Iran Diplomacy

Former Saudi Chief Spy Infuriates Iranians by Attending Terrorist Group Rally

Turki Faisal has raised the anger of Iranian officials by attending Mojahedin-e Khalgh’s annual congress in Paris.

When it comes to politics, there are only a handful of things that bring Iranians together in unison. Of these enviable handful, opposition to Mojahedin-e Khalgh, MEK/MKO, stands on top of the list. It beats contenders for its ability to unite not only Iranians inside the country and those loyal to the Islamic Republic, but also the majority of the establishment’s critics and opposition groups outside the country.

The Mojahedin-e Khalgh Organization, aka MEK/MKO, described by Bobby Ghosh as "1 part opposition, 3 parts terror group, 6 parts cult", earned the grudge of Iranians early in the 1980s after it resorted to armed opposition and wave of blind terror that targeted not only officials of the nascent Islamic Republic, but also civilians. Yet, it was the organization’s decision to side with Iraqi tyrant Saddam Hussein during his eight year war against Iran that served as the last straw and turned MEK into a national target of hatred.

On July 9, the group held its annual gathering in Paris with its typical pomp and circumstances and hired supporters gathering to voice their support for Maryam Rajavi, head of MEK and self-proclaimed president of Iran. Were it not for some unexpected guests, Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs would perform the ritual summoning of the French ambassador to Tehran after the event and let the story to rest. However, former chief of Saudi intelligence service Turki al Faisal was invited to the event, uttering provocative remarks against the Islamic Republic and wishing for its overthrow. This was apparently more than Tehran could tolerate.

Reactions to Turki Faisal’s speech in MEK’s Paris gathering were predictably fierce. In his Instagram account, Mohsen Rezaei, former Revolutionary Guards’ commander, threatened that if Iran became angry, it would "leave no trace of the House of Saud on earth", a strong reaction even in his own scale. Rezaei accused Riyadh of holding secret meetings with Iranian Kurdish separatist groups in Erbil, capital of Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq, after which terror attacks were carried out, apparently against Iranian targets, in Iraqi Kurdistan. "Saudi Arabia’s official en the MEK shows that all terrorist attacks carried out in the recent years by this group enjoyed Saudi support."

Tabnak, affiliated with Mohsen Rezaei, followed the same line. "[Faisal’s] official, open support for the MEK, removed all doubts about Saudi Arabia’s support for criminal acts of this terrorist group" the website said. "This becomes important knowing that many of these acts of terror were carried out during the time Faisal held an official position in the highest level of the Saudi establishment" it added. Tabnak also stated that from now on, Saudi Arabia will be viewed as responsible for any action carried out against Iran by the MEK, and Iran reserves the right to show appropriate response.

The hardliner Mashregh News pointed to the unprecedented coverage of the MEK gathering by Saudi-sponsored media, including al Arabiya, al Hadath, and Sky News Arabia. Mashregh News called Riyadh support for MEK, "an out-of-date group", a sign of Saudi Arabia’s "absolute failure in its anti-Iran policies".

"Saudi Arabia has extensive relations with the MEK" said Hossein Amir-Abdollahian in an interview with Al Alam, the international state-run Arabic channel of Iran. Amir-Abdollahian, who recently left his position as Deputy Foreign Minister for Arab and African Affairs, added that remarks by Turki Faisal prove that sponsoring terrorism has been always on Riyadh’s agenda. "Riyadh’s strategic mistake of wielding terrorism in [order to influence] regional developments, will bring irreparable damage to Riyadh and all of us" in the Middle East the Iranian diplomat added.

Another diplomat, Alireza Miryousefi, head of the Iranian foreign ministry’s Middle East research center was less soft-spoken, calling Turki Faisal’s attendance at the MEK annual gathering a sign of Riyadh’s "desperation" and the consequent "stupidity". Miryousefi claimed that de-listing the MEK as a terror threat in 2012 by the US was thanks to "Saudi petrodollars". He also attributed Riyadh’s recent move to its struggle with domestic and regional challenges, and its need to project those challenges to the region. "In its instrumental use of terrorists, Riyadh is playing with fire" Miryousefi warned.

