Articles

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Saudi-MKO Alliance, a Political Idiocy

Prince Turki al-Faisal’s hostile remarks against Tehran in the annual gathering of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization and his promises to stand by the MKO seems to be a total failure for both sides of the alliance.

The Saudi policies aimed at destabilizing its rival Islamic Republic –as a powerful neighbor and an influential country in the Muslim world—sounds to have formed new stances that are now overt rather than covert. Prince Turkie who presumably have been authorized by his peers in the Saudi regime cheers up the MKO-gathered audience by saying, “I, too, want the downfall of the regime.”

But, this plain sponsorship for the destructive cult of Rajavi with a dark history of violence and human rights abuse will not work. As the New York-based journalist on U.S. foreign policy, Ali Gharib writes, “If Saudi Arabia is on a quest to paint itself as a responsible actor in the region, the kingdom took a big step backward over the weekend.”[1]

It’s truly “a big step backward” and as Barbara Slavin Acting Director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council in Washington, asserts in her article on Turkie Feisal’s support for the MKO, “mixing with the MEK is a recipe for disaster and a distraction from the region’s and the world’s real enemy – the group that calls itself the Islamic State.”[2]

Slavin confirms rumors about Saudis’ long-standing support for the MKO, “It’s entirely possible that the Saudis have funded the MEK for years.” [3] So, In case of Turkie and other rich Arab figures MKO’s speaking fees do not create the motivation to take such hostile stances against the Islamic Republic. “The Sunni Gulf states—flush with petrodollars and bearing sectarian grudges against Shiite Iran in a regional battle for hegemonic primacy—have long been suspected as a source of funding for MEK’s lavish spending, but no reliable reports have definitively established where the group gets its cash,” writes Ali Gharib. “Al-Faisal’s public move in support of the group certainly provides one more piece of evidence to link Gulf States to MEK’s financing.”[4]

He explains, “Although MEK is famous for lavishing money on its supporters—paying as much as $50,000 for a short speech and investing in politicians through campaign contributions—al-Faisal, as a member of Saudi Arabia’s super-rich royal family, probably scoffs at the sort of cash MEK offers. Instead, al-Faisal attended for obvious reasons: to put a thumb in Iran’s eye.”[ 5]

Actually, Saudi’s financial and spiritual support for the MKO is already a failed investment because the MKO is notoriously known to Iranians and many others in the international community. “Contrary to the MEK’s claims, there is nothing democratic about this cultist organization, which requires its members to divorce their spouses or remain celibate and engage in Maoist-style struggle sessions of self-humiliation”, Slavin warns. “Those that manage to escape often require long periods of de-programming.” [6]

And this is Ali Gharib’s account about the MKO’s situation among all Iranians in general: “Let’s be blunt: MEK is neither a viable agent for regime change in Iran nor the “government-in-exile” the group pretends to be. They enjoy almost no support among Iranians at home or abroad. Exiled royalists hate them for their terror war against the Shah’s regime and their part in the Islamic Revolution. Inside the country, they are reviled across the political spectrum for siding with Saddam Hussein—and fighting against Iranians—in the Iran-Iraq war.” [7]

The MKO has carried out numerous terrorist attacks against Iranian civilians and government officials over the past three decades. Out of the nearly 17,000 Iranians killed in terrorist attacks since the Islamic Revolution, about 12,000 have fallen victim to MKO’s bombings, mortar attacks and other violent acts.

Robert Macey of the Intercept cites from an Iranian scholar Ariane Tabatabai of Georgetown University _who describes the MKO as “cult-like dissident group”_ what the Iranians feel about the MKO. “If the current government is not Iranians’ first choice for a government, the MEK is not even their last — and for good reason,” tells Ariane Tabatabai to Robert Macey. “Today, the MEK is viewed negatively by most Iranians, who would prefer to maintain the status quo than rush to the arms of what they consider a corrupt, criminal cult.” [8]

Saudi transformation from a sponsor of Syrian rebels particularly ISIS to a state sponsor of the terrorist cult of Rajavi indicates the failure of previous proxy wars and a new endeavor to confron Iran. However, the new choice is not reliable at all. The common enmity for Iran does makes an absolutely idiot alliance.

As a matter of fact, ISIS is losing ground in Syria and Iraq and eventually Saudi Arabia is largely losing the capacities to use terrorist groups against its rival. Thus, the kingdom is beating the dead horse of “the late Massoud Rajavi”.

Mazda Parsi

References:

[1]Gharib, Ali, Saudi Supports Anti-Iran MEK Fanatics Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terror group, Lobelog, July16, 2016

[2] Slavin, Barbara, Saudi Backing of Iranian Exile Group Inflames Mideast Conflicts, Voice of America

July 11th, 2016

[3] ibid

[4] Gharib, Ali, Saudi Supports Anti-Iran MEK Fanatics Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terror group, Lobelog, July16, 2016

[5] ibid

[6] Slavin, Barbara, Saudi Backing of Iranian Exile Group Inflames Mideast Conflicts, Voice of America

July 11th, 2016

[7] Gharib, Ali, Saudi Supports Anti-Iran MEK Fanatics Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terror group, Lobelog, July16, 2016

[8]Mackey, Robert, Newt Gingrich Pals Around With Terrorists Saddam Hussein Once Armed, the Intercept, July 11, 2016

July 25, 2016 0 comments

Iran

From Iran to Nice, We Must Confront All Terrorism to End Terrorism

France has unfortunately been the epicenter for two terrorism-related events in recent weeks. The tragic truck attack in Nice, which received international attention, and a rally recently held in Paris by a notorious Iranian opposition group — the “Mujahedin-e Khalq,” or MEK, which for years has committed acts of terrorism against Iran. While it might not be immediately evident, there is a connection between the events — the groups behind them have been accused of atrocities and have historical ties to Saudi Arabia.

