highly imposed drastic security measures even for the group’s members is described as:

His [Rajavi’s] dwelling in Auver-sur-Oise, in the Parisian suburbs, is much like a fortress. There is a high wall keeping it concealed from suspicious looks. There are high voltage barbed wires around as well as searchlights on the walls illuminating the surroundings. The road to Massoud Rajavi’s villa (leadership centre) is controlled by two French check-points equipped with machine guns. The only entrance to villa is guarded by Mojahedin forces themselves. 2

In addition, Mojahed quotes the Germany national broadcasting and writes:

There were some impedimenta in our path to his [Rajavi’s] dwelling, 4 kms to northwestern Paris. The park therein was not well landscaped; the area was surrounded by barbed wires charged with high voltage… 3

Also it has been written:

Mojahedin as the most active resistance group and one of best organization, control and inspect reporters and their instruments carefully by magnetometer and sometimes search them too. 4

The significant point is that in the recent article of the organization by Mr. Taherzadeh, the case of 17 June 2003 of Maryam Azdanlu has been referred to and he says that France has kept it in cold storage. Its legal meaning is that they are still pursuing the accusations of the dossier and have the trial of its defendants on the agenda. This is exactly what we said. We warned French officials to take the crimes recorded by DST into consideration and prohibit future incalculable misdeeds of Mojahedin channeled from their headquarters in Auver-sur-Oise. This dossier shows that the position of France against Mojahedin has remained unchanged and France is acting more prudently in this regard. Also, as it is included in the DST report, Mojahedin in their communiqués of their so-called military-political phase have assumed the responsibility of more than hundreds of terrors committed inside Iran from their command centre in Auver-sur-Oise.

The next issue in these comments was that the destiny of Camp Ashraf would be clear in the near future and their expulsion from Iraq is inevitable. Therefore, Mojahedin, being aware of this, make their utmost efforts to postpone the consequences of this event that may endanger their position in Auver-sur-Oise as well as their transfer to France. As we said, making much maneuver and propaganda blitz on Camp Ashraf aims at distracting the attention of the world from Auver-sur-Oise and what happens therein. Now, after the determination of the destiny of Camp Ashraf, the same maneuvers are concentrated on Auver-sur-Oise. The call of Mojahedin for supporting Auver-sur-Oise and defending it is in this regard aiming at immunizing it by the lever of threat. However, Auver-sur-Oise is much more important for Mojahedin compared to Camp Ashraf hence when asked of the possibility of suicide attacks of Mojahedin in the Europe, Bijan Niyabati said: “It is unlikely as long as the Mojahedin leadership is not intruded…”. 5

The reaction of the organization against these articles under the alias of NCRI members is a proof of their significance and the truth lying behind them. If our statements and warnings were false, there was no need for Mojahedin to take this hostile and harsh position against them.

Mojahedin have transferred their key figures that consists of more than a half of members of leadership council and now is to transfer the remnant members of this council as well as its body, i.e. rank-and-files from Camp Ashraf. It has to be pointed out that Mojahedin threatened French officials of self-immolation and suicide attacks once before the events of 17 June 2003 in 1987 when a group of MKO members illegally transferred to Gabon were arrested. Finally, they managed to make French officials withdraw and Maryam Rajavi addressed French officials, saying:

Last year during the departure [expulsion of Masoud Rajavi], all events came to pass in absolute silence. It seems that this silence and firm discipline of Mojahedin at that time led many to a false conclusion… This year we had numerous requests for self-immolation too that were prohibited by the order of Masoud and the concerned officials are well aware of them… Anyway, this move by the fighters of liberation army is one of the greatest operations all over the world. 6

Maryam Rajavi sent her indirect warning to French officials and then she fulfilled her promise of terrorist activities in 17 June 2003 when she managed to turn Paris streets to the scene of the most reactionary practices of a cult of personality. It may provide sufficient evidence for our true efforts in alerting the world and France in particular to a potential cultic danger.

Resources:

1. Mojahed , No. 249, 1985, Massoud Rajavi’s interview with Italian News agency (ANSA). And DAP.

2. Mojahed, No. 250, 1985, Massoud Rajavi’s interview with Corriere della Sera Daily

3. Mojahed, No. 251, 1985, Massoud Rajavi’s interview with Deutschlandfunk

4. Mojahed, No. 237, the announcement of MKO office in Paris on the security system of the dwelling of Masoud Rajavi.

5. Majid Khoshdel website, interview with Bijan Niyabati, “The destiny of the forces of MKO in Iraq”.

6. Mojahed, winter, 1987.

April 25, 2009 0 comments
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Posts

  • The black box of the torture camps of the MEK

    December 24, 2025
  • Pregnancy was taboo in the MEK

    December 22, 2025
  • MEPs who lack awareness about the MEK’s nature

    December 20, 2025
  • Why did Massoud Rajavi enforce divorces in the MEK?

    December 15, 2025
  • Massoud Rajavi and widespread sexual abuse of female members

    December 10, 2025
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Youtube

© 2003 - 2025 NEJAT Society . All Rights Reserved. NejatNGO.org


Back To Top
Nejat Society
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Media
    • Cartoons
    • NewsPics
    • Photo Gallery
    • Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Nejat NewsLetter
    • Pars Brief
  • About Us
  • Contact us
  • Editions
    • عربي
    • فارسی
    • Shqip