July 18, 2016 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MKO: Obama’s anti-Iran card in elections

"The US administration uses the MKO to create security challenges and problems in Iran, and this trend has continued since many years ago," says Dr. Foad Izadi, Professor at the University of Tehran and US affairs expert.

Iranian Diplomacy: The US has announced that it will take in a number of MKO members. What has this country’s position been toward this terrorist group from the inception of the group until today?

Foad Izadi: What we had seen was that the MKO had been in alliance with Saddam’s regime, and were financed by the regime in Iraq, and a base had even been created for them. Keeping this in mind, the US should have confronted them and, given that the MKO had also committed many crimes inside Iraq as well, put them to trial.

The MKO’s terrorist history inside and outside of Iran makes it totally clear that, according to the opinion of Americans and based on the US State Department’s terrorism list, it is definitely a terrorist group.

What happened after the invasion of Iraq was that unexpectedly the US not only did not confront the MKO, but it continued to financially support them just as Saddam had done, and thus smoothed the way for their terrorist acts.

Before the Iraq war, the Americans claimed that weapons of mass destruction could be found in Iraq and that this country supported terrorism. At that time, a reporter for NBC News asked Dick Cheney, George W. Bush’s Vice President, what terrorist groups Iraq supported. Cheney was reluctant to answer this question, but after the journalist insisted, which was in itself rather interesting, he finally said that the MKO was a terrorist group that Saddam supported. But after the invasion of Iraq, Dick Cheney was himself a sponsor of the MKO.

Therefore, the US government’s relations with the MKO continued and even during the period in which they were considered a terrorist group by the US, they had an office in Washington. They held conferences in Washington and many non-US citizens came to the US to attend these conferences, something that the US was completely aware of and supported because they issued visas for them. In reality, a terrorist group was easily able to get visas from the US and its members were able to enter the country. They also held meetings in Congress, and the MKO even held a ceremony for the Iranian New Year in the Capitol.

The issue of financial and arms support for the MKO did not stop with Iraq. As the American media reported, the US government trained members of the MKO in Nevada for anti-Iranian spying activities in the nuclear domain and in issues regarding the assassination of nuclear scientists, bugging and listening systems, and other ways to damage Iran. They used members of the MKO for spying and terrorist activities due to the fact that they spoke the Persian language and that they would not be recognized on the streets of Tehran because of their appearance.

This terrorist group is completely coordinated with a government that is the biggest supporter of terrorism. The recent news that the US will accept a number of MKO members is nothing new, because these individuals have been living in the US for many years now and have been active there, and this is a sign of the US’ double standard. Because, if the US claims that it combats terrorism, why does it support these people? This American policy confirms the US as a supporter of terrorism. In fact, from the US perspective, there are two types of terrorists; good terrorists who work in line with the interests of the US and its allies, and bad terrorists who work against US policies.

ID: Has the election atmosphere in the US influenced the decision to accept MKO members in the country?

FI: There is a presidential election this year and a competitive atmosphere between the Republicans and the Democrats inside the US, for both of which the issue of Iran is very important. The Obama administration intends to pursue more anti-Iran policies than its rivals. Usually, in election years, the two American parties compete with each other in support of the Zionists and Iran’s opponents. It should be said that, in the end, the issue of Iran is not the only issue of the election season, but an issue which has always been on the mind of politicians.

ID: Have relations between Iran and Iraq and Iran’s influence in this country been the cause for this US decision?

