The gathering, which organizers had touted as a 100,000-person show of force, drew only a few hundred supporters to Place Vauban before police moved in, according to French media reports.

The Paris administrative court had banned the event Thursday, citing “serious risks of clashes” with Iranian monarchists and the potential for public order disruptions “in the current particularly tense national and international context”.

The intervention marks a significant embarrassment for Maryam Rajavi, the MKO’s ringleader, who had poured millions of dollars into promoting the event.

Video footage showed CRS riot police using pepper spray to disperse demonstrators, amid the deep and increasingly violent rivalry between the MKO and monarchist groups.

According to sources familiar with the court’s ruling, the ban was motivated in part by intelligence suggesting potential bomb attacks by elements linked to former SAVAK operatives – the shah-era intelligence apparatus – against the MKO gathering, reflecting the growing lethality of the feud between the two violent factions.

The Paris debacle echoes the MKO’s humiliating defeat on June 20, 2023, when Albanian anti-terrorism police stormed the group’s Ashraf-3 camp near Tirana. That raid, which injured 15 police officers and 21 MKO members, was launched over the group’s involvement in “terror and cyberattacks” against foreign institutions.

The United States backed the Albanian operation, with a State Department spokesperson stating that Washington does not regard the MKO as a “democratic representative of the Iranian people” and remains concerned about allegations of abuse committed against its own members.

The MKO, which is designated a terrorist organization by Iran and was historically listed by the United States and European Union before being delisted in 2012 and 2009 respectively, has been involved in the killing of nearly 17,000 Iranian civilians over the past four decades. The group collaborated with Saddam Hussein’s regime during the Iraqi war on Iran in the 1980s.

The French government’s decision to ban the rally came hours after Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot spoke with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi about ending the war against Iran.

Paris has previously faced criticism from Tehran for hosting MKO activities, with Iran’s Foreign Ministry describing the group’s continued presence in France as “a clear example of support for terrorism” and a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1373.

Kayhan.ir

The post MKO Rally Dispersed by French Police in Humiliating Blow to Terrorist Group appeared first on Nejat Society.

During the event, participants emphasized that all organizations, regardless of their political beliefs or objectives, should uphold fundamental human rights, respect individual freedoms, and ensure the right of every person to maintain contact with their family.

Nejat Society Albania on June 20th

Nejat Society Albania on June 20th

Nejat Albania reaffirmed its commitment to supporting families seeking communication with their loved ones and to advocating for greater transparency regarding the living conditions and personal freedoms of Iranian individuals residing in Albania.

The Society believes that democracy, freedom, and human dignity are strengthened through dialogue, accountability, tolerance, and respect for diverse opinions. Human rights should remain a universal principle that transcends political differences and ideological divisions.

Our message is clear: no political cause should take precedence over human dignity, individual freedom, and the fundamental right to family connection.

Let June 20 serve as a moment of reflection on the values of freedom, human rights, transparency, and solidarity with families seeking contact with their loved ones.

Nejat Society Albania

The post Nejat Society Albania’s Conference on June 20th appeared first on Nejat Society.

This organization has built its political existence for years on crisis, sanctions, external pressure and the nuclear issue. Whenever tensions increased, it presented them as a sign of the nearness of the “collapse of the regime”. Whenever the paths of negotiation and agreement were opened, its media spoke of their failure.

Today, the situation has changed. An agreement and a reduction in tensions would deprive the organization of one of its most important political and propaganda tools. Therefore, its leaders try to present themselves as supporters of peace, in order to avoid even greater political isolation.

If peace is in the best interest of the Iranian people, why has the drumbeat of crisis been beaten for years? If war is a tragedy for the people, why was every sign of military confrontation presented as a political possibility? And if an agreement is desirable, why were policies promoted that led to the escalation of pressure and confrontation?

The problem is not that Maryam Rajavi is now talking about peace. The problem is that this stance contradicts the organization’s long history. An organization that has been nourished by crisis for decades is now trying to wear the mask of a peacemaker.

History does not lose its memory. What is presented today as “support for the agreement” looks more like an attempt to hide the fact that any lasting agreement and any reduction in tensions in the region takes away political ground from a movement that has for years linked its existence to the continuation of crises.

Hassan Shahbaz, former member of the MEK in Albania

Translated by Nejat Society

The post Maryam Rajavi’s Stance, Peace or Survival Tactic? appeared first on Nejat Society.

The Paris-based NCRI said earlier in ⁠the day that the Paris police had banned ​their rally ​at ​the last minute ‌and linked it to a call by France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot with his Iranian counterpart Abbas ‌Araqchi on ​Thursday.

“This allegation is ​false. ​The minister did ‌not mention this protest ​or ​request its cancellation,” the ministry said in a ​statement ‌sent to Reuters.

​John Irish, Reuters

The post France’s foreign ministry denies asking for ban of MEK’s rally appeared first on Nejat Society.

After the media of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) announced the death of Yazdan Teimorian, a 74-year-old member of the organization, on June 15, his daughter Sepideh published a letter on her Instagram account addressed to her late father in mourning for him, revealing dark aspects of the difficult and painful experience of the Yazdani family during the years of involvement with the MEK.

The letter that Sepideh Teimorian posted on her Instagram on the occasion of the death of her father, whom she had not seen since she was ten years old, points to the trip she and her sister went on to Albania in 2017 to visit their father, but during their week-long stay in the country, the MEK leaders did not allow them to visit their father. She further writes for her late father: “It later became clear that you were not even informed of our presence. This was revealed when a social worker, during a medical visit, discussed it with you. It was recorded on video, which I only saw later.”

Sepideh Teimorian’s post on Instagram for her late father

Ali PourAhmad, a former member of the MEK, explains how the Teimorians fell apart following Yazdan’s membership in the MEK. According to him, Sahar and Sepideh are his second and third children who were smuggled from Iraq to Europe and North America in 1992, at the age of 11 and 10, along with hundreds of other MEK children. Sahar and Sepideh were taken to the Netherlands and, like other MEK children, probably wandered among MEK sympathizers, Dutch foster families, or orphanages. The family’s first child, Musa Teimorian, later left the organization. Their mother, Aghdas Adnani also left the MEK.

Sepideh Teimorian, distressed by her father’s bitter and painful fate, asks for peace after death in her post: “A peace that may have been out of reach during your lifetime.”

Mazda Parsi

The post The MEK did not allow them to visit their father appeared first on Nejat Society.

European citizens where shocked to see MEK supporters set themselves ablaze as a form of protest to their leader’s arrest. This was considered by the MEK as an act of martyrdom. Since then, the two above-mentioned women are glorified as martyrs of the group and the others who were paralyzed by the fire they set on themselves, are over-valued as role models for the entire members of the group. What it suggests about the MEK?

The most striking feature is the intensity of personal loyalty to the leadership. In ordinary political movements, arrests trigger petitions, rallies, legal defense funds, or strikes. Self-immolation is something else: it suggests an environment where followers saw the leader’s detention not merely as a political setback but as an existential, sacred crisis.

That does not prove that leaders directly ordered anyone to die. But it does strongly suggest an organizational culture capable of producing self-destructive acts in defense of leadership. When members are socialized to treat obedience, sacrifice, and total commitment as moral duties, the boundary between “voluntary protest” and psychological coercion gets blurry. In case of the MEK, members had been coerced to do so according to the testimonies of former members.

Signs of a destructive cult

Therefore, many critics call the MEK cult-like. Calling a group a cult is often imprecise, but in this case, critics point to recognizable features:

-Charismatic, centralized leadership focused heavily on Massoud and Maryam Rajavi.

-Demand for total commitment, where personal identity becomes subordinate to the organization.

-Emotional absolutism, dividing the world into pure supporters and evil enemies.

-Readiness for self-sacrifice framed as proof of sincerity and loyalty.

-Suppression of internal dissent, reported by many former members over the years.

The 2003 self-immolations became one of the strongest public signs supporting that critique, because they looked less like spontaneous democratic activism and more like leader-fixated martyrdom.

Neda Hassani and Sediqeh Mojaveri

The deaths of the two women matter not just as isolated tragedies but as evidence of how vulnerable adherents can become inside highly controlling movements. Several layers are worth separating to interpret the deaths of the two women.

Individual agency: the women physically carried out the act themselves.

Organizational responsibility: if a movement creates intense pressure, glorifies sacrifice, and equates devotion with suffering, it bears moral responsibility even without issuing explicit instructions.

Symbolic messaging: self-immolation is designed to shock witnesses and force attention. In this case, it also signaled that Rajavi’s supporters understood her detention as worth dying for.

So, the deaths can be analyzed as both political communication and human exploitation.

The outcome of self-immolations for the MEK

Politically, the tactic was counterproductive outside the committed base. For sympathizers already deeply attached to the MEK, it may have reinforced solidarity. But to broader European audiences, it confirmed fears that the organization had fanatical or cultic tendencies. A movement trying to present itself as a democratic alternative usually benefits from showing discipline, public legitimacy, and respect for life. Supporting self-immolations do the opposite.

Ethically, this is hard to view as a legitimate form of protest in any positive sense. Self-immolation can sometimes be framed historically as a desperate act against overwhelming oppression. But here the trigger was the arrest of a political organization’s leader in a democratic country with legal procedures available. That makes the act look less like the “voice of the voiceless” and more like extreme leader worship under conditions of ideological control.

The key moral point is this: when people die for a leader’s prestige or freedom rather than for their own immediate survival, one should examine the structure of influence around them, not romanticize the sacrifice.

The 2003 self-immolations indicate that the MEK had, an intensely authoritarian internal culture with the power to drive followers toward lethal acts of devotion. The two deaths are best seen as tragic outcomes of manipulation, autocratic ideology, and leader-centered mobilization, not as healthy political resistance.

This event is one of the clearest cases critics use when arguing that the MEK functioned less like a normal opposition movement and more like a high-control organization built around the Rajavis, a cult of personality with a past record of acts of violence.

Mazda Parsi

The post June 17th, 2003, a Counterproductive Event for the MEK appeared first on Nejat Society.

Honorable President of the Republic of France

With greetings and respect

While commemorating the martyrs of Iran’s national defense against the US and Zionist aggressor enemy, on behalf of a group of grieving families of members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK, MKO) and members who have separated from this organization, I would like to inform and notify you that holding a propaganda rally of this terrorist organization in your country, on Saturday June 20 of this year, is not in the best interest of the national comforts and the domestic and foreign image of the government of the French Republic, and it is inferred that your country has become a haven for terrorists and traitors.

Throughout history, France has always tried to portray itself as a cradle of freedom and human rights, while with the presence and free activities of the MEK; it has become a safe haven for fugitive terrorists and traitors to the country.

In the eyes of the Iranian people, this organization is considered a traitor to the highest national interests in cooperating with the aggressor enemy (Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq), and its hands are stained with the blood of the Iranian and Iraqi people, as well as its own members, and this treacherous and criminal process continues in various forms at the present time.

The MEK has a dark and indefensible background, which is why it is highly hated by the Iranian people. However, by holding such meetings and instilling this illusion that it is supposedly supported by the French and other European governments, it is trying to gain a new image, while it will have no other result but to bring disrepute to the relevant governments.

If the French government allows the MEK to operate and hold propaganda programs against the country and the people of Iran, it is required to answer in return how it can give free rein to an organization that, according to the testimony of many of its former members, engages in inhumane acts that, in addition to its members being deprived of the right to a normal life, play a role in the chaos and disruption of the security and comfort of the Iranian people through real and virtual activities.

These points in themselves deserve a clear examination and response from the French government, which is a defender of security and human rights, which has allowed this organization to harm and target the material and spiritual integrity, as well as the physical and psychological security, of the Iranian people from France since 1981.

I am eagerly awaiting your response.

With regards

Ebrahim Khodabandeh

Tehran – Iran

June 14th, 2026

Copy to:

Honorable Ambassador of the Republic of France in Tehran

Honorable Minister of foreign affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran

The mainstream media

The post Letter from Ebrahim Khodabandeh to the President of France appeared first on Nejat Society.

The dispute, which largely focuses on the threat the resort would pose to local wildlife, reveals more than meets the eye. Under the surface is an intricate set of problems related to Jared Kushner — President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a close ally and confidante of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — and the presence in Albania of an Iranian exile group opposed to the current government in Tehran. All that comes on top of the news that the Albanian anti-corruption authorities have launched a probe into Kushner’s deal with Tirana, which poses a direct test also for the European Union which Albania seeks to join.

The Vjosa-Narta Delta — home to rare flamingos, pelicans, and turtle hatcheries — became Europe’s first Wild River National Park in 2023. But after Trump’s 2024 reelection, Kushner unveiled plans for a multibillion-dollar resort on the protected island. Prime Minister Edi Rama’s government granted “strategic investor status” to a Kushner-linked firm, reportedly waiving taxes and tenders and bypassing environmental reviews. When construction recently began, a “Flamingo Revolution” erupted.

What’s really important here is the possible geopolitical ramifications of this real estate project. During Trump’s first presidency, Kushner promoted the Abraham Accords – so-called normalization deals between Israel and Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Netanyahu hailed those agreements as a great diplomatic triumph. Kushner and Netanyahu reportedly remain in close contact, even as Kushner negotiates with Iran on behalf of the Trump administration. Kushner’s investment firm, Affinity Partners, was explicitly created to deepen economic ties between Israel and the Arab world.

To understand the broader context, recall Israel’s classic “periphery strategy.” For decades, Tel Aviv has cultivated ties with non-Arab states on the edges of the Middle East — from the Caucasus to the Balkans to Africa — as a way to break its diplomatic isolation. Today, that strategy is alive and well. Israel has forged close relationships with Azerbaijan (a key energy partner and Israel’s intelligence foothold on Iran’s border), Serbia (which has significantly increased its arms imports from Tel Aviv), Romania (which announced it will move its embassy to Jerusalem), and now Albania.

Albania fits perfectly into this picture. Strategically located in the Balkans, it is a Muslim-majority but secular state, a staunchly pro-American NATO member, and an eager actor looking to prove its value to Western allies. Crucially, it is also a European Union candidate country. Having another friendly nation inside the EU — or at its doorstep — would be immensely helpful to Israel as public sentiment across Europe turns increasingly critical of Israeli policies.

With EU member states debating sanctions, the potential suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, or bans on trade with the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, any sympathetic voice in the EU can be very helpful. Tirana is not yet a member, but its trajectory matters; and Prime Minister Rama has proved himself a strong ally.

Nowhere is Rama’s alignment with the Trump-Netanyahu tandem more visible than in his treatment of Iran. Albania is the country where thousands of members of the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), the exiled Iranian opposition group that was previously on the U.S. and EU terrorist lists, have relocated after leaving Camp Ashraf in Iraq in a deal brokered by the Obama administration in 2013.

The fact they found their new home in Tirana is mostly due to a refusal by most other nations approached by Washington to host them. The relocation was conceived as a humanitarian gesture, rather than the provision of a new operational base for the discredited group.

That arrangement was not fully respected; there is documented activity of MEK bots originating from Albania. But Rama has embraced the MEK nonetheless, using it as a cudgel against Tehran.

As the Flamingo Revolution spread, Rama publicly blamed Iran for stoking the protests. In a blistering statement addressed to the Islamic Republic, he accused Tehran of cyberterrorism, of targeting Albanian institutions, and of hostility “toward freedom itself.” He then pivoted to a full-throated defense of Albania’s decision to shelter the MEK (without naming it directly), framing its members as “Iranian men and women whom you sought to silence through intimidation, imprisonment and death.”

This is remarkable for two reasons. First, it effectively endorses the MEK as freedom fighters — exactly the language used by top officials of the first Trump administration, including former secretary of state Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton, who reportedly have been well compensated for their pro-MEK advocacy.

Second, it deflects entirely from the allegations of domestic corruption and environmental destruction at the heart of the protests. There is no evidence the protesters waving flamingos are Iranian agents. They are Albanian citizens worried about their coastline. But by blaming Tehran and wrapping himself in the mantle of resistance to theocracy, Rama seeks to transform a local scandal into a battle in a global proxy war — one that aligns perfectly with pro-Israel interests.

This raises the question of the extent to which Albania’s foreign policy is aligned with the EU as it seeks to join the bloc. Even as the EU relations with the Islamic Republic are arguably at their lowest point since 1979, the EU does not recognize MEK as a legitimate interlocutor; nor does it seek to endorse the group in any shape or form.

To accentuate the split with Brussels, Albania joined Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace” and even agreed to send peacekeepers to Gaza, as per Trump’s plan, endorsed by Netanyahu.

In a sign of a deeper alignment with Netanyahu’s Israel, Rama traveled to Jerusalem, spoke before the Knesset, and was praised by Netanyahu for his “moral conscience.” There, he blamed “no one else but Hamas” for the Israeli military retaliation for Hamas’ October 7 atrocities – even though that retaliation has killed over 70,000 Palestinians in Gaza in what the International Court of Justice, a U.N. rapporteur and numerous international legal experts have characterized as plausibly constituting a genocide or genocidal acts. Such alignment accrued Rama tangible benefits, such as arms deals with Israeli firms like Elbit Systems.

While this geopolitical divergence is concerning, foreign policy is still the preserve of member states and candidates to join the EU, and some EU members have strong ties with Israel anyway. However, the allegations of corruption against Rama are one dimension where Brussels can exert real leverage.

Since Albania received EU candidate status in 2014, and formal membership negotiations started in 2022, the EU has repeatedly expressed concerns over corruption and the weakness of the rule of law in Albania. When protesters ask basic questions about who benefits from a Trump-owned resort on a nature preserve, Rama not only accuses Iran of meddling but insists there is “absolutely no chance” the development will stop.

Brussels cannot afford to look away. The EU could hold the Albanian government accountable here by demanding transparency; conditioning enlargement funds on strengthening the rule of law and the fight against corruption; and, ultimately, putting the accession negotiations on hold if those conditions are not fulfilled.

What Brussels needs is political will to protect its own tattered reputation. The flamingo-wielding protesters are not Tehran’s pawns. They are citizens fed up with the political elite’s high-handed neglect and arrogance, of which the Kushner project is only the latest expression. Brussels should start listening — and acting.

By Eldar Mamedov, Responsible Statecrafts

The post The Kushner-Israel nexus behind the Albania ‘flamingo revolution’ appeared first on Nejat Society.

In his 12-year run as prime minister, Rama has tried to drag his nation out of the depths of postcommunist depression through an economic policy of saying yes to just about any development that could bring in revenue, or what he calls “strategic investors.” Gulf and Western-backed projects have been given expedited approvals and government support. “With no industrial, financial or human capital to offer on the global market, the only thing left to sell is nature,” the Albanian author Lea Ypi wrote this week in The Guardian.

But the Kushner project is just one in a long line of unsavory and unpopular deals Rama has undertaken in a bid to curry favor with Western partners as he hammers home his “Accession before 2030” agenda — the campaign to join the European Union — which has been a key part of maintaining power.

Ivanka Trump may have been able to swim up to an island in the Mediterranean and scramble ashore barefoot, but thousands of migrants seeking refuge on European shores are now being warehoused in Albania, thanks to a five-year deal Rama signed with the Italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, that was roundly criticized by human rights groups but praised as “out-of-the-box” thinking by Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the EU Commission. In exchange for holding up to 3,000 people at a time while their asylum claims are being processed, Albania, which has lost 1.2 million of its own citizens to migration, received not much more than an assurance of Italy’s support in its EU bid.

In 2013, the United States came knocking at Rama’s door with a direct request: Take on the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal. The Balkan nation had successfully destroyed its own a few years earlier, and the U.S. couldn’t find another NATO country to play host to the more than 1,000 weapons, which included mustard gas and sarin gas. The deal was scuttled after it was leaked to the press and citizens complained, but the heart was willing, as it were.

It wasn’t the first time Albania was asked to take on an outsize risk as a favor for its supersized ally. Rama also expanded an arrangement, initially negotiated before his time, to host members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq — an Iranian movement that opposed both the Pahlavi monarchy and the Islamic Republic. Though it didn’t garner the same kind of public reaction the proposed chemical weapons dump did, some Albanians questioned why their country was taking on security risks for a conflict thousands of miles away. Their fears were confirmed when Iran began launching cyberattacks on critical government systems, including a crippling outage in 2022. The attacks haven’t let up; the most recent was in March.

In the past, opposition to Rama’s gambits was modest. Now thousands of people are on the streets with a single, unified slogan: “Albania is not for sale.” The growing disenchantment with the notion that the only thing the nation has to give is its land at bargain basement prices could be a tipping point for Rama and his economy of “yes.”

By Erin Clare Brown, New Lines Magazine

The post Albanians Say No to the Economy of ‘Yes’ appeared first on Nejat Society.

The presence of Ukrainian refugees at rallies organized by the MEK has been a subject of investigation by several international media outlets, including Der Spiegel and The Guardian. Analyzing this phenomenon requires looking at the tactical objectives of the organization and the vulnerabilities of the refugee population.

Tactical Motivations for the MEK

From an analytical perspective, the recruitment of individuals who are not ideologically affiliated with the MEK to attend their events serves several strategic purposes:

Projecting Popularity: The MEK faces a long-standing challenge regarding its domestic support base inside Iran. By busing in participants, they create the visual impression of a large, diverse, and international movement, which is essential for maintaining their political relevance among Western policymakers.

Optics and Legitimacy: Large, crowded rallies provide high-quality photographic and video content for the group’s media wings. This helps project an image of an “Iranian government-in-waiting” that enjoys broad popular support.

Networking: By appearing to lead a multi-national coalition of supporters, the MEK aims to gain traction with European politicians and media who may not be aware of the crowd’s composition.

Why Ukrainian Refugees Participate

The participation of refugees is generally viewed by analysts not as a sign of ideological alignment, but as a byproduct of material necessity and outreach tactics:

Economic Incentives: For refugees living in precarious conditions, the offer of free transportation, food, and occasionally small stipends provides a tangible, albeit temporary, relief.

The “Gig” Economy of Protests: Recruiters often target refugee housing centers, framing these events as “pro-democracy” rallies or simply as an opportunity for a free day trip to a major city like Paris or Berlin. Many attendees reportedly have little to no knowledge of the MEK’s history, ideology, or specific political goals.

Lack of Awareness: Due to language barriers and recent arrival in a new country, many Ukrainian refugees may be unaware of the controversial reputation associated with the MEK and its past history as formerly terrorist designated organization. They may perceive the event as a generic human rights demonstration according to the MEK’s propaganda.

Ethical and Political Implications

The practice has drawn criticism from several angles:

Exploitation of Vulnerability: Human rights observers have noted that using refugees as “rent-a-crowds” leverages their economic instability to further a political agenda they may not even support.

Misinformation: By presenting these crowds as organic supporters, the MEK creates a deceptive narrative for the Western public and political figures, potentially influencing policy decisions based on inflated metrics of support.

Reputational Damage: Investigative reports detailing these practices have further isolated the MEK from mainstream Iranian opposition groups, who often distance themselves from the MEK’s organizational tactics.

This year, the MEK is once again holding an event in Paris on 20 June 2026, branded as the “Paris Free Iran Rally.” The date marks the beginning of the group’s armed struggle against the Iranian government over four decades ago. Due to its unpopularity among Iranian diaspora, the MEK often recruits financially stimulated non-Iranians, including refugees and foreign nationals like Ukrainians, to attend rallies to create the appearance of mass Iranian support. It pays all the expenses for the trip to Paris.

The participation of Ukrainian refugees in MEK rallies is widely interpreted by experts as a logistical maneuver rather than a political movement. It allows the MEK to maintain a facade of mass-scale support while exploiting the immediate material needs of displaced persons. This trend highlights the importance of distinguishing between a group’s curated image of “popular support” and the actual popular base they command. Media  and human rights activists must take steps to inform refugees living in Europe so that the MEK does not succeed in using these people as a tool for propaganda.

Mazda Parsi

The post Ukrainians Should be Warned about the MEK’s Paris Free Iran Rally appeared first on Nejat Society.