Both the MEK and the self-proclaimed Islamic State, which claimed the attack in Nice, are groups with a history of terrorism, and both, in some way or another, are influenced by the kingdom.

People light candles at a makeshift memorial on the Promenade des Anglais in Nice on July 19, 2016 in tribute to the victims of the Bastille Day attack. (VALERY HACHE/AFP/Getty Images)

MEK’s Terrorism in Iran

While the group no longer has the distinction of a terrorist group in the United States and is not related to or as widely destructive as ISIS, in Iran the MEK is still very much a perpetrator of terror.

Since its founding in the late 1960s, the MEK’s favored tactic has been terrorism, which for years it directed towards Americans. An MEK leader by the name of Massoud Rajavi stated in 1972 that the group’s “main goal” was to “free Iran of U.S. imperialism.” As I documented in my 2014 book, “Iran and the United States,” the MEK’s assassination campaigns in the 1970s claimed the lives of several high-profile Americans. Among the victims were one colonel and one lieutenant colonel of the U.S. Air Force, along with other servicemen.

The MEK’s hands are tainted not only with American blood, but also with the blood of countless Iranians, Iraqis and Kurds. Since Iran’s 1979 revolution, the MEK has been responsible for the deaths of upwards of 17,000 Iranians, including senior officials and ministers. During the Iran-Iraq War, the MEK also sided with Saddam Hussein, earning the enmity of the vast majority of Iranians. An Iranian NGO, the Habilian Association, has gone so far as to document all the Iranian victims of the MEK in a comprehensive database that includes photos and biographies of each of the victims.

In the ‘80s and ‘90s, the MEK was responsible for several terrorist campaigns within Iran, one of which killed some 70 Iranian officials in 1981, including both the president and prime minister at the time.

After the Iran-Iraq War, the MEK resided in Iraq and took on the role of Saddam’s henchmen. An October 1994 Wall Street Journalreport quoted a Clinton administration official as saying, “Saddam looked on the Mujahedeen as more loyal than some of his own army units.” After the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Massoud Rajavi lambasted the U.N. coalition that pushed Saddam out of Kuwait, stating, “Iranian national movements and their masses strongly denounce the Iranian regime’s alliance with U.S. imperialism, world Zionism, and regional reactionaries to launch aggression against Iraq.”

In recent years, Iranian nuclear scientists have been assassinated — in some cases murdered while driving to work. MEK is thought by many to be involved in these attacks, perhaps with the assistance of Israel. According to a 2012 NBC News report, Israel was “training MEK members” to carry out the killings. The group has also been held responsible for an April 2000 assassination attempt on the leader of the Iranian policy making center for the war in Iraq.

Mourners carry the coffin of an Iranian nuclear scientist on January 13, 2012. Some believe MEK is involved in the deaths of the nuclear scientists. (Atta Kenare/Getty Images)

The Saudi Connection

This year, the annual gathering of the MEK in Paris featured Prince Turki al-Faisal, the former director of Saudi intelligence, as a speaker. The conference typically draws the attendance of politicians of many nations, including the U.S., Egypt, and this year, Saudi Arabia. In his remarks, al-Faisal praised the pseudo-Islamist-Marxist group and emphatically supported its objective of toppling the Iranian government. Al-Faisal’s comments, which come at a time when Saudi-Iranian relations are at an all-time low and have even been compared to a “Cold War” state, will have serious consequences for the Tehran-Riyadh relationship going forward.

During my trip to Iran a few weeks ago, I spoke with a senior official about the necessity of improving Iran-Saudi relations. He told me that Iran was willing to engage the Saudis but that Riyadh had devoted itself to a confrontational approach. This official informed me that Iran had detailed intelligence about Riyadh’s financial support to the MEK, which he said had increased 800 percent in the past two years. He also noted that Saudi Arabia would cover the cost of this year’s MEK conference in Paris and that Prince Turki would be present to publicly declare Saudi Arabia’s support.

With Prince Turki’s speech to the MEK, Saudi Arabia has elected to destroy any chance of de-escalating tensions between the two nations. In pursuing this approach, Saudi leaders should be cognizant that not only are they imperiling regional and global security, but they are also following in the footsteps of Saddam Hussein. Saudi Arabia has already separated itself from its traditional regional allies with its hyper-anti-Iranian posture, so much so that only Bahrain— which is effectively under Saudi occupation — is standing fully with it. Global powers, on the other hand, are pursuing ways to enhance ties with Iran. It is truly a shame that Prince Turki al-Faisal, a man of significant ability and experience, has committed himself to this doomed cause rather than searching for peace and friendship between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Riyadh’s now open alliance with the MEK only solidifies its position as the sponsor of yet another extremist group that espouses perverted views of Islam. The barbaric Nice terrorist attack— later claimed by the self-proclaimed Islamic State — and Prince Faisal’s endorsement of the MEK have a common denominator: a connection to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia’s Prince Turki al-Faisal looks on during the National Council of Resistance of Iran annual meeting on July 9, 2016. (Alain Jocard/Getty Images)

Saudi Arabia and ISIS

It has long been evident to the global community that Saudi Arabia is a benefactors of Islamist militant groups, including likely the group that evolved into ISIS. Many U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged this reality. Even former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated at the Brookings Institution last year that, “Much of the extremism in the world today is the direct result of policies and funding undertaken by the Saudi government and individuals.” A recent British parliament report also stated that it is “very likely” that individuals close to the royals of the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf have donated money to ISIS, though it is unclear how directly those funds have been given. Historically, too, the ideology of the group has ties to Saudi Arabia’s own identity via Wahhabism.