FI: If it was not for Iran’s influence in Iraq, the MKO would still have remained in this country. With all the US pressure on Iraq, they would not have been transferred. But, Iran’s influence in Iraq led to the upcoming deportation of the MKO from that country. Of course, crimes committed by this group might have helped in this cause, but it seems that this was not the only reason behind their deportation, for if this was the case, they should have left Iraq much earlier. Good relations between Iran and Iraq are the reason for this act. It should be noted that they have not completely left Camp Ashraf, and as long as American forces are present in Iraq, they will not permit all members of the MKO to be deported.

ID: Will accepting the MKO members create security problems for Iran?

FI: The US administration uses the MKO to create security challenges and problems in Iran, and this trend has continued since many years ago. It does not make any difference whether more numbers of MKO members are admitted to the US or not, for they have always enjoyed the support of the Americans. US support for the MKO has never weakened during previous years.

May 14, 2012 0 comment

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Americans Want to Keep the Mojahedin Khalq in Iraq

Interview with Hassan Danaeifar, Iran’s ambassador to Iraq, on the saga of Mojahedin-e Khalgh terrorist group

IRD: After months of tussles, the process of expelling from Iraq the Islamic Republic’s main militant opposition, the People’s Mujahedeen Organization (MEK/MKO), has reached an operative level. According to recent news, four hundred members of the Marxist cult have been moved to Camp Liberty, there awaiting their destiny after negotiations between representatives of the UN High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR) and the government of Iraq. Despite the Iraqi government’s insistence on expelling the MEK, several domestic and foreign pressure groups are impeding the procedure, against both Baghdad’s and Tehran’s will: Washington in particular wants to keep the MEK in Iraq as a pressure tool against Iran, while European countries are unwilling to host the group. In the meantime, rumors from inside the group’s main base, Camp Ashraf in the Diyala Province of Iraq, persist that the MEK leaders are still resisting expulsion. Iranian Diplomacy has interviewed Hassan Danaeifar, Tehran’s ambassador to Baghdad, on the process of MEK’s expulsion and the Iraqi government’s decision:

IRD: How could the transferring of MEK members from Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty bring a turnabout to this lengthy story; considering that Camp Liberty is still a part of Iraqi soil?

HD: Based on the agreement between the Iraqi government and UNHCR, a temporary residence had to be designated for the group, where its members could directly interview with UN representatives from the High Commissioner on Refugees, to see if they demand a return to Iran, a move to Europe, or have other decisions in mind. There was no such opportunity in Camp Ashraf; the MEK operatives prevented any interviews.

IRD: The MEK is still resisting efforts to leave Iraq. Could their resistance change the decision of the Iraqi government?

HD: What the government of Iraq is seeking is sovereignty over its entire territory. Camp Ashraf is an impediment against their goal. Plus, the Iraqi government acknowledges the MEK as a terrorist group and insists on their leaving of Iraq. There is no evidence proving that the group has legally entered Iraq upon the admission of the Iraqi government, even at the time of Saddam. They have no documents showing that they have sought asylum, and their stay in Iraq is illegal.

IRD: An Iraqi MP had recently claimed that the government is not that determined to expel the MEK. Do you concur with his remarks?

HD: Well I think you should ask him. But there are different voices inside the Iraqi parliament. We also see lawmakers who insist that the MEK members immediately leave the country.

IRD: Looking at your previous interviews on the issue I see that you have pointed to ‘reasonable excuses’ of the Iraqi government regarding the MEK expulsion, which Iran should understand. What do you mean by “reasonable excuses”?

HD: I don’t remember using exactly that phrase, but as I said, the Iraqi government opposes the MEK’s further residence in Iraq for the reasons I told you earlier in the interview. It is facing unreasonable pressure from third parties, and seriously pursues the process through its agreements with the United Nations.

IRD: What do the Americans think of the MEK’s expulsion from Iraq?

HD: I’m not quite certain, but I do know that both the Americans and Europeans insist that the MEK stay in Iraq. But Baghdad cares about its sovereignty and regards the MEK a terrorist group. Transferring four hundred members of the group to Camp Liberty was the first phase of their decision to banish the MEK.

