Page 720 – Nejat Society

Camp Ashraf leaders prevent the entry of survey team

Baghdad – The Iraq’s national security advisor, on Friday, said that the leadership of camp Ashraf prevented the entry of survey team of the Ministry of Human Rights who were supposed to perform their duty to identify options for the inhabitants either to return to Iran, or to select a third country.

The national security advisor said in a statement [A copy of which received by Aswatal Iraq]:”The committee in charge of putting an end to Camp Ashraf case, held their regular meeting, chaired by the representative of the national security advisor, and in the presence of all members of the committee discussed topics on the agenda included the Ashraf camp case.”

The statement quoted the representative of the national security advisor, saying that “leadership of the camp is still authoritarian and confiscated the freedom of the residents of the camp , preventing the entry of the Ministry of Human Rights’ survey team into the camp, to identify options for the inhabitants, to choose between the return to Iran or the selection of a third country,”stressing that”the government would not backtrack on its decision to close the camp.”

The statement reads:”MKO leaders, under the same practices, continued to prevent making the necessary arrangements to facilitate the visit of families with their children who are inhabitants of Camp Ashraf. This is a clear violation of human rights, despite attempts by the Iraqi government to facilitate such visits in the framework of obligations in accordance and with respect to human rights and international conventions”.

The statement noted that”such acts are illegal and hinders the Iraqi government from providing Ashraf Refugee Camp inhabitants with humanitarian assistance and facilities and discourages the Iraqi government from humanitarian dealing with the camp . Such actions are a clear proof of the Camp Ashraf Leadership adherence to terrorism and hostilities against Iraq and its people.”

The statement called on international organizations”to condemn such actions which are a clear violation of human rights.”

The People’s Mojahedin Organization [MKO/PMOI/MEK] based in Camp Ashraf in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad with the support of Saddam Hussein.

After the U.S. invasion to Iraq in 2003, they were disarmed. The Organization has been under American protection in spite of being classified a terrorist organization.

After signing the security agreement between Iraq and the United States government, Iraqi government took the responsibility of the Ashraf refugee camp provided that the American forces to remain in the camp. ..

March 14, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

The intrusive tone of Rajavi’s message

In his message of 26 January 2009, Rajavi once more expressed his delight over the removal of MKO from the EU terrorist list. The message, aside from repeating the cliché discussions as before, is mostly founded on perversion, fabrication, threat, sedition, and denouncement aiming at achieving his totalitarian objectives. A brief look at the main points of this message may reveal more facts about the true nature of the cult of Mojahedin.

1. He is putting the blame of the decision made by Iraqi government and the expulsion of Mojahedin on Iranian government stating “the closure of Ashraf is demanded and dictated by the reactionary, clerical regime and thus illegally unfounded”.

This claim is in fact the most apparent form of MKO’s interference in the internal affairs of Iraq and its legal government and has certain consequences. Rajavi makes an attempt to instigate Iraqi people against their government by introducing it as an illegitimate and illegal organ. He does so to sidetrack his full cooperation with Saddam in oppressing Iraqi people and all his crimes and brutal acts as Saddam’s main supporter and ally. Also, he poses challenge to the independence and sovereignty of Iraq to intensify its internal tensions and sidetrack the attentions from the issue of the expulsion of Mojahedin.

2. Rajavi in his message declares that “I openly announce to be heared: Iranian people and resistance as well as Ashraf Mojaheds never surrender to the dictated will and policy of the religious fascism governing Iran”.

Making these statements in which he has replaced the term Iraqi government with Iranian government, he implies his decision on initiating war against the Iraqi government by gesture. In fact he has no scruples about making an all-out war against the Iraq since he has already made the ground for it by means of intensifying the internal tensions of Iraq as well as making the naively made claim of winning the support of 5.2 million Iraqi people. Undoubtedly, Mojahedin have their most hostile position toward Iraqi government and their present status in Iraq corresponds to that of 1980’s in Iran when they passed a so-called political phase and then entered the phase of armed struggle against Iranian government. All their false claims on taking a tolerant position toward Iranian government were futile. As the facts prove, as soon as Rajavi got the illusion of the possibility of his coming to power in Iran, he initiated an armed struggle the result of which was victimizing his followers in a way that now after three decades has reached a cul-de-sac. The hostile position taking of Mojahedin in a country where they are to receive political asylum well reveals Rajavi’s psychopathic ambitiousness and megalomania.

3. Rajavi quotes Mojgan Parsaee of the possibility of the occurrence of a cultic and human disaster, that is, a general “hunger strike to death”. In fact, it is a warning to Iraqi officials of an imminent war. He also refers to the decision of the EU and tries to use it as a proof on the legitimacy of MKO’s settlement in Iraq. Furthermore, he claims that the name of Mojahedin has never been in the terrorist list of the Security Council. It seems that he has forgotten the recent statement of the White House and Obama on endorsing the terrorist nature of Mojahedin. Now Rajavi has resorted to making a gap between FBI and the US state department as a new trick to pave the way for his misusing the EU decision making.

4. Rajavi in his message states “During invasion to Iraq in March and April 2003, I ordered Mojahedin and NLA warriors to tolerate and fire not against American forces despite their bombardments and firing. It has been approved and signed in a “ceasefire” contract between American forces and MKO/NLA in 15 April, 2003”.

This is the funniest part of Rajavi’s message. As used to, Rajavi petitions in a reverse form. Due to his extreme illusionist and egotistic personality, Rajavi denies his total compulsory surrender to the US forces in 2003 and considers it as a deliberate action. Whether his statement I ordered Mojahedin and NLA warriors to tolerate and fire not against American forces despite their bombardments and firing is the result of his illusion or is part of a new trick is ambiguous. However, it is evident that the claim of the Don Quixote of the third millennium is making the American forces burst into laughter more than anybody else. The only difference between Saddam and Rajavi in the course of coalition forces’ invasion to Iraq is that contrary to his ally, Rajavi and his wife had left Camp Ashraf a long time before. An act that surprised the residents of Camp Ashraf more than others when they found out that their she-guru, Maryam Azdanlu, has left Camp Ashraf for her luxurious residence in France. Rajavi’s pretending to have surrendered to disarmament willingly despite availing military and logistic superiority over coalition forces is mostly insulting for residents of Ashraf who felt the pain of failure and surrender by heart and soul and it comes only from an ill and psychopathic mind or a big charlatan.

5. Simple mindedness and naiveté of Rajavi is well-defined when he claims that Iran can no longer enforce Iraq to expel Mojahedin for their terrorist charges. It aims two objectives. First, leading to passivity and silence of Iraqi officials on the issue of MKO’s remaining in Iraq and second, in case if Iraqi officials insist on their legal decision, Rajavi may grab at international levers to provoke internal tensions of Iraq. However, the statements of Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, Iraqi national security advisor, made a few days after Rajavi’s message on the determination of Iraq to expel Mojahedin awaked Rajavi from his daydreamings. Not only he emphasized on the expulsion of Mojahedin but also asserted that Iraqi judiciary would prosecute 14 high rankings of MKO for their violations of human rights in Iraq. These statements were a telling retort to Rajavi who makes an attempt to stabilize the position of MKO in Iraq by means of fabrication, pressure, and propaganda blitz. Mowaffaq al-Rubaie stated openly that the vote of the EU has no effect on the decision making of Iraq. Also, he informed Mojahedin of Iraq’s conferring with some European countries on determining the destiny of Mojahedin and it proves further the naiveté of Rajavi since it is evident that the EU decision is never considered a must for Iraqi government. Consequently and despite all activities of Rajavi, the main issue of expelling Mojahedin from Iraq is still of effect and pursued legally.

6. Rajavi further maintains that from now on, commuting from and to Camp Ashraf is a legal right of Mojahedin and Iraqi government cannot prevent it. In fact he means that by doing so, the Iraqi government may avoid hatred and anger of Iraqi citizens. It is obvious that Rajavi is openly interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq and tries to escalate tensions. His words are in absolute contradiction with international conventions that puts the responsibility of providing security for political refugees on the country if it has ever granted asylum. Now, it is not clear what Mojahedin have to do with insurgent groups in Iraq and what are the objectives followed by them. However, it is clear that calling a number of these dissidents as Iraqi citizens, or whatever the Iraqi government is the only authorized source to call, aims at intensifying internal tension and disorder. The Iraqi government is well aware of the main objectives of Mojahedin and also its absolute right of controlling those entering and exiting Camp Ashraf.

In a nutshell, the efforts of Rajavi for misusing the war-torn and unstable conditions of Iraq for achieving his objective in keeping his ideological bastion, i.e. Camp Ashraf, are vain. He is well aware that the sole looser in this play is himself and a number of MKO members who are victims of ambitious and egocentric objectives of a cult leader.

(Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, cult leaders)

(Maryam Rajavi directly ordered the massacre of Kurdish people)

(A cult session in Ashraf Camp Iraq – under the protection of Saddam)

(Chemical attack on Halabche, Kurdistan, Iraq)

(British Lord!! Corbett promoting terrorism under the Logo of MKO for the past 25 years)

(In the streets of London with Lord Corbett!!)

(MKO members in European Countries 2003)

March 14, 2009 0 comments

European Union

European Justice

Now that you have decided that the Mojahedin-e Khalq”random mortar launchers”are not a terrorist group, please would the European Council put me and my family on their terrorism list so that the system will be completed.

Yours sincerely,

Abdul Nabi Beit Salem

Ahvaz, Iran

Edalat Association (families of victims of Mojahedin Khalq Terrorism), March 11 2009

March 12, 2009 0 comments

European Union

Europe vs. MKO

Europe vs. MKO: West controversial act in war on terror

Foreign Ministers of EU voted for the removal of MKO from terror list. An act that shows west’s contradictory behavior in its war on terror.

Protection of human rights is going to the opposite way in the West, although MKO is still designated as a terrorist organization by many countries.