While ISIS wreaks havoc on the world with its global acts of terror, the MEK ravages Iran. In much the same way ISIS is a twisted offspring of the Sunni world that has ravaged, among others, Sunni-populated areas, the MEK is its counterpart for Iranians in the Shia world. Iranians thus expect the world community to confront the MEK just as it confronts ISIS. At the very least, the group should not be hosted by countries like France and endorsed by Saudi Arabia. In the fight against terrorism, European and Saudi leaders should know better than to distinguish between “good” and “bad” terrorism, or tolerate any form of terrorism in the service of cheap geopolitical gains.

In light of the Nice terrorist attack, the international community should also view the threat from other groups such as the MEK as an interconnected phenomenon. The scourge of terrorism currently threatening the whole world can only be alleviated if it is addressed in a holistic way. The Nice truck slaughter — indeed the slaughtering by ISIS in general — and the MEK’s killing of thousands of Iranians are both worthy of our attention and condemnation. The territory the perpetrators of such violence use to plan and launch attacks, as well as the flow of cash, equipment and ideology they draw their support and influence from should all be considered as pieces of the same terrorism “puzzle.” The global terrorist threat simply cannot be solved until all these pieces are recognized as being a part of the same puzzle and dealt with in an effective and simultaneous manner. This means not only increasing security to prevent attacks, but also seriously confronting those who aid terrorism in any way — from the MEK to ISIS.

Seyed Hossein Mousavian

Head of Foreign Relations Committee of Iran’s National Security Council (1997-2005)

July 24, 2016 0 comments

Saudi Arabia

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 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Mr. Gingrich! The Cult of Rajavi Is Also Incompatible with Western Civilization!

Following the terrorist attack in Nice, France, the former speaker of the US House of Representatives called for screening and deportation of Muslims who practice Sharia (Islamic law). He told that "Sharia is incompatible with Western civilization” while a few days ago he spoke in the rally of the Mujahedin khalq Organization (the MKO/ the Cult of Rajavi) and declared his sponsorship for this Islamist terrorist cult-like group.

The former presidential candidate of the United States asked for monitoring the mosques. “Where do you think the primary source of recruitment is? Where do you think the primary place of indoctrination is? You’ve got to look at the madrasas (religious schools), if you’re a school which is teaching Sharia, you want to expel it from the country," Gingrich continued. He forgot or denied to notice that the MKO’s camp in Auver sur d’Oise, Paris and also its bases in Tirana and Baghdad are primary places of indoctrinating individuals with reactionary ideas.

The Iranian-American independent researcher, writer and journalist, Soraya Sepahpour Ulrich updated her Facebook status highlighting Gingriches double standard towards radical Islamists:

“The irony! Gingrich demands Moslems be deported from America a couple of days after he attended a rally in France in support of a Moslem Terrorist Cult, the MEK, funded by Wahhabi Saudis! And not a freaking news stations is making the link! Wake up people…”

Mark Dankof, the American correspondent confirmed Soraya by sharing this:

“Wake up, folks. Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich is absolutely correct. Check out the Rand Corporation report on the MEK. I witnessed their handiwork in Tehran in the 1970s at a funeral for 2 American officers.”

He also said the deadly attack in Nice was the “fault of Western elites who lack the guts to do what is right, to do what is necessary.” Actually, Newt Gingrich himself is one of those Western Elites absolutely “lack the guts to do what is right, to do what is necessary”. He supports the MKO and bows to Maryam Rajavi while the cult-like group under the rule of Rajavi has a horrific background of extremism, violence and terror. should beware about any group or movement that might endanger their civilization. The Cult of Rajavi is definitely one of those groups that is located in the heart of France. Surprisingly, it is free to buy a large number of Western figures to speak in its luxurious gatherings under the cover of freedom and democracy.

By Mazda Parsi

July 16, 2016 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

The man whose midwife was Saddam Hussein, announced dead by Saudis!

In an official MEK (Mojahedin-e Khalq of Iran, aka MKO) meeting, a Saudi guest speaker mentioned that Massoud Rajavi is dead. Prince Turki Al-faisal, who is a member of the Saudi Royal family and the former head of the KSA spy agency, gestured to Maryam Rajavi twice while directly saying “your late husband”.

For a long time the MEK has refused to talk about the situation of their leader and master Massoud Rajavi. They have tried to provide an account in which he is hidden, while many others believe that he died when Iraq was attacked by American forces in 2003. Dead or alive the MEK is still following the rules and regulations which are designed by Rajavi. The Ideological Revolution, which forbids MEK members from getting married and forces them to live collectively in isolated gender-segregated houses and attend self-criticism meetings, is still being followed. These are all standards which were designed by the leader who has disappeared.

Another legacy of Rajavi for this Organization is working for the notorious enemies of Iran, and this is still being practiced. Rajavists became a part of Saddam’s army during the Iran-Iraq war. However, their participation was more beneficial to the Iranians than to their master. In this era they did not have any military or political victory which could change the playing field on their behalf. Information they provided for Saddam was not beneficial either. The MEK lost many of their loyal forces in combat and provided a good source of propaganda for hardliners in Tehran.

After the fall of Saddam and in order to get removed from the US terrorist list, they approached right wing conservative US politicians who were negotiating for a military attack on Iran to stop its nuclear activities. At the same time the MEK enjoyed a good relationship with the occupation forces in Iraq – although after being used, the MEK was thrown away by its American handlers. US military sources who were assigned to interrogate members of the organization claimed that they exaggerated their power and information in a way that throws doubt on all of their claims. Nevertheless, the US left the MEK in the deserts of Iraq and the ongoing war in Iraq has cost the life of many MEK activists.

The third phase in which the MEK has tried to attach itself to a wealthy power is the Syrian civil war. Although the MEK had had a long term relationship with Saudi intelligence, this strengthened since the Syrian war began. During this period they approached the KSA embassies in European capitals claiming they have information to sell about activities of Iranians in Syria and Lebanon. Being so desperate to have anything against Iran, the Saudis began to invest in the MEK – even though the historical facts show that investing in the MEK is not a win win game. It seems rather that the KSA has a propaganda plan for internal use. They are fully aware that the MEK is not what it claims. The MEK provides information from open sources which are not accurate. Therefore, Saudi intelligence’s pay and play with this organization shows that they want to use it for their internal affairs. For example, to show the new King that they are working!

The Saudis have had many failures in their intelligence war on Iran. A former Iranian activist and reformist individual who spent some time in Evin prison 209 section as a high-security prisoner, claims that he had seen two individuals accused of spying for the KSA. Both cases were very humorous, he said. In one case the Iranian national arrested for espionage sold translations of articles and interviews of Iranian military officers published on the IRGC website, claiming that it is confidential information that only he has access to.

The second case involved an Afghan man who was spying for Saudi for a long time. After his arrest he told his cell mates that the Iranian interrogator had information about him which could only have been obtained from his handlers inside the Saudi service. He was mocked by his interrogator for working for people inside Saudi intelligence who were actually working covertly for Iran!

Thus, considering these examples, it can be concluded that Saudi Intelligence officers are trying to grab at anything they can against Iran to satisfy their king. It is very unfortunate for the MEK because the average age of Saudi Kings is usually between 5 to 10 years and after choosing a new king a new policy will be enforced.

The Saudis have accidentally announced the death of Rajavi. This does not indicate a very professional new master for the MEK.

Arash Pirouz,

July 16, 2016 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Saudi Supports Anti-Iran MEK Fanatics

If Saudi Arabia is on a quest to paint itself as a responsible actor in the region, the kingdom took a big step backward over the weekend. That’s when a former top official—who remains an influential figure—declared support not only for regime change in Iran but for one of the strangest would-be agents of overthrowing the Islamic Republic. Prince Turki bin Faisal al-Saud, the former head of the Saudi intelligence agency and a longtime ambassador to the U.S., spoke to a gathering of thousands of Iranian exiles in Paris. The group was gathered to fête Maryam Rajavi and her movement, the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a group that, until 2012, the United States and other Western countries listed as a terrorist organization.

Al-Faisal more than played his part in the adulatory chorus. “You, Maryam Rajavi,” he said, according to the Saudi-owned pan-Arab newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, “your endeavor to rid your people of the Khomeinist cancer is an historic epic that, like the Shanameh”—the most famous Iranian epic poem—“will remain inscribed in the annals of history.” Rajavi’s endeavor, of course, has been the monomaniacal pursuit of bringing down the Iranian regime—under any banner she can fly—in order to install herself atop Iran’s government.

MEK has a long and strange history. With roots as an Islamo-Marxist revolutionary organization dating back to the 1960s, MEK launched various terrorist attacks during the time of the Shah to achieve its aim of toppling the monarchy. As a result, it faced a brutal crackdown. During the 1979 Islamic Revolution, MEK fought at the vanguard of anti-Shah forces. But after the king’s overthrow, Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic Republicans stripped MEK of its potential place in the halls of power by. Around that time, the group consolidated itself around the leadership of the charismatic and mustachioed Massoud Rajavi. Facing another round of brutal repression, this time under Khomeini’s nascent rule, Rajavi led his followers into exile, setting up a political base in France and a military one in Iraq, where Saddam Hussein’s regime lavished weapons and cash on MEK fighters. In 1985, Rajavi took Maryam Abrishamchi as his wife and co-leader. Critics, including no small number of former adherents, allege that a cult of personality has developed around the pair.

MEK and Petrodollars?

Al-Faisal’s appearance at the MEK gathering was remarkable on a number of fronts. The anti-Iran Gulf Arab monarchies, among which Saudi Arabia is the driving force, haven’t made a show of open support for such a controversial anti-Iran groups like MEK. (Other Gulf monarchies and their allies also appeared at the Paris summit: a member of parliament from Bahrain gave a speech, as did a delegation from Jordan, another monarchy with close security ties to the Gulf.) The Sunni Gulf states—flush with petrodollars and bearing sectarian grudges against Shiite Iran in a regional battle for hegemonic primacy—have long been suspected as a source of funding for MEK’s lavish spending, but no reliable reports have definitively established where the group gets its cash. Al-Faisal’s public move in support of the group certainly provides one more piece of evidence to link Gulf States to MEK’s financing.

Then there was al-Faisal’s speech explicit call for regime change in Iran and support for MEK. The crowd at the MEK rally, donning their standard yellow vests and hats, interrupted al-Faisal’s speech with Arabic chants in favor of bringing down the Iranian regime. Al-Faisal, who had been delivering his speech in Arabic, responded in kind: “I, too, want the fall of the regime.” At The Intercept, Robert Mackey noted an irony: the Arabic chant to which al-Faisal responded so positively is the same one that “was used in the pro-democracy protests across the Middle East in 2011 that Saudi Arabia fought so hard to repress.”

A host of other ironies also loom over al-Faisal’s appearance. MEK, for instance, long ago gave up its aim of an Islamic Marxist state in favor of hollow pledges to establish a secular democracy in Iran. But Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies are about the farthest thing from a secular democracy. Conservative religious sentiments inspire the Saudi royal family’s rule, and political repression is endemic wherever Saudi Arabia enjoys considerable influence. What’s more, MEK directed the first decade of its terrorist attacks at bringing down the Shah’s repressive monarchy, denouncing its form of government as inherently unjust. The kingdom of Saudi Arabia, then, makes an especially strange bedfellow.

Let’s be blunt: MEK is neither a viable agent for regime change in Iran nor the “government-in-exile” the group pretends to be. They enjoy almost no support among Iranians at home or abroad. Exiled royalists hate them for their terror war against the Shah’s regime and their part in the Islamic Revolution. Inside the country, they are reviled across the political spectrum for siding with Saddam Hussein—and fighting against Iranians—in the Iran-Iraq war.

Saudi Interests

Why, given all that, would such a well-connected former Saudi official make such a show of supporting MEK? Although MEK is famous for lavishing money on its supporters—paying as much as $50,000 for a short speech and investing in politicians through campaign contributions—al-Faisal, as a member of Saudi Arabia’s super-rich royal family, probably scoffs at the sort of cash MEK offers. Instead, al-Faisal attended for obvious reasons: to put a thumb in Iran’s eye. In this, the high-ranking prince is acting like the Washington Iran hawks that have warmed up to Saudi Arabia since, mostly out of mutual enmity for Iran, the Gulf Arab states and Israel began blowing kisses to each other over their shared antipathy for the Iran nuclear deal. Several such hawks were in attendance in Paris. As The Intercept reported, among the attendees were Newt Gingrich and superhawk former UN ambassador John Bolton.

For close MEK watchers, such as myself, perhaps the most interesting wrinkle—aside from the Saudi prince’s ridiculous gesture toward Rajavi—was al-Faisal’s apparent announcement of Massoud Rajavi’s death. The MEK leader hasn’t been seen in public since the US invaded Iraq in 2003, at which time Massoud was holed up with thousands of MEK fighters at the desert base Saddam Hussein had bestowed upon the group. Occasional reports of Massoud addressing followers by phone have appeared, but even the last of these was years ago. Rumors of his death have swirled for years. Al-Faisal appeared to confirm them when he referred to Massoud Rajavi as “marhoom,” which means “late.” Here’s how Al Monitor’s Arash Karami reported the fallout:

In response to Faisal’s comments about the “late” Massoud Rajavi, the MEK continued to deny Massoud’s death. Shahin Ghobadi, spokesman for the MEK, said Faisal’s comments were “misinterpreted.” In the audio, however, Faisal refers on two different occasions to Massoud as “marhoom,” which means “late” in both Arabic and Persian.

That’s just like MEK: lying about something everyone can see is true. The possible revelation of Massoud Rajavi’s death, however, doesn’t change the geopolitics: Maryam Rajavi is still around. With Massoud out of sight for nearly a decade and a half, MEK has operated under her aegis, their relevancy slipping away but the core of adherents holding to the pipe dream of retaking Iran. Perhaps al-Faisal’s appearance does indicate a program of Saudi Arabian support for MEK. But it will only allow the group’s followers to cling to their fantasy of putting Rajavi in charge of their homeland. MEK trudges on, thanks to supporters with deep pockets in high places.

By Ali Gharib,

About the Author

Ali Gharib is a New York-based journalist on U.S. foreign policy with a focus on the Middle East and Central Asia. His work has appeared at Inter Press Service, where he was the Deputy Washington Bureau Chief; the Buffalo Beast; Huffington Post; Mondoweiss; Right Web; and Alternet. He holds a Master’s degree in Philosophy and Public Policy from the London School of Economics and Political Science. A proud Iranian-American and fluent Farsi speaker, Ali was born in California and raised in D.C.

July 16, 2016 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Grand Controversy as MEK can’t prove leader Massoud Rajavi is dead or alive

Maryam Rajavi’s Grand Gathering in Paris on 9 July was billed as her promise of imminent regime change at her behest. Instead it turned into a Grand Controversy of a different kind. This annual propaganda show advertises Rajavi’s propaganda skills in order to secure continued funding from regime change pundits. This year was dramatically different due to the unannounced presence of Prince Turki al-Faisal, former Saudi ambassador to the UK and US. Certainly not a person you invite from a list in a speakers’ agency.

This year, Prince Turki’s involvement changed everything for the MEK. Not least because of public perception of Saudi Arabia as a repressive regime, particularly toward women. Turki insisted the venue be moved from Villepinte to Bourges for reasons of security. He then ordered changes to the layout of the stage and the speakers panel. Suddenly someone else was in charge of the event. Undaunted, perhaps even pleased to have such a prestigious guest, Maryam Rajavi opened the rally by praising her husband Massoud Rajavi. “May God protect the everlastingly vigilant lion” she announced while gesturing to his picture posted large around the arena. This was only to be expected. Even though he disappeared just before allied forces attacked Iraq in 2003, Massoud Rajavi is known to be the actual leader of the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK – NCRI is a front name for the MEK), his wife being second-in-command.

When it was the turn of the Saudi Prince to speak, he gestured for Maryam Rajavi to sit down with the rest of the audience and listen, ensuring at the same time that she was not photographed with him in any capacity. Turki, former head of Saudi intelligence with which he is still involved, is a notoriously shrewd operator. As Ambassador to Washington he famously convinced some Americans that the backing for 9/11 came not from Saudi but from Iran. He is known to never talk off script. Therefore, there can be no doubt that when he twice announced Massoud Rajavi’s death it was not a mistake. The word ‘marhoum’ – which is understood by Arabic speakers as an expression of condolence – appeared clumsily, and thereby deliberately, inserted into his sentence.

Until that moment Maryam Rajavi had been blissfully unaware. Her lack of reaction the first time he turned to look directly at her and said ‘marhoum Massoud Rajavi’, shows that she didn’t catch what had been said. The second time the penny dropped, as did her smile. Clearly Turki had not consulted the MEK in advance on the content of his speech. And if he had made a mistake there was plenty of time afterwards to correct it. He didn’t.

So, what does this mean? Is Massoud Rajavi dead? And if so, why doesn’t his wife know, or if she does, why not say so? More importantly, why did Prince Tuki make this announcement in public during the most important event of the MEK?

Although Saudi support for the MEK goes back to the time of Saddam Hussein, the relationship was never made public. (Indicatively, the MEK have used Al Arabiya as their mouthpiece for years and much more in recent months.) Analysts have surmised that Prince Turki attended the MEK rally in order to publicly announce himself the new owner of the group.

After the fall of Saddam Hussein, the MEK needed new backers. Massoud Rajavi sold the services of his group to the Israelis, the neoconservatives and of course to Saudi Arabia. This is why we saw the MEK used during the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran. Once agreement was reached their anti-Iran rhetoric shifted towards human rights abuses. Unfortunately for MEK backers the group has history in this respect, with Human Rights Watch and the RAND Corporation revealing human rights and cultic abuses taking place inside the MEK. As a fake opposition, the group is so reviled by Iranians that it has even attracted its own opposition!

With the rise of Daesh and other violent gangs and groups in Syria and Iraq, the MEK found new opportunities. Maryam Rajavi made overtures to the Syrian Free Army. It looked for a while as though the MEK would be able to use a new base in Albania – to which its ageing, but deeply radicalised fighting force in Camp Liberty, Iraq are currently being transferred – as a facilitating camp. The idea was to provide training and logistics to newer terrorist groups from a country on the edge of Europe but close to the Middle East. This was blocked when Albanian experts exposed it on national television.

Events in the Middle East have shifted. Saudi Arabia has come to the fore and covert threats of military conflict against Iran are an open secret in the region. But after being left in the cold by the United States, the Saudis have had to search for other allies in this venture. While Turki knows very well the MEK is nothing more than a propaganda machine and irritant for Iran, this is apparently better than nothing.

Turki’s appearance at the rally signals that whoever was handling Rajavi previously – presumably western intel services – have handed him over to the Saudis as they did in 1986 when Rajavi was expelled from France and handed over to Saddam Hussein to help his war effort against Iran.

Massoud Rajavi, being as naïve as he is, thought he would retain the old masters and work on new projects for the Saudis. Instead, MEK experts believe that Maraym Rajavi will have understood Turki’s message as this: ‘There are no old masters, they are all gone. It is only me. And Saudi intel will not treat you like Saddam did. At that time you had a fighting force in Iraq ready to attack Iran. Now your only use is as a propaganda outlet. Nor will we treat you with the leniency that the Israelis or UK or US have shown. And so that you understand your position as our slave I have just announced your husband’s death. Now, forget about disobeying my commands. His actual death can easily be arranged at any time’.

Whether Rajavi is already dead or now killable is not known – only he can answer this – but he and his whole organisation are certainly now, body and soul, in the capable hands of the Saudi Prince. If he is still alive, Rajavi’s only role is to act as go-between to instruct his wife what she must do on behalf of the Saudis. If he is dead, some other operative will easily do instead. The Saudis, like Saddam Hussein, regard women of equal importance to goats and sheep. It would, therefore, be inconceivable they deal directly with her as the so-called feminist leader of a group whose services they are paying for.

Days have now passed since this Grand Controversy erupted. The MEK reaction following the rally was near hysterical. They issued messages in places they would never normally talk to – VOA and BBC Persian – to emphasise beyond doubt that Rajavi is still alive. In spite of this, the MEK has still not been able to actually prove this to be true. Somebody therefore is lying.

The fact is, nobody outside the MEK really cares whether Rajavi is alive or dead. But for his followers the grim reality of their future must by now have sunk in. If the MEK cannot prove – by voice or appearance – that their leader is alive, or proclaim instead that he is actually dead, it means the whole organisation has died. For if they cannot accomplish this simple task, how can they promise regime change?

By Massoud Khodabandeh Director at Middle East Strategy Consultants., huffingtonpost.com

Co-authored by Anne Khodabandeh

July 14, 2016 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Newt Gingrich Pals Around With Terrorists Saddam Hussein Once Armed

Newt Gingrich, who is being vetted to be Donald Trump’s running mate and appeared with the candidate in Cincinnati on Wednesday, left the campaign trail this weekend for an unusual reason. The former speaker of the House had to fly to Paris to appear at a gala celebration for the Mojahedin-e Khalq, or People’s Mujahedin, an Iranian exile group that wants Washington’s backing for regime change in Iran.

In his remarks, Gingrich heaped praise on the MEK’s efforts and congratulated the group on the presence of another dignitary, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a senior member of the Saudi royal family and former head of that nation’s intelligence service.

What Gingrich failed to mention in his enthusiastic endorsement of the MEK, however, is that the Iranian dissidents previously spent three decades trying to achieve their aim through terrorist attacks, and some of their first victims were Americans. He also avoided talking about the fact that the group’s terrorist cell was once based in Iraq, where it was armed and protected by Saddam Hussein.

The timing of Gingrich’s appearance at the MEK gala was awkward for Trump, since the candidate had spent part of the previous week arguing that the late Iraqi dictator, while being “a really bad guy,” deserved some credit because “he killed terrorists.”

“He did that so good,” Trump told supporters in North Carolina on Tuesday. “They didn’t read them the rights; they didn’t talk; they were a terrorist, it was over.”

Four days later, Gingrich reminded the world that Saddam, in fact, had a history of support for terrorist groups like the MEK, whose members helped foment the 1979 revolution, in part by killing American civilians working in Tehran, and then lost a bitter struggle for power to the Islamists. After they were forced to flee Iran in 1981, the MEK’s members set up a government-in-exile in France and established a military base in Iraq, where they were given arms and training by Saddam as part of a strategy to destabilize the theocratic government in Tehran that he was at war with.

In recent years, as The Intercept has reported, the MEK has poured millions of dollars into reinventing itself as a moderate political group ready to take power in Iran if Western-backed regime change ever takes place. To that end, it lobbied successfully to be removed from the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2012. The Iranian exiles achieved this over the apparent opposition of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in part by paying a long list of former United States officials hefty speaking fees of between $10,000 to $50,000 for hymns of praise like the one Gingrich delivered on Saturday in Paris, where the MEK’s political wing held its annual “Free Iran” gala.

But, according to Ariane Tabatabai, a Georgetown University scholar, the “cult-like dissident group,” whose married members were reportedly forced to divorce and take a vow of lifelong celibacy, “has no viable chance of seizing power in Iran”:

If the current government is not Iranians’ first choice for a government, the MEK is not even their last — and for good reason. The MEK supported Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War. The people’s discontent with the Iranian government at that time did not translate into their supporting an external enemy that was firing Scuds into Tehran, using chemical weapons and killing hundreds of thousands of Iranians, including many civilians. Today, the MEK is viewed negatively by most Iranians, who would prefer to maintain the status quo than rush to the arms of what they consider a corrupt, criminal cult.

Despite how little reality there is behind the claim that the MEK’s political wing, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, is a force for democratic change, Gingrich was joined at the group’s gala in Paris by a bipartisan group of former U.S. officials, including former U.N. ambassadors John Bolton and Bill Richardson, a former attorney general, Michael Mukasey, the former State Department spokesperson P.J. Crowley, the former Homeland Security Adviser Frances Townsend, the former Congressman Patrick Kennedy, and the former Vermont governor Howard Dean. The gala was even hosted by Linda Chavez, a former Reagan administration official who has loudly opposed Donald Trump’s nomination.

As Gingrich noted, however, perhaps the most important speaker at the MEK gathering this year was the Saudi royal, Prince Turki al-Faisal.

Although the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran is not new, Prince Turki’s speech to the dissident group seemed like a departure to many Iranians, not least because it was marked by the bizarre spectacle of the Iranian exiles interrupting his address to chant, in Arabic: “Al Shaab Yureed Isqat al-Nitham!” — “The People Demand the Fall of the Regime!”

Video of this moment, broadcast on Al-Arabiya, the Saudi-owned satellite news channel, showed Prince Turki respond: “I, too, want the fall of the regime.”

The comment, an open call for regime change in Tehran from a Saudi royal, struck Iranian journalists and activists as a turning point. It was also deeply ironic, given that the chant was used in the pro-democracy protests across the Middle East in 2011 that Saudi Arabia fought so hard to repress.

By Robert Mackey – the Intercept

July 13, 2016 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Love is forbidden and ground for punishment in the Cult of Rajavi

Since the so called “ideological revolution” in the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO) in the 1980s, relationships and emotions have been destroyed. Rajavi’s “ideological revolution” forced members to divorce their spouses and eventually to forget their families. A few years later, Rajavi sent all children outside the group’s camps.

Thus, in the isolated camps of the group, children were no more with the parents, ex- couples could no more think of each other, brothers and sisters could no more visit each other except for a short time in the new year celebration and under the supervision of the group authorities.

Love is unheard of in the cult of Rajavi. The only kind of love that is not only permitted but also obligatory is the love for leader. All members should kill the love of their children, family and ex-spouses in their hearts, instead they should grow the love of their leader in their mind. Female members should consider Massoud Rajavi as their only love, their only husband!

As the individuals who are taken as hostages in the Cult of Rajavi do not have any access to the outside world, they are not able to contact their families outside the group.

Despite the efforts made by families of the MKO’s hostages to visit their loved ones in the group’s camp, the group authorities use all types of tactics to keep members far from families demonizing families as spies of the Iranian Intelligence Ministry!

Love is a variety of different feelings, states and attitudes that ranges from interpersonal affection to pleasure. The hostages in the MKO Cult are deprived from all of these interpersonal affections, feelings and pleasures. They are just indoctrinated to idolize their leader, Massoud Rajavi.

Love is one of the most profound emotions known to human beings and this deep relationship is one of the meaningful elements in the life of human beings. Love provides people with a source of deep fulfilment. The MKO leader has tried hard to shallow this source of fulfilment and to alternate it with an absolute obedience to himself.

Therefore, living in the cult of Rajavi requires denial of the love for your spouse, children, relatives and friends. Besides, caring about love make the cult member accountable for punishment. The punishment in the MKO ranges from self-criticism report writing, peer pressure, being humiliates by superior members and peers, psychological and even physical torture.

In case that family of an MKO hostage try too much to contact their loved one in the MKO camp, the hostage is indoctrinated to write a statement against his or her family. This might be the harshest punishment for a person who thinks of love!

Mazda Parsi

July 11, 2016 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

The late Iraqi dictator did kill many thousands of people—but very few were terrorists

(Benjamin served as Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. State Department 2009-2012. He is director of The John Sloan Dickey Center for International Understanding at Dartmouth College)

Donald Trump is, by his own admission, “like, a really smart person,” and someone who has “a very good brain,”

Trump, roughly: Saddam Hussein was thiiiiiiiiis good at killing terrorists.

but he don’t know much about history. His remarks this week—and on multiple other occasions—about Saddam Hussein’s skill at counterterrorism are a reminder of this.

“He was a bad guy—really bad guy,” Trump opined during a rally in North Carolina. “But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights. They didn’t talk. They were terrorists. Over.”

Hussein, it is true, killed a lot of people. The estimates run into the hundreds of thousands, and he murdered in a variety of appalling ways: He had his victims shot, gassed, blown up, beheaded and even torn apart by wild animals. And while all of his victims had excellent reasons for not liking life under the longtime Iraqi dictator, almost none were terrorists. On the contrary, terrorists in Iraq were mostly honored guests and worked at the regime’s behest.

Thousands of terrorists called Iraq home, and their organizations had the blood of Israelis, Turks, Iranians and Europeans from numerous countries on their hands. Among the killers were members of the Palestine Liberation Front, the Arab Liberation Front, the Kurdish PKK, the Iranian Mujahidin e-Khalq and the Abu Nidal Organization. Saddam promised to pay the families of suicide bombers who killed Israelis for their deeds. It is true that he despised jihadists and had nothing to do with al Qaeda, but that hardly diminishes his record. Not for nothing, Iraq was among the first batch of countries designated by Washington as state sponsors of terror in 1979.

Perhaps Trump has information that is not widely available, but only one case of a terrorist being killed in Iraq comes readily to mind: the death of Abu Nidal. Before Osama bin Laden came along, Nidal—also known as Sabry al Banna—was widely considered the most vicious terrorist alive. He worked, by turns, for the Syrians, the Libyans and the Iraqis, engineered notorious airport massacres in 1985 in Rome and Vienna, and ultimately was credited with some 900 deaths and injuries.

Nidal was a particular favorite of Hussein, who employed him for assassinations and other wet-work from the beginning of his career in the 1970s. But as rumors of an approaching war with the United States swirled in the August of 2002, Hussein is said to have worried that Nidal, who lived in Baghdad, might be working for the U.S. Though Hussein might also have decided that as Washington was making its case for action against Iraq, Nidal was a non-essential burden. Iraqi press accounts afterward that said Nidal committed suicide and that he had multiple gunshot wounds. Perhaps that was what Trump was thinking when he applauded Hussein for killing terrorists “so good.” But the bigger picture of Iraq’s ties with Abu Nidal begs the question of whether the end was the most important part of this relationship.

It also seems to have slipped by Trump that the Iraqi dictator often used his own intelligence service to stage terrorist attacks. The best known case got more than a little press because it involved an effort to kill a former American president. In April 1993, shortly after leaving office, George H.W. Bush visited Kuwait, the country his administration liberated from Iraqi occupation. Hussein sought retribution through a car bombing arranged by his intelligence service.

The Kuwaitis uncovered the plot before Bush arrived. Two months later, after the suspects confessed and the full picture of the operation was clear, President Bill Clinton sent 23 Tomahawk cruise missiles into Iraqi intelligence headquarters. It was his administration’s first use of military force.

This was not exactly a hidden chapter in history. Indeed, President George W. Bush reminded everyone in late 2002 that Saddam was “the guy who tried to kill my dad”—a remark that launched countless conjectures about the motivation behind the American march to war in Iraq.

It is odd that Trump seems to have no memory of the incident and odder still that he holds up Hussein as being on the right side of the terrorism issue. Unimpeachable ignorance and no moral compass. Trump does that so good. Over.

By Daniel Benjamin,

July 10, 2016 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts