Articles

Mojahedin Khalq lobbyist Haward Dean refused to disclose his fees

MeK-Paid Officials Blast Deal as ‘Appeasement’

The Mujahedin-e Khalq has been called a lot of things over the years: terrorists, a cult, even (by themselves) a “government-in-exile.” One thing that is undeniable at this point is that they wield considerable influence among US officials past and present, and that lobbying heft is being thrown behind stopping the Iran nuclear deal.

Former Governor Howard Dean (D – VT), a major MeK enthusiast, was among the speech-givers at a recent sponsored “briefing” that condemned the deal, saying any deal must be conditioned on imposing some sort of deal on Iraq to deal with MeK exiles there. Former US Special Envoy Robert Joseph concurred, and blasted the current deal as “appeasement.”

The MeK is putting a lot of effort behind the same Senate sanctions bill that the Israel Lobby is so staunchly behind. The bill would violate the Iran deal by imposing new sanctions, and would effectively kill negotiations.

While the depth of the MeK’s funding of this is, like much of their lobbying, strictly off-the-record (Gov. Dean openly refused to answer questions about how much he was paid for his statement), the group appears to still envision itself being the benefactors of US-imposed regime change in Iran, and is willing to pull out all the stops to see to it that diplomacy does not succeed and rapprochement remains impossible.

By : Jason Ditz

February 1, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

US should not sabotage diplomacy with Iran

The Geneva interim accord over Iran’s nuclear program signed on November 24 last year was a landmark development in the course of Iran’s relations with other countries, especially the United States, with which it directly negotiated at a high-level for the first time since the Islamic Revolution in 1979.

According to the agreement known as the Joint Plan of Action, Iran will voluntarily limit certain portions of its nuclear activities, in return for relief from some of the sanctions imposed against Iran in the recent years, including the petrochemical and automobile industry sanctions. The P5+1 group(Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States) have also agreed to release $4.2 billion of Iran’s frozen assets, lift the ban on Iran’s gold trade, refrain from restricting its oil exports and allow the sale of civilian aircrafts’ spare parts to Iran.

Aside from the fact that the agreement signaled a revival of Iran’s economy that was somewhat troubled under the biting international sanctions, it also opened up new horizons for political and diplomatic cooperation between Iran and the international community and provided opportunities for the resuscitation of Iran’s marred relations with the United States and the European Union.

It was immediately following the conclusion of this important agreement that the Western officials, diplomats and parliamentarians began to enthusiastically travel to Iran one after the other to hold talks with their Iranian counterparts, exchange views with them and explore the possibilities of future cooperation with Tehran and bringing to an end the longstanding standoff between Iran and the West.

Delegations from the European Parliament, Italian Senate, German Bundestag, Mexican Chamber of Duties, Irish House of the Oireachtas and UK House of Lords and the foreign ministers of several countries came to Iran, and as reported by the Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, it’s expected that prominent officials will be traveling to Iran in the coming weeks, including the Swedish and Polish foreign ministers, a parliamentary delegation from Romania and a group of Canadian lawmakers. In the diplomatic culture, such exchanges and communications signify the importance of bilateral and multilateral relations and indicate the foreign policy priorities of different countries.

In the wake of these determining developments that seem to be quite vital for the future of Iran’s foreign policy and its international standing, a group of hawkish U.S. Senators unexpectedly came up with the plan of introducing a bill that will impose new sanctions against Iran and will even oblige the U.S. government to give logistical support to Israel in case the Tel Aviv regime decides to launch a military strike against Iran.

S.1881, the “Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act of 2013,” was introduced by Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), a Republican Senator and former member of the House from Illinois. It’s noteworthy that of the 59 Senators supporting the bill, 16 ones are Democrats.

When it was first reported that the 100-member Senate will be giving the green light to the bill to impose a new round of sanctions against Iran, even the U.S. government officials were disturbed and frightened, because the deal that was signed with Iran after several days of intensive talks in Geneva, and more importantly after some 10 years of inconclusive negotiations, was not something trivial or insignificant which could be overlooked that easily with the obduracy and adamancy of a group of pro-Israeli Senators.

The White House immediately rushed to denounce the call by the Senators to pass the new sanctions and President Obama, likewise, said he will certainly veto any new sanctions that will derail the negotiations with Iran. “Imposing additional sanctions now will only risk derailing our efforts to resolve this issue peacefully, and I will veto any legislation enacting new sanctions during the negotiation,” said Barack Obama in a statement released by the White House.

Following the remarks made by the U.S. President, the Senate minority leader Harry Reid also announced that he will not allow the bill to reach the Senate floor. Any legislation in the 100-member Senate needs at least 67 votes to be able to override the president’s veto, and with the withdrawal of the Democrat signatories, it will not have any chances of being realized.

However, the very fact that there are some lawmakers and politicians in the United States, who contrary to the commitments entrusted to Washington by virtue of the Joint Plan of Action, are still pushing for new sanctions against Iran is alarming and upsetting. One of the commitments made by the United States and the five other countries talking to Iran is for them to refrain from imposing new unilateral or multilateral sanctions against Iran during the 6 months of the implementation of the interim accord, and after that during the talks for bringing forth the comprehensive agreement. So, any new sanctions by the EU or the United States would be a violation of the terms of the Geneva agreement, a deal-breaker action and will eventually force Iran into revising its approach toward the talks.

Like as the Geneva agreement has critics in Europe the United States who believe that the wave of sanctions should continue to be directed against Iran and there should be no removal of the sanctions until the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program in its entirety, the deal has its own critics in Iran, as well, who believe that the United States and its European allies cannot be trustable partners and holding talks with them will be fruitless and full of loopholes.

President Rouhani and his diplomatic team have a relatively hard job convincing and satisfying the domestic critics and opponents who dissuade the administration from sitting with the United States at the negotiation table, and the imposition of new sanctions will simply further complicate the situation for him. The critics of President Rouhani that include some lawmakers, journalists and public speakers say that the black background of the U.S. interventions in Iran’s internal affairs, its support for the 1953 coup against the government of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, its support for Saddam Hussein during the 8-year war, its sponsorship of MKO and Jundallah terrorist cults against the civilians and its policy of sanctions and military threats against Iran have all made it an unreliable negotiating partner and insincere interlocutor. They say when Iran was cooperating with the United States on the security of Afghanistan, the former U.S. President George W. Bush dubbed Iran as part of an “axis of evil”, and so the future of cooperation with the U.S. would be unclear.

President Rouhani and his team argue that Iran and the international community should move towards reconciliation and putting aside the disputes and the acrimonies of the past in order to solve the nuclear standoff once for all. Acknowledging the arguments of their domestic critics, they also concede that the continuation of the nuclear controversy is in nobody’s interests, so in order to find a sustainable solution for this controversy, both Iran and the West should forget about the bitter memories they have of each other, and negotiate in good faith, on an equal footing and based on mutual respect.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif has several times reiterated that Iran’s negotiations with the P5+1 are simply limited to the nuclear issue, and this is how the Iranian government has decided to address the concerns of those inside Iran who believe that Iran should not show leniency toward the United States, a country which has already demonstrated its unconditional animosity and hostility toward Iran well over the past three decades.

But the hawkish, extremist figures in the U.S. political sphere, whether in the government, the Congress or the media, should carefully note that the door for diplomacy would not always remain open, and the chances to reach for a categorical, definite resolution of the decade-long nuclear controversy are limited.

They should pay attention to the fact that President Rouhani’s administration has embarked on a very sensitive endeavor for directly talking to the United States, which many people inside Iran don’t think of positively. Any new sanctions against Iran under any baseless pretext would mean a violation of the Geneva agreement, the termination of its implementation and possibly an end to the long-sought talks. A peaceful and diplomatic resolution of the nuclear controversy would be beneficial to all parties, and will immensely contribute to regional peace and security. These pro-Israeli Senators who are certainly fueled and empowered by Tel Aviv should come to the understanding that pleasing Netanyahu and Shimon Peres at the expense of the interests of their own people and the people of the world is not a logical or relevant decision. Somebody should ask them not to kill the unprecedented chances that have emerged for a peaceful and viable diplomacy with Iran.

By Kourosh Ziabari

AB/AB

Kourosh Ziabari is an award-winning Iranian journalist, media correspondent and peace activist. He has interviewed several prominent politicians, university professors, academics and media personalities. His articles and interviews have appeared on publications in Iran and across the world. He has won a presidential award in the National Iranian Youth Festival and three awards in Iran’s national press festival. His papers have been presented at conferences in Canada, Italy, Turkey and Czech Republic. He is a graduate of English language and literature and was the member of World Student Community for Sustainable Development.” You can visit his website at www.kouroshziabari.com.

January 27, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MEK lobbyist Menendez under investigation again for corruption

Report: Feds probe Bob Menendez on Ecuador banker links

FBI agents are reportedly looking into Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez’s dealings with two fugitive Ecuadorean bankers, according to a New York City TV station.

WNBC in New York — citing anonymous sources — reported on Thursday evening that the New Jersey senator contacted the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department on behalf of W illiam and Roberto Isaias Dassum. The brothers are fighting extradition to Ecuador over charges that they allegedly embezzled tens of millions of dollars from the country’s largest bank before it failed and had to be rescued by the Ecuadorean government.

The brothers were convicted in absentia in 2012, but a Florida court refused to allow the Ecuadorean government to seize $20 million in assets the Dassums held in the United States. Ecuador has already confiscated $400 million worth of property owned by the brothers back home, including media companies

According to WNBC, Menendez contacted Homeland Security in April 2012 on the brothers’ behalf.

WNBC said family members of the fugitives donated $10,000 to Menendez’s successful 2012 relection campaign, as well as $100,000 to the Democratic Party.

Menendez is already the subject of a federal criminal probe into his dealings with Dr. Salomon Melgen, a close friend and financial backer.

Menendez reportedly intervened with federal officials on behalf of Melgen, who was being investigated for reportedly overbilling Medicare by $9 million for eye treatments.

Melgen and his family have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Menendez and other Democrats during the past 15 years, federal campaign disclosure records show.

Melgen also gave $700,000 in 2012 to a Democratic super PAC that spent heavily in support of Menendez’s reelection campaign.

The criminal investigation into Melgen and Menendez has dragged on for more than a year with no charges against either man, but this latest report puts Menendez back into scandal mode.

Menendez’s office criticized the WNBC report as based on anonymous sources, and added that Menendez “was not aware” of any criminal probe into his interactions with the Dassum brothers.

“A year after a false smear campaign was launched against Sen. Menendez, once again we see anonymous sources making outlandish allegations,” said Tricia Enright, a Menendez spokeswoman. “Our office works each year with literally hundreds of individuals and families from across the country who are seeking help with the immigration process. We review each and every request we receive, and if we feel any inquiry is appropriate, we make it.”

Enright added: “In this particular case, Senator Menendez believed the Isaias family had been politically persecuted in Ecuador, including through the confiscation of media outlets they owned which were critical of the government. We are not aware of any inquiry into the senator’s actions on this matter.”

JOHN BRESNAHAN, Politico

January 26, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Historic deal is working despite MKO-AIPAC- led obstructions

The U.S. Treasury Department on Monday suspended some of its sanctions against Iran, after the Islamic Republic began halting some of its nuclear activity as part of the historic deal with P5+1. Historic deal is working despite MKO-AIPAC- led obstructions

The U.S. Treasury said hours following news of the Iranian move that it has suspended sanctions on foreigners engaged in transactions related to Iran’s oil exports, and some trade in gold and precious metals.

As nuclear deal takes effect easing international sanctions in exchange for slowing Iran’s nuclear work, and buying time for a more comprehensive deal seems to be a horrible nightmare for the pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and the Mujahedin Khalq terror cult that have been lobbying members of Congress to keep the pressure on Iran. Attempting to make them pass extra sanctions against Islamic Republic their ultimate aim is definitely a violent regime change in Tehran.

Maryam Rajavi the self-claimed president of the National Council of Resistance the propaganda wing of the MKO, visiting a few French sponsors of the group blamed the West for its "erroneous policies" towards Islamic Republic. "They must compel the mullahs to shut down their nuclear sites completely", she said.

The MKO and Israel as well as Arabic states of the Persian Gulf claim that the nuclear deal with Iran will not work. Indeed, these Middle Eastern allies of the West are mostly worried about the opposite effect of the nuclear accord; they panic it might work!

Regarding the MKO, its role in the relations and equations between Iran and the West is so trivial that the cult leader strives hard to create tension between the two sides more and more in order to achieve the least support they can gain. The MKO’s only means to survive is to convince the West that the proverb "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is symbolized in supporting a cult of personality with the darkest and dirtiest background of violence and crime against Iranian nation.

The MKO’s anti-Iranian substance is also demonstrated in the large-scale well-funded lobbying by the group in the US Congress to increase sanctions against Iranian people who are already suffering the outcome of the previously imposed sanctions. Senator Robert Menendez was the key MKO lobbyist in US Congress to pass legislation that as stated in Menendez’s press release its goal was “the complete and verifiable termination of Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program”.

The MKO’s lobbying efforts to launch another war against Iran was seen as a deal-breaker by the Obama administration. Although the group’s efforts to undermine improvements in Iran-West relations do not seem to be influential, one thing is verified, the Mujahedin Khalq Organization is never the representative of the Iranian nation but its true enemy.

Mazda Parsi

January 26, 2014 0 comments

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest – 38

++ UNAMI published its Half Yearly Report on Human Rights for January to June 2013. Section 11.1 covered Camp New Iraq (Camp Ashraf) and Camp Hurriya (Camp Liberty). The report points out that the “UNHCR’s efforts to find durable solutions for the residents have been hindered by the non-cooperation of residents, such as the boycotting of UNHCR interviews.” It goes on to say, “UNAMI has continuing concerns about human rights abuses committed by the PMOI/MeK leadership within Camp Hurriya against the residents. These claims have been made to United Nations Monitors during interviews with residents who had managed to leave Camp Hurriya, as well as in a number of private discussions with residents who still reside in the Camp – despite the leadership’s attempts to prevent such discussions. The PMOI/MeK, which has a hierarchical and authoritarian structure, imposes a number of severe restrictions on the residents’ rights, including the right of freedom of movement within the Camp and the right to leave the organization, the free right of association, along with restrictions on contacts with family members (including those residing in Camp Hurriya), on access to basic communications, and on access to medical care and treatment.”

++ This week in Baghdad, Dr Nafeh Issa, a prominent political and human rights activist, says some MPs have shown him evidence that some groups of MPs who still have Saddamist affiliations have been meeting in Jordan with representatives of the MEK. During these meetings the MEK promised unlimited financial backing by the Saddamists in Jordan – the Izzat Ebrahim branch and Saddam’s daughter – in return for the promise that if they are re-elected they will help the MEK to stay in Iraq and get Ashraf camp back to be used as the HQ for their mutual political benefits and activities. The MEK have given examples of how they have been able to financially support and push their own candidates into the European Parliament and the US House of Representatives, etc.

++ Adnan Al Mayahi, MP in Baghdad, member of the security and defence commission in parliament, announced that fresh evidence has shed more light on the relation between the MEK and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and Al Qaida in the Anbar province. He also criticised western governments saying that they love to have these terrorist organisations but only to use them in countries like ours rather than having them in their own countries. With reference to Ban Ki Moon’s appointment of Jane Holl Lute as his Special Adviser for Relocation of Camp Hurriya Residents Outside of Iraq, Al Mayahi says her appointment doesn’t change anything for my country and the continued presence of terrorists here. Our position is clear and simple, he continues, the MEK have been part and parcel of Saddam’s regime, have massacred Iraqis and after Saddam have become proxies to interfere to endanger our people including support for Al Qaida and ISIL and trying to create corruption in the country.

++ This week the MEK tried to sell the idea that by signing a deal with the West, Iran has drunk poison and will collapse soon. Many Farsi commentators reacted by reminding Rajavi that he has been saying this for over thirty years, but the reality is that the poison that will affect the remains of the MEK is if there is rapprochement between Iran and the West because the West is the only place that was feeding the MEK after the fall of Saddam.

++ There have been several articles about the possibility of moving the whole MEK organisation to Romania and the desire of the Americans to keep them intact and to create a new closed-door camp in that country. Many refer to this as a failed attempt but which, if it does go ahead, will open the doors anyway since if the MEK leave Iraq they will leave the organisation anyway. In example they say that when the MEK arrived in Albania over half separated in first few days of arriving in the country. At present the MEK is desperately trying to prevent them from talking by misusing their financial dependency. Many have contacted Iran Interlink and said the MEK will pay $500 per month on condition that they do not openly criticise the MEK or say what happened to them in the camp, and that they do not talk to the UN about anything nor accept the $200 the UN pays to refugees. They have all pointed out that this situation cannot last as they are all talking privately and the word is spreading anyway, but that out of desperation to feed ourselves we have to agree to this for now. Critics point out that if more people arrive, the MEK will not be able to pay for all of them. In this respect Bahar Irani has mentioned this situation in an article in Mojahedin.ws pointing out that the MEK’s silence over the Romanian case and their lobbyists’ silence and refusal to answer on this issue shows they are seriously worried because they know that just moving them at all will precipitate the collapse of the organisation.

++ Mazda Parsi of Nejat Bloggers has written about the threat which the MEK will pose to the West if the group is relocated to the Balkan region, in particular Romania. Citing various experts and journalists the article concludes with a section from Anna MIKHAILENKO’s piece on the new US plan to move “the Cult of Rajavi” to the Balkans, translated from Russian by the ORIENTAL REVIEW. ““It is obvious that the Mojahedin-e-Khalq is not a peaceful organization” she writes. “In fact, it would be better compared to the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, or Jubhat al-Nusrah, other groups which also enjoyed the tacit support of the United States until they became too unruly.” … MIKHAILENKO warns of the threat of “this army of 3,000 militants” at the door of a tensed region. “Harboring so many fighters so close to Ukraine, a country that has been afflicted with EuroMaidan fever for the past month and a half, could pave the way for any number of coercive scenarios for regime change”, she suggests.”

++ This week there were still a few articles about Massoud Dalili who was killed in Camp Ashraf, asking the UN to push the Pentagon back and allow the witnesses to be questioned and the issue to be fully investigated.

++ A few articles have pointed out that Maryam Rajavi has echoed Netanyahu’s statements about Iran this week. Both of them fear Iran having better relations with the West. Many point out that until only a few days ago Rajavi claimed the deal to be as poison and claimed Iran will die from it. Now it seems they have jumped to order and now that Netanyahu has changed the argument, Rajavi has had to obey and change her tune as well.

++ This week the MEK have tried more than before to praise Saudi Arabia and try to get nearer to the security services of the Kingdom. A few Arabic outlets claim the MEK have had new meeting with Saudi Arabia’s secret services in a bid to start more terrorist activities and bombing in Iraq, Syria and Iran with the promise of more money from the Kingdom. (Note that even at the time of Saddam the MEK got money and backing from Saudi Arabia and had good relations with Wahhabis, Al Qaida and the Saudis.)

++ Ashraf news website reported that former MEK member Mohammad Razzaghi said the MKO has been training some militant groups fighting the Syrian government, including the FSA, on bomb manufacturing, planting and detonation methods, assassination and street war. Razzaghi noted that some MEK leaders have had a series of meetings with the Syrian opposition leaders in France and Jordan and discussed help and assistance to the FSA and a number of other extremist Salafi groups in Syria.

++ There has been reaction to Maryam Rajavi’s attack on disaffected members and internal critics in which she clearly asks them to fight against the ex members. She challenges them by claiming that if you are only critics and not agents of the Iranian regime then you have to expose those who are agents of the regime among yourselves. Mohammad Razzaghi has answered by pointing out that what the critics question is nothing other than what you and your husband have been doing and saying, such as the forced divorces, the separation of the children, and now working with MOSSAD and praising Wahhabis, etc. This is what they are criticising.

++ Parviz Khazai the infamous member of the NCRI in Scandinavia has yet again come out with an article swearing at the internal critics of the MEK. He refers specifically to Atefeh Eghbal but without naming her, calling her “that oik” and trying to discredit her by claiming she only wants to be famous. Khazai himself first worked for the Shah and after the revolution switched to the Islamic Republic as civil servant before being bought by Rajavi to become a low paid, low level lobbyist. There are many examples of his immoral and degenerate behaviour, visiting prostitutes and being found drunk in the street. Even inside the MEK he is known as a man with no dignity.

++ Hadi Afshar, (Said Jamali), has published a note about his experiences in Geneva with the MEK attacking and threatening to kill him. He briefly details how Rajavi’s ideology and his teachings have created these kinds of murderous thugs. He warns Rajavi, even if you kill a few of us as you do in Ashraf and Liberty, you will never get rid of all of us and there will always be enough people to expose you and there is no way you can evade justice.

++ The MEK have held their so-called National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) meeting in Paris. Hojjat Seyed Ismaili, an ex Intel officer of MEK and former Central Leadership Council member, has written a short note in Irandidban website titled, ‘Useless members of the NCRI and the boring rants of the Mojahedin Khalq’. He says that their announcements claim they have discussed and talked about the economy of Iran and the effect of the reduction of the subsidies and also about international events surrounding the Middle East etc. Islmaili asks, should they not talk more about their immediate problems such as why they did not evacuate Camp Ashraf until 53 of them had been killed and only then were they ready to come out. Why did they go on hunger strike for over 100 days, why did they stop and what happened to their demands. Wouldn’t they want to ask who is Massoud Dalili and why did he end up in the camp with his face burned beyond recognition. Why don’t they ask about the alliance between the MEK, the ISIL and Al Qaida. Don’t they want to find a solution for the desperate 3000 people in Camp Liberty. Why don’t the MEK give the names of the injured to their families. Wouldn’t they want to know from their leaders why he or she have never mentioned the need to transfer these people to third countries; leaders who are afraid of even saying it. Why are the MEK engaged in the internal politics of Iraq and Syria and have not been engaged in Iran for at least a decade. In this meeting Maryam Rajavi has announced that whoever asks for the names of the injured are all agents of the regime who are trying to find out the exact situation on the ground so as to discover where to aim their missiles next time. Many others who wrote on this affair criticised the members of the NCRI for sitting there passively and not asking ‘what on earth are you talking about?’

++ There are reports from inside both Camp Liberty and Auvers-sur-Oise that there is a ban on questioning and that any questioner will be severely punished. Absolutely forbidden is to ask: 1. why didn’t we leave Ashraf before the attack and why, after giving so much resistance, did we then accept to leave? 2. Was Rajavi in the camp when it was attacked? 3. Why did we stop the hunger strike after 108 days and why have you stopped pursuing what happened to the allegedly missing seven who you say are being held by the Iraqis? 4. Should we stay in Iraq or go? 5. What happened to those who left Iraq, what happened to those who went to Albania and who is going to leave next? Asking any of these questions is forbidden on the grounds that if these things are talked about it will give information to the enemy and therefore the questioner is an agent of the Iranian regime and has no other motivation but this to help the regime attack us again.

24 January 2014

January 25, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Mr. Obama’s Iran problem

Congress is not helping the president deal with the Islamic Republic

NEAR the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, his inner circle twice debated whether diplomacy or American air strikes were the best way to stop Middle Eastern foes from building a nuclear bomb. In both debates, involving Syria and Iran respectively, Robert Gates, the defence secretary, argued that Mr Bush could afford to try talking first without sacrificing his credibility. “I suspect no one in the world doubts this administration’s willingness to use force,” Mr Gates told Mr Bush in 2007, with more than a touch of understatement.

Now Iran is again causing angst in Washington. Barack Obama faces acute, bipartisan scepticism in Congress, after his envoys joined other world powers in brokering an interim nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic. This is due to take effect on January 20th, easing international sanctions in exchange for slowing Iran’s nuclear work, and buying time for a more comprehensive deal. At the time of writing 59 of 100 senators say they back a proposal to hold extra sanctions over Iran’s head, despite warnings from Mr Obama that if Congress votes for new sanctions Iran may abandon the talks. That means Senate sceptics are not far from the two-thirds majority they need to override Mr Obama’s threat of a veto. (The Republican-controlled House of Representatives strongly backs tougher sanctions, either because members think the Iranians are bluffing about walking out, or because their favoured Iran strategy involves regime change.) Team Obama has let rip, asserting that passing new sanctions—even ones whose bite is suspended—will wreck talks, shatter international unity over Iran and trigger a “march toward war”. A National Security Council staffer said that if some members of Congress want military action against Iran, “they should be upfront with the American public and say so.”

Some of the forces at work have changed little since 2007. Friends such as Israel and allies such as Saudi Arabia still believe that Iran is a rogue power that will always break nuclear promises. Many members of Congress sincerely loathe Iran’s regime, partly because it sponsors terrorism and tortures dissidents, but also, perhaps, because of a sense that Iran bested America in the battle for influence in post-Saddam Iraq. If the Iranian government of President Hassan Rohani presents a smiling face to the world, many American lawmakers see that as a trick or as a sign that existing tough sanctions have worked, making it imperative to keep a boot on the regime’s neck, while reminding Iran that fresh cheating will be punished.

Another constant is domestic politics, especially in a mid-term election year. An influential pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has been lobbying members of Congress to keep the pressure on Iran. So have members of the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (often known by the Persian acronym MEK), a group with a violent past whose opposition to the Iranian regime has nonetheless earned it allies in Congress. Lastly, cynicism remains a lodestar. Democratic leaders in the Senate are not rushing to put plans for extra sanctions to a vote, and insiders say that suits some senators very well. For such opportunists, co-sponsoring a sanctions bill that goes nowhere is an ideal outcome: it avoids hard foreign-policy trade-offs, while warding off attack ads that call them soft on Iran.

Yet at least one big thing is new: a widespread belief, certainly among Republicans, that Mr Obama is in exactly the opposite position to Mr Bush. Plenty of people in the world doubt his willingness to use force, even to prevent Iran from building a nuclear bomb on his watch. If Congress is willing to risk scuppering talks with Iran at this early stage, a big part of the explanation is that Mr Obama is suffering a crisis of presidential credibility. That crisis dates back, most acutely, to his failure to secure congressional approval for promised strikes on Syria for using chemical weapons. Put bluntly, Washington critics think Mr Obama talks endlessly and wields only sticks small enough to be delivered by drone.

Putin and Assad take him seriously

Obama supporters inside and outside government offer two big counter-arguments about credibility. First, they offer a different interpretation of what happened over Syria last year. At the very moment that Washington was focused on Mr Obama’s apparent weakness, they say, the people who counted—Presidents Bashar Assad of Syria and Vladimir Putin of Russia—found talk of American strikes credible enough—and frightening enough—to dismantle Syria’s chemical arsenal.

Second, it is argued, when such allies as the Saudis or Israelis talk about American credibility, they often mean that they want American troops to fight and die to advance their own foreign- policy interests. In their bleakest moods, American officials accuse the Gulf monarchies of being willing to hold the coats of the last American soldiers to fall on their behalf, but not much more.

In public, Israel and the Gulf monarchies say their fear is that a nuclear deal with Iran cannot work. In private, Obama-backers suggest, such Middle Eastern allies are almost as frightened of the opposite outcome: that a nuclear accord might work, paving the way for Iran to resume its pre-revolutionary role as a Shia regional power and a counterweight to the influence of the mostly-Sunni Gulf monarchies. There are few signs of Congress pondering these questions very hard. “There aren’t five senators who have really thought through what it means for the geopolitical balance of power, if we do reach a [nuclear] deal,” growls a senior figure on Capitol Hill.

Much simpler for Congress to cover its back while planning for failure. Overall, Mr Obama’s handling of foreign policy is far from flawless: his approach to Syria is a mess, for instance. But with Iran he is right to try talking, not least because international unity has probably peaked. He could do with more help at home—but is unlikely to get it.

January 21, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

The threat of MKO in Balkan

The relocation of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization from Iraqi has been a problematic issue from the very start phase. Although the process started near a year ago it has been rather slowly and it has faced different frustrations whether by the group leaders or by the host countries. Leaders of the MKO seek to relocate the group as a whole body in order to prevent the collapse of the cult-like structure of the group while third countries hesitate to accept a crowd of 3000 militants with a dark background of violent acts and cult-like attitudes.

Albania was the first country in the Southeast Europe that accepted to receive 210 residents of Camp Liberty. The United States welcomed the Government of Albania’s "generous offer". However, the move has not been accomplished yet. [1]

Germany was another European country to accept members of the MKO but it did not agree to accept more than 97 individuals. German authorities ordered to relocate 77 of these people in Koln but the decision was disputed by the officials of the city, according to German newspaper, Kolner Stadt –Anzeiger. [2]

The United States is now planning to move 3000 members of the MKO from Iraq to Romania — again in Balkan region. According to the Romanian Foreign Ministry employees the U.S. State Secretary and the Romanian Foreign Minister discussed the issue of militants’ migration during the meeting in Brussels in early December. This time the US seems to seek to compactly resettle the group members near the city of Craiova. [3]

Ilya Kharlamov of the Voice of Russia believes that by such mass relocation "Washington may turn Romania into a hotbed of tension, which will prove quite a headache both to Romania proper and the neighboring countries." The VOR’s correspondent suggests that the action on the US plan is fraught with danger quoting an expert with the Moscow-based Institute for Strategic Studies and Analysis, Sergei Demidenko: "A transfer of a large group of people, drilled ideologically and militarily, to an unstable European area will clearly add no quiet to the area."[4]

Besides, another Russian expert in Oriental Studies Boris Dolgov considers the US plan as inappropriate. He told VOR," If the Romanian leaders have certain doubts, and they will certainly question the correctness of the decision, then they should stiffly oppose the move." Pointing to terrorist history of the MKO he added, ”The US plan is at variance with the recent trend towards improving relations between Washington and Tehran.” [5]

The author of the VOR article puts the responsibility on the Romanian Government that is free to accept or refuse to persecute the US plan and warns on the risk of the presence of "well-trained fighters" of the MKO in the unstable situation of the neighboring Ukrain.

Anna MIKHAILENKO’s piece on the new US plan to move "the Cult of Rajavi” to Balkan was translated from Russian by the ORIENTAL REVIEW. She also criticized the US for delisting the MKO in 2012 and "trying to move militants from this group out of Iraq and closer to sites that are being readied for future armed hostilities."[6]

"It is obvious that the Mojahedin-e-Khalq is not a peaceful organization" she writes. "In fact, it would be better compared to the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, or Jubhat al-Nusrah, other groups which also enjoyed the tacit support of the United States until they became too unruly." [7]

MIKHAILENKO warns on the threat of "this army of 3,000 militants" at the door of an tensed region. "Harboring so many fighters so close to Ukraine, a country that has been afflicted with EuroMaidan fever for the past month and a half, could pave the way for any number of coercive scenarios for regime change", she suggests. [8]

Is it really worth to maintain the supremacy of a cult like terrorist group by risking the peace in an already-tensioned area? Will Romania buy the danger of receiving "Saddam’s Private Army" the MKO to the cost of appeasing the US?

By: Mazda Parsi

References:

[1] Psaki, Jen, Thirty MEK Camp Hurriya Residents Depart Iraq for Relocation to Albania, US Press Statement, June 3, 2013

[2]https://www.nejatngo.org/en/posts/5423

[3]Martov, Delyan, U.S. to move 3000 MKO terrorists to Romania, Sofia, December25,2013

[4] Voice of Russia, US to flood Romania with terrorists, January 10, 2014

[5]ibid

[6]MIKHAILENKO , Anna , Is the US preparing to stash 3,000 terrorists near the Ukrainian border? ,Orientalreview, January 11,2014

[7]ibid

[8]ibid

January 20, 2014 0 comments

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest

Iran Interlink Weekly Digest – 37

++ In a press statement, US Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa, embarrassingly refers to Maryam Rajavi as ‘Maryam’ as though the two are BFF, and describes the woman responsible for thousands of deaths as a human rights advocate. Ros-Lehtinen then goes on to, unintentionally perhaps, reveal that her best use of the MEK is as a stick to beat the government of Iraq and the UN with. While careful not to attribute blame to the GOI – as do the MEK – for the September attack on Camp Liberty she declared ,”These parties – the Government of Iraq and the UN – made promises of security, but these promises have yet to be fulfilled, as is evidenced by the hundreds of protective T-walls that have yet to be installed despite assurances that they would go up and the inability of the parties to bring those accountable to justice.”… While mentioning the seven MEK members allegedly missing from Camp Ashraf Ros-Lehtinen makes no mention of the 42 surviving eye witnesses who are incarcerated incommunicado inside Camp Liberty.

++ Many people on the web this week have joined the demand for the UN to investigate the murder of ex member Massoud Dalili in Camp Ashraf. Evidence is emerging that he was imprisoned there and has more than likely been killed by the MEK and the disfigurement to his body (uniquely among the victims) was an attempt to destroy evidence.

++ This week marked the anniversary of death of Takhti, the legendary wrestler during the reign of the Shah who was widely admired for his sporting ethic and for helping people and charities. Much has been written in Persian against what they describe as the “opportunistic support of Rajavi”, and through examples writers have concluded that there is no relevance between the activities of the cult leaders and their abuse of human rights with Takhti and his passion for humanitarian ethics.

++ Baghdad has officially welcomed the appointment of Ban Ki Moon’s new special representative and her role in moving the MEK out of Iraq. Baghdad said any help in getting rid of this terrorist organisation by anyone and for any reason is most welcome. Observers, however, believe that the sticking point rests with the MEK’s American backers, specifically the Pentagon, who do not want this terrorist organisation to be dismantled. Hence they are trying to move them all together to another closed camp as hostages, something that European countries do not accept.

++ Following on from a revelation in a Bulgarian article earlier this month, both Voice of Russia and 21st Century Wire wrote about attempts by the United States to negotiate the en masse transfer of the residents of Camp Liberty to a new camp in Romania. Russian expert in Oriental Studies Boris Dolgov said “Washington’s plan to deploy the Islamists in Romania is inappropriate at the very least”, and elaborates, “If the Romanian leaders have certain doubts, and they will certainly question the correctness of the decision, then they should stiffly oppose the move. The organization acts against Iran, Tehran sees it as terrorist, Mujahedin-e Khalq is known for numerous terrorist attacks and life attempts. Besides, the US plan is at variance with the recent trend towards improving relations between Washington and Tehran. Also, a presence of Islamic militants will serve to aggravate tension in the region. It’s obvious that peaceful coexistence with the people of other religions is the last thing the Islamists will think of when arriving in Romania”. So far, the US attempts have proved futile, even though Romania heavily depends on Washington.

++ After declaring support for Rajavi and the MEK during announcements for the “Islamic government of Iraq and Syria”, an off-shoot of Al Qaeda which is engaged in fighting the Iraqi Government in Al Anbar province, many have written in Farsi about reasons Rajavi must support Al Qaeda as well as the remnants of the Saddam regime in Iraq and Syria. As much as Rajavi has tried to change master and become a western supported mercenary, until he is in full possession of such support he dare not let go of the vital life saving support he gets from the Saddamists office in Jordan, in particular the Ezzat Ebrahim branch of insurgents and Saddam’s own daughter.

++ This week many have written open letters to Romanian politicians warning them of the formation of a new lobbying committee in their parliament after America started putting pressure on Romania to accept them. Many comparisons have been made with the lobbying committees in the European Parliament and the Houses of Parliament in the UK and the problems they have caused in these establishments’ international relations especially with Iraq.

++ Families of Camp Liberty residents have asked for the names of those injured in the December attack on the camp to be made public. The MEK reacted by labelling the families as ‘agents of Iran’ who want sensitive information. Commentators have responded by pointing out that the injured are in Iraqi hospitals and since Rajavi claims Iraq is a subsidiary of Iran then there is nothing secret for Iran. The families this week have turned to the UN, particularly the UNHCR to ask for their help in discovering the names of the injured.

++ This week Rajavi and the MEK have on a daily basis posted announcements on Facebook and secondary sites rather than in their official sites, warning that the Iraqis want to attack us. In one of these they claim that Iraqi security have climbed the walls of the camp to take pictures. This is while Iraqi forces have been in charge of the camp even before they moved the MEK there. Writers about this are warning that this is another attempt to kill more hostages and blame Iraq for it. Interestingly in all the MEK propaganda there is not a single instance of a demand for getting out of Iraq, instead they and their benefactors in the Israeli lobby and House of Representatives in Washington ask for the expansion of the camp, and demand that the American army be brought in to protect them and all other sorts of peculiar and impossible demands to bide time to kill and get rid of as many people and witnesses as possible.

++ Iraqi media outlets have reported that the British parliamentarians who visited Iran met with the families of MEK terrorism and quote Jack Straw, former British Foreign Secretary, describing the MEK as a terrorist group, while another delegate said it is possible that the MEK be put back on the British terrorism list. Iraqi media also reported on interviews with former high ranking MEK members who have given evidence of the MEK massacre of Kurdish people to quell their uprising against Saddam in the 1990s.

++ Swearing on Rajavi’s paid sites and outlets against their internal critics has continued to the point that many outsiders are now reminding the group that this kind of behaviour against their own members and internal critics cannot be in their favour and the effect of this line of action which was intended to make others afraid of talking is wearing thin and in fact has the opposite effect.

++ It was reported that after Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk visited and spoke directly with members of the MEK in Camp Liberty, the diplomat stressed the urgency of relocating the residents to another country. Since then the MEK have refrained from swearing at the US State Department. but have not mentioned the visit on their sites either. Commentators believe that because the US representative asked them to cooperate and move individually, Rajavi has panicked, and the MEK are now working with AIPAC to intervene and stop them being removed from Iraq and reintegrated into normal society. Many believe that now Rajavi has seen how people have left immediately after arriving in Tirana, he is now determined not to let the rest of the hostages get out of his hands.

17 January 2014

January 18, 2014 0 comments

Human Rights Abuse in the MEK

Rajavi’s absurd claim of equality !

Maryam Rajavi’s claim for promotion of equality in her cult is absurd and ludicrous.

Many argue that the hijab is oppressive to women and removing it would enhance women’s equality and freedom. They argue that veiling prevents and limits women’s activities in public. On the other hand, Muslim believers of hijab argue that It not only makes a woman feel confident and liberated, but encourages society not to see women as sex objects. They believe that Islam promotes sexual equality, and Hijab allows women to be an instrumental part of the society without being discriminated and looked down. Hijab can also prevent men from ogling look. What about Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the Mujahedin Khalq Organization, the MKO as an Islamic Marxist group? What is her stance about hijab?

Actually, Maryam Rajavi’s idea about hijab is very controversial. She claims in her so-called “ten point plan for future of Iran” that women “will enjoy the right to freely choose their clothing”. However, evidences on what is really going on inside her group indicates that there is no freedom of clothing in the MKO camps.

Perhaps, Elizabeth Rubin the New York Times correspondent, was the first to reveal the cult-like atmosphere ruling the MKO camps including uniform clothing of members, in 2003 after she visited Camp Ashraf. Rubin titled the MKO as “The Cult of Rajavi”. “As you pass the checkpoints and dragons’-teeth tire crunchers into the tidy military town, you feel you’ve entered a fictional world of female worker bees. Of course, there are men around; about 50 percent of the soldiers are male”, she recounts. “But everywhere I turned, I saw women dressed in khaki uniforms and mud-colored head scarves, driving back and forth along the avenues in white pickups or army-green trucks, staring ahead, slightly dazed, or walking purposefully, a slight march to their gaits as at a factory in Maoist China.”

Following the collapse of Iraqi dictatorship and the main financial supporter of the MKO in 2003, the US forces disarmed the MKO. Camp Ashraf was since then guarded by the American army. Having been disarmed and guarded by the MKO’s former enemy the US, members started doubting the group’s ideology. Moreover, the group’s leader Masssoud Rajavi was disappeared. The process of defection of members began.

Disassociated members of the MKO –hundreds of individuals—including female members disclosed shocking realities about the life inside MKO camps. They revealed cult-like and suppressive practices of the MKO authorities. The testimonies of women who had left the group exposed cases of forced divorce, forced celibacy, forced hysterectomy surgeries to make female members barren and particularly sexual abuse by Massoud Rajavi.

Among such abusive treatment against female members of the MKO, forced clothing might be very trivial but it certainly proves the invalidity of Maryam Rajavi’s claims about freedom of choosing clothes in future of Iran. Zahra Sadat Mirbaqeri is a defector of the group who was a member of the second layer of the group’s Elite Council. She was a candidate to marry Massoud Rajavi. She was given the famous necklace with the portrait of Massoud. Fortunately she managed to escape the Cult of Rajavi before she was raped by Massoud.

Mirbaqer challenges Maryam Rajavi’s promise to let Iranian women “enjoy the right to freely choose their clothing’’. She recites her firsthand account of living under regulations and obligations of Rajavi’s cult of personality:

“I was a member of this destructive cult for 23 years. I was not allowed to wear any clothes except the khaki uniform and the green head scarf. Forced hijab was ruled everywhere even in places that only belonged to female members…

“In the cult, women are not allowed to use any kind of hijab except green, khaki and red scarves. However, red and khaki scarves are allowed only for special occasions. You would be punished if you wore your red or khaki scarf in occasions other than the group’s propaganda ceremonies and marches.”

Zahra Sadat Mirbaqeri criticizes Maryam Rajavi’s propaganda for freedom of women quoting a renowned sentence that female rank and files of the MKO were always told:” Scarf is the official uniform of the organization.”

Mazda Parsi

January 14, 2014 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

On U.S. plan to transfer 3,000 MKO terrorists to Romania

It’s incredible when one looks behind the scenes of the facade of ‘diplomatic relations’ with the likes of John Kerry masquerading as a globetrotting statesman, mostly enacting damage control in response to the tangled spider’s web of CIA-steered terrorist organizations around the world. “As long as we control them, they’re our terrorists”, or so the mantra goes.

The important concept for our readers to grasp in all of this is that more often than not, countries like the US, Israel, Britain and France, will employ third parties to carry out assassinations on their behalf. The main reasons for this are fairly obvious – to maintain ‘deniability’ should any individual plot be exposed causing an international incident.

Secondly, readers should understand that the US detention facility at Guantanamo Bay has nothing to do with detaining terrorists who threaten America citizens. That was merely the public relations myth which Washington conveniently put forth in the aftermath of 9/11. The true function of Gitmo (and the reason why it has remained open for business for so long) and similar detention facilities worldwide, is to prepare suitably corrupt Islamic extremists and other militants to become double agents before they are sent back into the field. Any detainees who cannot fulfill this purpose for the CIA are either laid to waste in jail, or allowed to ‘expire’.

In 2012, former US Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton , formally removed the Iranian opposition group, PMOI-MEK from its blacklist of designated terror groups. Note that this move by Clinton in 2012 set the stage for this latest bombshell revealed below – where the US appear to be offering some sort of financial incentive to Romania in return for them allowing that Eastern European country to be used as a forward operating base to launch terror attacks globally.

But as you will learn, the story goes back much further than Clinton’s clandestine move to secure this private terror army. Go back to Iraq, and even before, to see the full scope of this US intelligence-controlled terrorist army.

Why maintain such a terrorist force in the region? Answer: to maintain the upper hand in all foreign affairs by controlling and steering the business interests of the worst criminals. Drug-running, human trafficking, smuggling and kidnapping are only some of the lucrative business used to generate black budget cash and grease the skids of corruption in the Middle East and Central Asia.

This latest revelation is also linked to the completely reckless, joint US-Israeli STUXNET/FLAME cyber attack against Iran and Russia’s civilian nuclear power facilities.

Hillary Clinton’s hands are extremely dirty in this regard.

Now the US are wanting to plant these criminal inside Europe. Watch this space…

U.S. to move 3000 MKO terrorists to Romania

21stcenturywire,

January 12, 2014 0 comments