February 25, 2012 0 comment

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Why does no one deal with Mojahedin Khalq?

When witnessing Qaddafi’s behavior in the recent suppressing of the Libyan , we remember that of Saddam. Even in recruiting mercenaries (from African countries neighboring Libya)—Saddam did something similar. Perhaps Gaddafi has adopted Saddam Hussein’s style. Seyyed Ammar Hakim, the Head of the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq

We should bear in mind that Saddam Hussein hired mercenaries from terrorist groups, particularly from the MEK, those who were hired to kill, torture and harass the Iraqi people and who settled in prosperous military townships. Unfortunately, they are still in Iraq even 8 years after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, for no specific reason, living in the townships of Saddam Hussein who prepared them for their use. No one seems to ask why members of the group that attacked Iraqis and tortured people remain under a protective umbrella in the Ashraf camp, and are responsible for nothing. They were not even prosecuted for the crimes committed in Iran and Iraq.

In contrast, Imam Hussein pilgrims from Iran and Afghanistan, with the love of Imam Hussain (PBUH) and visiting Iraq, have been captured and now have been kept in jail for a long time. These pilgrims entered the country without a visa, then they were tried and imprisoned: this justification for their arrests is accurate and fair, but the question is why are the MEK free to walk the streets of the country and have all amenities in their camps? The facilities provided in the camps since Saddam’s time are amenities of which Iraqi citizens are deprived in many cities.

Some time ago, an Afghan diplomatic delegation came to me and asked me to do something for some Afghan pilgrims who entered the country illegally, were arrested, and now are in jail. They claimed that those people were women, children and the elderly who could not tolerate and endure in prison. The problem is not why the government treats people who entered the country illegally in such a manner, but why the MEK, a legacy left by the Baathist regime, having not only no benefit to the country but also damaging it with harassment and political costs for the Iraqi government and people, still remain in the country and no one has the right to protest their presence. They have exploited this situation and created many inconveniences for Iraqi citizens.

While there are dozens of reasons and documents that prove these people (MEK) have participated in the assassination of Iraqis and also in the Baathists and al Qaeda bombings in recent years, for those actions judicial orders have been issued but none have been executed. Why are they not submitted, while Iraqi courts put the emphasis on the crimes and issue orders for their detention and their punishment, and yet why does no one execute the sentences issued against them? Their crimes are underlined in the court to be dealt with carefully in an organized manner. It is a pity that Iraqi citizens are being prosecuted with judicial verdicts, but dozens of criminals of the MEK, whose verdicts have been issued, are not prosecuted.

Seyyed Ammar Hakim, the Head of the Supreme Islamic Council of Iraq

March 12, 2011 0 comment

MEK Camp Ashraf

Members Reluctant To Continue Cooperation With MKO

Iranian Diplomacy’ interviews Hossein Alaei, a senior Iranian analyst in political and strategic affairs about the current status of the terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) in Iraq and the possibility of their deportation from the country Q: Iraqi troops arrived at Camp Ashraf on Monday and took control of the base. However, the Iraqi government spokesman Ali Dabbagh has said the army presence at the camp is only aimed at removing some of the problems of the MKO members in accordance with human rights principles. What is your comment on this? A: Ever since Iraq came under the US occupation, one of the important issues for the Americans has been the way they should treat the Mujahedin Khalq who had been operating as an arm of Saddam Hussein against Iran and against the Intifada as well as the political currents opposed to the Saddam regime in Iraq. From the very beginning of the occupation, the US let the MKO and its forces stay inside their camps the most important of which was Ashraf Camp near Baghdad. It assigned the MKO to manage the affairs inside the camp and took control of the external issues itself. The aim was for the MKO to operate inside Iraq under the US control. After the coming to power of a legitimate government in Iraq, one of the important security topics discussed in the security negotiations between the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iraq has been to decide the fate of the MKO as an anti-IRI terrorist organization. Iran demands dismantling of the MKO bases in Iraq and handover of their members to Tehran. However, the US has not let this happen. The Americans thought they could use the MKO as an organization for both espionage and intelligence in Iran and as a tool for negotiations with the IRI. For the same reason they let them continue operation; some of the MKO leaders were sent abroad under the US control and some others are still in Iraq and under control of the US policies. Under the status quo, the US wants to solve this issue in a way to take the IRI pressure off its shoulder. For the same reason, it has agreed to apparently delegate administration of Camp Ashraf to the Iraqi government. But the Americans will continue to decide the policymaking and treatment of the MKO. In fact, the Iraqi army will act as a tool in the hands of the US as far as administration of the camp is concerned. In other words, the MKO is not fully under the control of the Iraqi government. For the same reason, the Iraqi government is trying to gradually expand its authorities concerning the MKO and take control of the region. Naturally, the remarks made by the Iraqi government spokesman (Ali Dabbagh) are in line with this policy. Considering that at the time of Saddam Hussein, the MKO was run with the money of the Iraqi government and later with the financial aid of the US and Europe and in some cases with the support of the (post-Saddam) government in Iraq, those remarks (by Dabbagh) are meant to indicate that the MKO are under the Iraqi control. It seems that changes have taken place in MKO management inside Iraq with the Iraqi government playing a bigger role than the Americans. Q: It is said the MKO has received a deadline until eid-ul fitr (end of Ramadan – early October) to leave Iraq. Is this true and feasible at all? A: The Iraqi government is under pressure both from Iran and Iraqi officials who have received blows from the MKO in the course of the Intifada. Therefore, it is just natural for them to try to solve the problem. Perhaps the best way for them and for the Americans is to move the MKO members and spread them out in various world countries. On this basis, it may be said that the Americans plan to form MKO cells in various European and Arab states and even in America. What they have in mind is formation of new MKO cells which could embark on political activities against IRI and at the same time maintain their organization. The Americans are concerned that the MKO members would be handed over to Iran and this could lead to practical dissolution of the terrorist organization. That is why they are trying to do this through the Iraqi government. The important thing for the Iraqi government is that MKO members would no more stay in their soil. Q: Wouldn’t this be to Iran’s detriment when it could exercise the least control over the MKO (after they are out of Iraq)? A: This may be the case in the long run. But in the short term it may be in Iran’s interest because it would help disorganization of MKO which is regarded an armed paramilitary organization. Their concentration in one place would enable the MKO to launch military operations against IRI. This dispersion would probably encourage many MKO members who are looking for an opportunity to split away from the organization to do so and this would cause the organization not to be able to maintain its former consistency. But at the same time, the IRI must pay attention to the point that the Americans may try to create a new organization for MKO. Washington may put an end to MKO military activities and turn them into political cells opposed to Iran in certain parts of the world, including countries which have issues with Tehran such as Europe and America in the future. Q:It is said that Iran has announced it would allow repentant MKO members to return to their home country. Do you think this is an effective step? A: Iran has always been seeking to return (repentant) MKO members to the bosom of their families here, particularly those who have not committed murders or assassinations. The aim is to lead the terrorist organization towards gradual disintegration by breaking their members away from it. This is a policy that has been executed so far and hundreds of them have returned home and reunited with their families. This has been a successful policy. Perhaps, under the present conditions that the MKO is under growing pressure the same policy could be pursued more seriously. According to information coming out of Camp Ashraf so far, many MKO members are reluctant to continue cooperation with the organization. They believe the way the camp is being administered is very despotic and oppressive. They feel they have been wasting their lives for long years with the MKO and are now looking for a peaceful and trouble-free life. Therefore, giving assurances to such persons that they could return home and live a normal life provided that they would not take their past course again, is probably an effective measure.

September 8, 2008 0 comment