EU couldn’t declare a group’s being or not being terrorist by itself, rather a just court should announce such a ruling and determine terrorist designation. In fact, terrorism is an international crime that according to international laws and an international fair court is the only competent tribune for terrorism designation.

It seems that EU didn’t obey Vienna Convention (which is binding for all individuals) and removed the group from terror list in a political act.

MKO has committed numerous crimes worldwide especially in Iran and Iraq and its terrorist designation is perfectly documented based in true facts.

Terrorism evidences in a legal view:

In various concepts of human science and specially politics the determination of a standard is neither possible nor acceptable. Therefore, lack of a standard for terrorism definition, makes it mixed with political or sometimes beneficial interests.

According to the International law commission the below-mentioned issues are considered as terrorist acts:

(i) Any act causing death or grievous bodily harm or loss of liberty to a Head of State, persons exercising the prerogatives of the Head of State, their hereditary or designated successors, the spouse of such persons, or persons charged with public functions or holding public positions when the act is directed against them in their public capacity (A large number of Iranian politic men were assassinated by MKO after the Islamic Revolution)

(ii) Acts calculated to destroy or damage public property or property devoted to a public purpose (So many governmental or non-governmental buildings, buses, cars have been bombed by MKO or damaged in MKO mortar attacks)

(iii) Any act likely to imperil human lives through the creation of a public danger, in particular the seizure of aircraft, the taking of hostages and any form of violence directed against persons who enjoy international protection or diplomatic immunity ( MKO’s violent acts include a large range of attacks, such as their simultaneous attacks to 13 Iranian Embassies all over the world in 1992)

(iv) The manufacture, obtaining, possession or supplying of arms, ammunition, explosives or harmful substances with a view to the commission of a terrorist act.( MKO has formally declared its armed struggle to overthrow the Islamic Republic)

A lot of international conventions, acts, treaties and agreements on the terrorism phenomenon, have been signed. There are numerous international bodies involving in fighting terrorism, having various plans to control such inhumane, immoral acts.

Indeed, the most important motive to cause terrorism is political but the efforts to control terrorism have just had legal aspects.

One can claim that the international laws in this case are only a cover for the political interests of the states to whether support or condemn a terrorist incident.

It should be noted that the war on terror is caught between various paradoxes which gives the superpowers and their agents an opportunity to abuse the current atmosphere.

Evaluation

The EU’s move is violation of the international laws and implies their political benefits.

The EU’s position regarding MKO’s case will bring about heavy damages. It might become a new approach to deal with other terrorist groups.

Values like human rights and freedom are nowadays a tool for implementing political pressure by those who claim to call for freedom.

However, the West does take no position against Israelis who massacre civilians in Gaza, the EU removes MKO from the black list. The file of various crimes committed by MKO against Iranians is achieved on the so-called human rights’ table of the West.

The dual standards of the West considering terrorism and human rights is viewed as funny by the international community.

War on Terror will never be successful unless the superpowers put away their ambitions or reckless political interests. Terrorist acts of evil MKO group might continue in the safe haven of the West.

Islam Abad-Ahmad Farahani – Translated by Nejat Society

March 11, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

Saints of MKO Leadership Council

Memoirs of Ms. Batoul Soltani – Part 9

Following the previous parts I’d like to start this part with a particular memory. I remember when Nasrin (Mahvash Sepehri, the third high-ranking leader after the Rajavis) said in a meeting of Leadership Council:”you should act in a way The Rajavis don’t want to expose the truth that one of the saints of their leadership Council has escaped from the cult. that when your Minor goes to bed, he or she should be like a dead body who has been beheaded. I mean that one should be so exhausted that one could not think of anything at all.” The working schedule of the members should be so tight that when they go to bed, they are like dead bodies; otherwise they might think of their spouse, their children or their families in their free time. And if they think of such things, they will criticize the organization and start complaining and finally join the other dissidents. Every Superior had to check her Minors’ schedules everyday to remove every free hour. Sleeping time must be at least. They say that: "the members should never sleep enough” because if they do so, the next night they will have enough energy to think before falling asleep. Thinking alone is dangerous for the organization.

You cannot imagine the dimensions of the organizational control inside MKO. There is another issue called “physical working time for the members”. It means that beside those hours you are working on a computer, you should also have some physical working time. Your job shouldn’t be sitting and working on a computer only. The job shouldn’t be absolutely mental. You should at least have two hours of physical working time a day. For example if your job is working on a computer, they will assign you an intensive working time in the kitchen too.

To extend their organizational control, they have inspired the members that the Leadership Council is very sacred. It is so saintly that no one can doubt its foundation or criticize it. Anything ordered by the Council must be obeyed. There are also some other elements called as Pins (cult jargon) including high-ranking members like Rahman (Abbas Davari) or Javad Baraiee or Reza Moradi.

They were the officials of men’s section. Everyone has to obey them. They were the equivalent of the Leadership Council.

Today I believe that this is the reason why MKO does not take any position against me despite the fact that I have had many interviews and done a lot of activities for Sahar Family Foundation. It’s so simple for the MKO to make some false documents accusing me for any crime but they do not do anything against me. Why? Because they don’t want to expose the truth that one of the saints of their leadership Council has escaped from the cult. Therefore they never take a position against me. If they say anything against me in their website, the twenty to twenty-five members of the Leadership Council who run the sites will realize the fact and that’s what the organization doesn’t want.

I’d like to discuss an issue: cutting off with the normal world and the art of remaining revolutionary. This is a principal very similar to that of other cults around the world. The primary principal of such an art (the art of remaining revolutionary) is to leave the family. It means that you should take distance from your family and friends. Particularly after the Ideological revolution you should pass a phase called ideological divorce, whether you are married or single or if you have any children you should pass over them emotionally and abandon them and then enter the organization. After you entered the organization you couldn’t even have a pocket radio because it links you to the outside world. You cannot use any mass media except that of MKO. They never let the news of the other Media broadcast in the hall. Sometime they even record, edit and censure the news and then show them, just to claim that they broadcast the news of CNN or Al Jazeera. They are very careful about the relationships between the members and the people of the outside society such as the Iraqis who come to the camp. They care about the relations because they don’t want to risk the art of remaining Revolutionary. They say:” becoming Revolutionary is not an art but remaining Revolutionary is an art.” They say that they help to remain Revolutionary. How do they help? They send your children far away to make you free and consequently they solve your contradiction. Here, you see the highest deception. However this is how the organization acts for its own survival, but they make you think that you owe them because they help you!

Another example is that you should submit all your photos or souvenirs to MKO. Love and friendship is forbidden. They have created a world of violence without any emotions.

They also confiscate the members’ ID cards and passports to cut them off their identities. They have a theory called: " in contradiction with the society”. When one enters MKO where one is always criticized, one finds the life so hard. They say that the art of remaining Revolutionary means that you must solve the contradiction with the group. They make you consider the life in the group as a value. Thus, the member is gradually departed from his or her world and becomes a puppet that acts in the same way the organization wants.

Translated by Nejat Society

March 10, 2009 0 comments

Former members of the MEK

A meeting of Ancient Iran, Glorious Future

A meeting of Ancient Iran, Glorious Future (AIGF) in Paris

deliberation on the current conditions of Mojahedin after the removal of the EU terrorist entities’ list, current developments of the Ashraf Garrison and reflection of the imminent outcomes of Masood Rajavi’s recent message.

Dated February 21 of 2009, a 6-hour gathering held with the presence of separated ex-members of the People Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) in Paris. Most of these former members have already been emancipated from the cage of Ashraf Garrison and reached the European states. In this get-together, the latest developments of the Ashraf Garrison and critical conditions of the incarcerated victims were discussed and the participants implored the Iraqi govt. to spread out its human efforts with the aiming of creature of the free space for victims’ families visit away from Mojahedin officials’ interventions and intrusions. The précis of the partakers’ views is as underneath.

deliberation on the current conditions of Mojahedin after the removal of the EU terrorist

In the opening, Mr. Karim Haghi, one of the Mojahedin former top officials put forward some questions pertaining to the past and existing developments of the Mojahedin. Subsequently, the Mojahedin victims replied the proposed questions in conformity with their visual observations as outlined beneath:

Mr. Engineer Hassan piransar: the Mojahedin cult leadership, Masood Rajavi, and Maryam Rajavi left their victims by themselves and fled at any historic juncture and dilemma to save their own lives. Masood Rajavi and Maryam Rajavi were the first who escaped the scene of war. In the military rules, the commander is the last one who leaves the war field. This reality shows that this leadership does not pay the cost of his action from his own pocket…. One of the ways to put pressure on the Iraqi govt. is to resort hunger strike versus the Ashraf garrison victims’ willing. The Mojahedin in charges compel the victims to go on hunger strike by means of threat…. afterward apprehend of Maryam Rajavi, the top officials of the cult asked the whole subordinates to commit self-burning suicide in the Ashraf garrison and the around of this base. Nevertheless, no one accepted the top officials’ demands. From then on, the question arose among the subordinates that, if the self-burning suicide is a correct and revolutionary action, why the cult top officials do not commit so…

Mr. Nader Naderi, an ex-member of the Mojahedin cult who has taken part in the Mojahedin military hostilities against Kurdish not guilty people, confessed the terrible scenes of the Kurds genocide and carnage. Such as a woman commander called Maboobeh ordered her subordinates to open a fire on a residential place occupied by many people on the contrary to her subordinates’ objections…

Mr. Hamid Siah Mansouri: Masood Rajavi’s latest message is an evident symptom of the violation of international laws owing to ignoring the right of national sovereignty of Iraq through frequent threats. He aroused the Ashraf victims for hunger strike followed by commit suicide and self-burning. According to the principles of the UN charter, Iraq govt. can work out the pre-emptive actions to defend its territory that facing jeopardy and insecurity.

Mr. Mansoor Nazari: now, Masood and Maryam Rajavi claim that the extradition to Iran is a “crime against humanity” but they themselves have already exercised these action frequent years and sent the dissidents of Mojahedin cult to Iran to pretext that there was no dissident surrounded by the cult. This cult killed the ones who had decided to abandon the cult as Saied Noroozi and Saied Kiani and the rest.

Mr. Mohammad Razaghi, a former member of Mojahedin cult: according to Rajavi’s rule, nobody was allowed to meet his or her family within the cultic relations. What happen? In addition, what has been changed? Nowadays, Rajavi has become an advocate of the family relations and feelings. Following the put an end to Saddam Hussein dictatorship, the Mojahedin cult top officials were unexpectedly surprised because, they bumped into a new phenomenon called ‘family’. So that they didn’t want the victims’ families to enter the Ashraf garrison. Therefore, they claimed that these families are the mercenaries of the Iranian Secret Service and asked Americans to detain them then American military forces took in for questioning these families ensuing Americans found out that they were victims’ families after a few hours.

Other victims at this gathering confirmed the above-mentioned bitter realties and expressed their terrible conditions under the control of Mujahidin

March 9, 2009 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

MKO imminent expulsion from Iraq

Iran has been the first and main supporter of the Iraqi government after the downfall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Labid Abawi said on Saturday.

"We have excellent relations with Iran and Iran has always supported us ever since the downfall of Saddam and the two sides have signed dozens of Memoranda of Understanding," Abawi told FNA.

He further noted the increase in the visits to Iran by Iraqi officials, and reiterated, "Our trip with Mr. Jalal Talabani to Tehran was aimed at deepening of relations with our neighbor Iran and took place at the invitation of Iranian President Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad."

On the issue of the security pact between Iraq and the US and the US president’s statements on the withdrawal of the countries’ troops from Iraq, Abawi said, "We are in full harmony with Iran and our position is completely transparent (on this issue). During this trip, we didn’t speak about the (Iraq-US) agreement."

Asked about the Iranian diplomats who have been arrested by the US forces in Iraq, he said Iraq has pressured Americans to release the Iranian diplomats as soon as possible, adding that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has informed Iraqi officials that two of the Iranian inmates will be freed in the near future.

Elsewhere, he pointed out that the anti-Iran terrorist group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), will be expelled from Iraq and that his country is searching for a third country to host the group members.

Labawi expressed pleasure in his visit to Iran, and described his meetings with Iranian officials as fruitful, stressing that Iraq wants to further strengthen ties with Iran.

March 9, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Required recruiting tool

Love Bombing & Relationship Control; required recruiting tool

“They flatter you in a way that you don’t even realize they are doing so” says Ann Singleton who has once been an MKO member. She explains the ways the Organization treated her when it needed to recruit her;” they really put BEWARE OF “INSTANT FRIENDS”, REMEMBER TRUE FRIENDS DEVELOP OVER TIME themselves on a pedestal so that when you want to join them you feel special.”

Cults know that if they can control your relationships then they can control you. Whether we like it or not we are all profoundly affected by those around us. When you first go to a cult they will practice "love bombing", where they arrange instant friends for you. It will seem wonderful, how could such a loving group be wrong! But you soon learn that if you ever disagree with them, or ever leave the cult then you will lose all your new "friends". This unspoken threat influences your actions in the cult. Things that normally would have made you complain will pass by silently because you don’t want to be ostracized. Like in an unhealthy relationship love is turned on and off to control.

The same as all cults, MKO bombards the individuals with love and emotion while recruiting them. Mrs. Singleton was so bombed by MKO’s love that she believes :

“They replaced my family, relationship and I rejected all my old values.”

Cults also try to cut you off from your friends and family because they hate others being able to influence you. A mind control cult will seek to maneuver your life so as to maximize your contact with cult members and minimize your contact with people outside the group, especially those who oppose your involvement.

BEWARE OF “INSTANT FRIENDS”, REMEMBER TRUE FRIENDS DEVELOP OVER TIME.

BEWARE OF A GROUP THAT TELLS YOU WHO YOU CAN AND CAN NOT SEE.

Now that the members are cut off from their whole relationships and individuality, the cult of Rajavi practices mind control techniques on them. Ann Singleton says:” I loved the camp and it felt liberating to obey the orders, because you lose all your responsibility over yourself … If the leader has said kill yourself, I would have killed myself.”

Mazda Parsi

Reference: HowCultsWork

Deluded Masud Rajavi demands Iraq obey European law

The first sentence of Masoud Rajavi’s message in December, 27th on MKO’s removal from the EU terrorist list referred to his ecstasy of delight for excluding the possibility of Mojahedin’s expulsion from Iraq. He resorted to the point that since the EU has removed MKO from its terrorist list, terrorist accusations of MKO are no longer of any effect and Iraqi government cannot prevent their presence in Iraq due to their terrorist charges. Surprisingly enough, from among all possible positive consequences of the decision made by the EU, this aspect is a priority and of utmost significance for Rajavi. Making a comparison between Rajavi’s new position taking and previous claims on considering MKO’s inclusion in terrorist list as their main barrier to overthrow the Iranian government and also their democratic claims and rejecting the policy of armed struggle reveals an apparent paradox.

Now, the newly made messages of Rajavi suffice to prove their false claims of stopping armed struggle since it is ambiguous that after their removal from terrorist list and their opportunity to pursue their political activities in the west, as repeatedly petitioned by Rajavi when MKO was blacklisted, why Mojahedin insist on staying in Iraq? Is the answer anything other than the fact that Rajavi seeks to misuse the tensions inside Iraq to follow his past strategy of armed struggle to fulfill his never achieved promise of overthrowing the Iranian government? This is a question to be answered by MKO’s western advocators who dared to remove the name of a notorious terrorist group from the EU blacklist.

Rajavi further expounds on his other demands like making all traffics to and from Camp Ashraf smooth and limitless. He has also warned Iraqi government of the point that any measure taken by Iraqi officials in putting bans and limits on MKO as well as their expulsion or relocation may trigger Mojahedin’s severe reaction even up to their sacrifice. His message implies that removing MKO from the EU terrorist list has solved their problems in Iraq as well as the west. However, the fact is that it has nothing to do with the decision made by Iraqi government on their expulsion since part of the blame placed on Mojahedin on the part of Iraqi government is its terrorist nature and activities during the reign of Saddam in Iraq. Evidently, the stance of the EU toward MKO in itself suffices not to recognize the legitimacy of MKO’s remaining in Iraq acquitting them of all terrorist charges.

Furthermore, it has to be noted that despite the EU’s removing MKO from its terrorist list, the US state department issued a statement in an immediate reaction on the terrorist nature of Mojahedin and asserted that there are no evidence or sign of a shift in the policy and position taking of Mojahedin. Obviously, the viewpoint and decision of the US that is present in Iraq and is considered one of the parties involved in the settlement of tensions therein is more authentic than that of the EU. Also many European countries like France, England, Italy, Czech… acknowledge the terrorist nature of MKO despite the decision of the EU and some regard it a hasty decision to be reconsidered. Therefore, the illusion of Rajavi on a shift in the policy taken by Iraq toward MKO has no rationale and is more like a kind of psychological and propaganda war initiated by him and now followed strongly in Mojahedin media.

As it was mentioned, the rationale behind the Iraqi government’s decision on expelling Mojahedin from Iraq is not limited to the terrorist accusations of MKO rather according to Iraqi officials there are many evidences on crimes and cooperative activities of MKO with Saddam against Iraqi people and also their present efforts to misuse the unstable conditions of Iraq to intensify sectarian conflicts and make contacts to Iraqi problematic groups to commit terrorist activities against Iraqi people and neighboring countries. Therefore, Rajavi’s resorting to the vote of the EU is unlikely to solve his problems and Iraqi government recognizes the obligatory settlement of Mojahedin in Iraqi soil contrary to asylum rights and conventions. In addition, whenever a country consent to offer asylum to Mojahedin, their insistence on remaining in Iraq would be of no effect.

Before, it seemed that removing MKO from blacklist would makes the ground for their transferring to a western country to pursue their political activities in security therein yet as it is evident, Rajavi prefers an unquiet and war-torn country to European countries for MKO’s settlement. In addition, according to common sense, if Mojahedin are to force a country to provide them with asylum it should be one of the members of the EU that dared to remove MKO’s terrorist label whereas Rajavi refrains to express the least inclination to do so and ever-increasingly insists on keeping Mojahedin in Iraq. The reason is clear. Rajavi has two major factors in Iraq without which the survival of MKO is unlikely. First, Camp Ashraf as the ideological container of Mojahedin and second, the Iraqi soil as a strategic lever in the hands of Rajavi to follow his struggle of armed struggle against Iran therein. The main challenge posed on Iraqi government as a result of the settlement of Mojahedin in Camp Ashraf is security considerations and the danger posed by Mojahedin for national interests and stabilization of peace and security in Iraq. Mojahedin have also warned Iraqi government that they would resort to group self-immolations in case if Iraqi government consents not to satisfy their demands. In fact, they are threatening Iraqi officials to enforce them to let Mojahedin reside in Camp Ashraf.

The Iraqi government is to be aware that even its least tolerance toward Mojahedin in the present conditions may result in the stabilization of MKO status in its soil and freedom of action therein. Iraq should engage those countries removing MKO from the EU terrorist list in this challenge and ask them to provide asylum for MKO if they have been convinced of the termination of terrorist activities of MKO rather than advocating their residence in a place too far from their soil and people where Mojahedin can pose no danger for their national interests and security considerations.

March 7, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Is Iran’s MEK a Threat to the Islamist Regime?

The People’s Mujahideen of Iran (PMOI), more commonly known as the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (“people’s mujahideen”; MEK), is one of the most organized and controversial Iranian opposition groups. Although it maintains an armed wing—known as the National Liberation Army (NLA)—and numerous front organizations, it derives its greatest strength from the slick lobbying and propaganda machine it operates in the United States and Europe. The MEK also boasts extensive support within U.S. government and policy circles, including many of the most vocal advocates of a U.S. invasion of Iran [1].

The MEK remains on the list of banned terrorist organizations in the United States and European Union (EU). Both parties have indicated no intention of reconsidering their positions. The May 7 decision by the United Kingdom’s Court of Appeal to overrule the British government’s inclusion of the MEK on its list of banned terrorist organizations, however, may pave the way for both the United States and EU to reassess their positions regarding the MEK down the line. Given the MEK’s history of violence and its willingness to act as a proxy force against Iran, such a move would represent a major escalation in hostilities between the United States and Iran, with consequences in Iraq and beyond.

Ideology

The MEK is an obscure organization with a long history of violence and opposition activities. It emerged in the 1960s, composed of college students and leftist intellectuals loyal to Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq; the popular leftist nationalist prime minister was deposed by a U.S.- and U.K.-backed coup in 1953 that restored Mohammad Reza Shah to power. Its revolutionary zeal combined aspects of Marxist and Islamist ideologies in pursuit of its goal to overthrow the U.S.-backed shah through armed resistance and terrorism. Its primary targets in the 1970s included ranking officials and symbols of the shah’s regime, both within and outside of Iran. The regime responded in kind with brutal repression through SAVAK, the shah’s notorious domestic intelligence apparatus. Thousands of members and associates of MEK were killed, tortured and jailed during this period. Consequently, like many Iranians at the time, the MEK viewed the Islamist opposition as a positive force for change. The MEK supported the revolutionary forces and the 1979 seizure of the U.S. Embassy and subsequent hostage crisis led by student activists in Tehran. The group’s unique brand of Marxism and Islamism, however, would bring it into conflict with the rigid Shiite Islamism espoused by the post-revolutionary government. The failure of a June 1981 coup attempt intended to oust Ayatollah Khomeini elicited a massive crackdown by the regime against the MEK, forcing the group’s leaders and thousands of members into exile in Europe. When France ousted operational elements of the group in 1986, many made their way to Iraq, where they joined Saddam Hussein’s war effort against Iran and enjoyed a safe haven [2].

Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, a charismatic husband and wife team that fled into exile in Europe, lead the MEK. From her base in France, Maryam Rajavi currently holds the position of “President-Elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)” after her husband’s disappearance sometime in 2003. He is presumed to be in hiding [3]. The Rajavis enjoy a fanatical cult-like following among MEK members and supporters [4]. The group’s cult-like character was displayed when 16 followers of the Rajavis staged dramatic public acts of self-immolation over a period of three days in June 2003 across major European and Canadian cities. The protests followed the arrest of Maryam Rajavi and 160 of her followers after a French court ruled that the MEK and its numerous front groups constituted a terrorist organization. According to former members of the group, the MEK’s “human torches” are a testament to the stranglehold the Rajavis have over their followers and the extent to which members are brainwashed and manipulated psychologically into blindly following them. The MEK is reported to maintain a list of volunteers ready and willing to perform acts of self-immolation on the orders of the leadership [5]. Like other cults, MEK members are often separated from their children and families and discouraged from maintaining contact with individuals outside of the group. Former members who defected from the MEK describe the Rajavis as autocrats who demand unquestioned loyalty from their followers (pars-iran.com, January 30, 2006).

Women make up a significant contingent of the MEK’s ranks, especially in its armed wing. In addition to its Marxist and Islamist pedigrees, the rise of the Rajavis to the group’s leadership led to the introduction of feminist ideologies into the group’s discourse. This aspect of the MEK’s ideology indicates their attempt to tap into local grievances and international sympathy regarding the position of women in the Islamic Republic [6]. In this regard, the MEK presents itself as a liberal and democratic alternative to the rigid brand of Islamism espoused by the ruling clerics, an image it has cultivated in U.S. and Western policy circles to great effect [7]. The U.K. court based its ruling on the premise that the MEK has renounced violence and terrorism, and that it currently maintains no operational capability to execute future acts of violence.

Violence and Terrorism

The MEK’s long history of violence and terrorism includes the abduction and assassination of ranking Iranian political and military officials under the shah in the 1970s, as well as attacks against the clerical establishment throughout the 1980s. Foreign-based MEK operatives also targeted Iranian embassies abroad in a series of attacks. MEK militants struck diplomatic officials and foreign business interests in Iran under both the shah and the Islamists in an effort to undermine investor confidence and regime stability. Furthermore, the MEK targeted and killed Americans living and working in Iran in the 1970s, namely U.S. military and civilian contractors working on defense-related projects in Tehran (mkowatch.com). The group has never been known to target civilians directly, though its use of tactics such as mortar barrages and ambushes in busy areas have often resulted in civilian casualties.

In addition, the MEK’s repertoire of operations includes suicide bombings, airline hijackings, ambushes, cross-border raids, RPG attacks, and artillery and tank barrages. Saddam Hussein exploited the MEK’s fervor during the Iran-Iraq war. In addition to providing the group with a sanctuary on Iraqi soil, Saddam supplied the MEK with weapons, tanks and armored vehicles, logistical support, and training at the group’s Camp Ashraf in Diyala Province near the Iranian border and other camps across Iraqi territory. In a sign of the group’s appreciation for Saddam’s generous hospitality and largesse, the MEK cooperated with Iraqi security forces in the brutal repression of uprisings led by Shiite Arabs, Kurds and Turkmens in 1991 [8]. MEK members also served alongside Iraq’s internal security forces and assisted in rooting out domestic opponents of the regime and other threats to Baathist rule.

Despite its history of high-profile attacks, the MEK never posed a serious threat to the Iranian regime. The group never enjoyed popular domestic support, despite its claims to the contrary. Many Iranians actively oppose the clerical regime and sympathize with segments of the opposition. At the same time, most Iranians also regard the MEK as traitorous for joining the Iraqi war effort against Iran and resent its use of violence and terrorism against Iranians at home and abroad (mkowatch.com).

Approximately 3,500 members of the MEK remain in Camp Ashraf. Following an agreement with U.S.-led Coalition forces, MEK units allowed Coalition forces to disarm the group. Decommissioned MEK units are currently under surveillance in Camp Ashraf. Their future status, however, remains a point of controversy. Despite their demobilization, Iran believes that the United States is holding on to the group as leverage in any future confrontation with the Islamic Republic (see Terrorism Monitor, February 9, 2006).

Political Activism

Although it has been disarmed, the MEK retains the capacity to remobilize, especially if it gains a state sponsor. Nevertheless, it is the MEK’s lobbying and propaganda machine in the United States and Europe that enables it to remain a relevant force in Middle East politics and a key factor in U.S.-Iranian tensions. The MEK’s political activism falls under the auspices of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)—an MEK political front organization that also serves as an umbrella movement representing various Iranian dissident groups. These efforts persist despite the fact that U.S. authorities ordered NCRI offices in Washington to shut down in 2003 (New York Observer, June 5, 2007).

From Iran’s perspective, the U.S. position on MEK is both ambiguous and at times hypocritical. On the one hand, the MEK remains on the U.S. State Department’s list of banned terrorist organizations, yet the group remains on Iraqi soil, albeit disarmed and under surveillance by Coalition forces. The MEK has cultivated a loyal following among an outspoken network of U.S. politicians, former and active government officials, members of the defense establishment, journalists and academics advocating violent regime change in Tehran. The MEK is even credited in some of these circles for disclosing aspects of the Iranian nuclear program [9]. At the same time, it is accused of fabricating intelligence information to boost its profile in the United States (Asia Times, March 4). With their call for regime change in Iran and pleas for international support, media-savvy MEK representatives based in the United States appear regularly on the cable news show circuit and other forums in Washington, DC in a campaign reminiscent of the one led by Ahmed Chalabi and the network of Iraqi exiles who mustered American support for the Iraq war [10]. The MEK has also gained legitimacy as a liberal and democratic force for positive change in Iran, despite evidence to the contrary.

Conclusion

The MEK will continue to capitalize on the ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran by enlisting the support of elements in Washington seeking a bargaining chip against Tehran. It is important, however, to see this bizarre organization for what it is; that is, to see through the façade of liberalism, democracy and human rights that it purports to represent through its propaganda. The well-documented experiences of scores of former MEK members are reason enough to consider this group and any of its claims with a healthy dose of skepticism.

Notes

1. See “U.S. Policy Options for Iran,” prepared by the Iran Policy Committee (IPC), February 10, 2005 at www.nci.org/05nci/02/IranPolicyCommittee.pdf.

2. For a historical narrative of the MEK’s formative years, see Ervand Abrahamian, The Iranian Mojahidin, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992). For an insider’s perspective on the history of the MEK from a former member, see the website of Massoud Khodabandeh at www.khodabandeh.org/.

3. See “Cult of the Chameleon,” an al-Jazeera documentary on the MEK (broadcast October 17, 2007) at www.iran-interlink.org/?mod=view&id=3384. For an insider’s perspective on the cult-like character of the MEK, see the website of the Dissociated Members of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran at pars-iran.com.

4. For an overview of the events of 2003, including graphic photographs of the acts of self-immolation, see “MKO Human Torches” at www.mojahedin.ws/art_pdfs/MKO-HUMAN-TORCHES.pdf.

5. For an overview of the MEK’s position on women, see Shahin Torabi, “Women in the Cult of Mojahdin,” March 5, 2003 at mojahedin.ws/article/show_en.php?id=653 and Sattar Orangi, “The Strives [sic] for the Freedom of Women,” March 13, 2008 at mojahedin.ws/news/text_news_en.php?id=1601.

6. A. Afshar, “The Positive Force of Terrorism,” October 10, 2006 at mojahedin.ws/news/text_news_en.php?id=842.

7. See “MKO and Massacre of Kurd and Turkmen Iraqis,” April 19, 2006 at pars-iran.com/en/?mod=view&id=664.

By: Chris Zambelis

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=4950

March 7, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts