Articles

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

Neglected points in RAND’s report on MEK

RAND National Defense Research Institute Corporation has published a comprehensive report on MEK in 2009. It may be considered the official position taking of the US toward MKO as a supplement to the statements of the US state department in 1997 as well as that of April 2009. All these reports focus on terrorist nature of the organization as a cult of personality. RAND National Defense Research Institute Corporation has published a comprehensive report on MEK in 2009

MEK leader Maryam Rajavi has established a "cult of personality." 1

The fact is that the US has failed to refer to a novel point regarding the organization in these statements yet has reiterated the analyses and viewpoints of separated members as well as political opposition trends that have managed to reveal some facts on the organization for more than two decades. However, the efforts made by the US to develop a realistic comprehension of NKO imply the well-intentioned inclination of the US in investigating the true nature of Mojahedin.

This article aims to elaborate on some ambiguities found in RAND report including the offered solution of repatriating MKO members to Iran. First of all it has to be pointed out that according to international bodies Mojahedin are an unknown group whose understanding depends on learning lessons from past experiences to avert the danger arising from MKO and other similar groups. According to the statements made by the US:

MEK leadership and members across the world maintain the capacity and will to commit terrorist acts in Europe, the Middle East, the United State, Canada, and beyond. 2

Therefore, finding solutions for avoiding the threat of such a terrorist group needs a full investigation. The more unknown an issue, the more study is necessary for its understanding.

Likewise, solutions proposed for escaping the danger of Mojahedin have to be of novel and unique nature. The solutions offered in RAND report are rarely feasible and also some result in the development of the organization. Surprisingly enough, it seems that the authors of the report aim mainly at shifting their own responsibility for providing a clear explanation of the reality onto other organs and bodies; as it was done by the US in neglecting its responsibility for eliminating the risk posed by Mojahedin in Iraqi soil and further putting the responsibility of making the final decision for the organization on the Iraqi government. However, it seems that Americans care not about the illegal actions of Mojahedin in Iraq.

Despite the focus of RAND report on the necessity of prosecuting and trying MKO leaders, it refrains to refer to this issue in its conclusions. It is not clear why the position taking of Iraqi government against MKO has been questioned in this report in spite of the fact that according to the constitution and sovereignty of Iraq, Iraqi government is rightful to maintain the interests of its citizens by fighting against those breaking its national rules. Another point to be noted is the issue of repatriating MKO members to Iran. According to the report:

Each MEK member who has been granted amnesty by the IRI should be repatriated to Iran. 3
A point confirmed by the following statement:

To date, however, there is no evidence that Iran has failed to honor its offer of amnesty for the former MEK members who have already returned to the country.4

However, the authors refuse to refer to the individual, voluntary and willful nature of the repatriation of a number of MKO members to Iran. This claim is made in a condition when the US has already acknowledged to the lack of public support and legitimacy for Mojahedin in Iran:

Following its participation in the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the group rapidly fell out of favor with the Iranian. 5

It is not clear if RAND report has taken a realistic and practical viewpoint when referring to Iran as the main alternative for giving refuge to MKO members. As it is put into words:

All evidence indicates that no country other than Iran will accept the group. 6

The question is that how a group failing to win the support of even one country in taking its members as political refugees suffering a lack of social support may be repatriated to Iran where according to the same report:

However, once it settled in Iraq and fought against Iranian forces in alliance with Saddam, the group incurred the ire of the Iranian people. 7

It is evident that the US is far from developing a realistic viewpoint and a clear position toward MKO failing to grasp its true nature and consequently resort to conservative policies in dealing with the organization. The solutions given in RAND report fail to solve the challenges met by Mojahedin and also refrain to decrease the potential fear of Mojahedin felt by the US.

The best way for ending the present crises is taking appropriate and feasible procedures for overcoming a group that according to the US is unreliable, incredible, unknown, deceptive and perverse. However, the US has never made an attempt to make Mojahedin submit to international rules and conventions nor withdraw its illegal claims against Iraqi government and its sovereignty.

References:
1. The US State Department’s statement, April 2007.
2. ibid.
3. The report made by RAND National Defense Research Institute on MKO, www.rand.org.
4. ibid.
5. The US State Department’s statement, April 2007.
6. The report made by RAND National Defense Research Institute on MKO, www.rand.org.
7. ibid.

October 25, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

MKO leaders are afraid of the truths that detainees found out

Behind the bars of a mind control cult, like Rajavi’s destructive cult, the leaders never want the internal affairs of the cult to be revealed. They are well aware that if their manipulative practices are externalized, the cult existence will be endangered since the human rights bodies and the international community never ignores such abusive acts. That’s why Rajavi is terrified by the testimonies of former members who externalize the internal affairs of the cult and always tries to label them as the agents of Islamic Republic’s intelligence ministry. Behind the bars of a mind control cult, like Rajavi’s destructive cult, the leaders never want the internal affairs of the cult to be revealed

On the other hand, the isolated members of the cult who are brainwashed through complex manipulation sessions and other cult jargons are not able to have any access to outside world. They are never informed of the true events taking place outside Camp Ashraf. All news and incidents are filtered and censured by cult leaders and then published for cult’s captured members. In fact, the Rajavis are also terrified by the truths that might be internalized by external elements.

As it was published in the media, the 36 Ashraf residents who were arrested by Iraqi police after the raid on Camp Ashraf in July 28th,were released on Wednesday October 7th , the detainees who were on hunger strike (that was ordered by cult leaders) while they were in Iraqi prison were taken to hospital due to their crucial health problem according to MKO’s spokesperson and now they are in a kind of medical quarantine ! After about 5 days since their release there have been no special news or interviews on MKO’s websites although its propaganda system has always been ready to hunt an opportunity for a big show-off. Even the cult’s TV channel, Simaye Azadi, which is its non-stop working propaganda machine has not published further news or interviews with liberated members.

As usual the cult should have taken the most use of the so-called atrocities against its detained members but in fact it prefers to keep silent.

One might suppose that these 36 individuals, who were far from the cult’s indoctrinations for more than 70 days, could find an occasion to be alone by themselves. They could face their individuality without the controlling regulations of the cult which had dominated all aspects of their life and their soul.

They might have had enough time to contemplate or meet other people with different ideas. They might have found new facts about the outside world which may oppose to what the cult had made them believe. In such a condition, the old terrifying case might have happened: the external facts have been internalized in the members’ minds.

Therefore, the leaders have to keep them in a mental quarantine too because their mind should be reorganized according to cult’ indoctrinations. But how late could the cult leaders stop the truth coming to the camp? This is an unavoidable fact.

By Mazda Parsi

October 25, 2009 0 comments

Duplicity of the MEK nature

Hunger strikers and absence of MKO leaders

The organizationally orchestrated hunger strike of MKO’s advocats and sympathizers in some European countries, and camp Ashraf in particular, in complaint to the presence of Iraqi police in camp Ashraf had to end somewhere. Lasting over 70 days, the strikes were raising suspicious that how these people, most over their mid-ages, were surviving such long-lasted hunger strikes! Fortunately for MKO, the Iraqi Government’s move to release the 36 detained members came to the organization’s help to grab at the opportunity to end the show. Since the events of June 2003, this has been the largest remonstrant reaction of Mojahedin to the enforcement of law in countries where they have managed to settle.

Mojahedin were desperate as they had two options before them. They had to either break the strikes midway on any unjustifiable excuse or enforce the strikers to continue which could lead to some victims even if nobody came to investigate and question the accuracy of the claimed strikes. In fact, it could be similar to the events of 17 June immolations in creating a human tragedy.

MKO leaders, those within Ashraf and those in their luxurious residences in European countries, are now bombarded with the questions that what decisive role did they play when Ashraf residents were facing challenges as they have trumpeted? If, according to the claims made by Rajavi, they are making their best to protect camp Ashraf and its residents, why the cost of defending MKO bastion is to be paid by the rank and files and not by the leaders and high rankings? As if nobody has noticed their absence from the scene of conflicts in camp Ashraf. As evidences show, many MKO high-rankings can leave Iraq and reside in another country if necessary. In other words, they are not at all worried about their own future and thus, there is no need to risk their life and line as human shields in protection of camp Ashraf. They are among the members of the Leadership Council but not all of them necessarily and some act as the scapegoats to carry out suicide attacks when demanded by the leadership.

However, Rajavi is well aware that he may need these scapegoats in long time and prefers to arrange a human shield for camp Ashraf based on the organizational hierarchy of MKO members. Evidently, the Leadership Council will be the last layer to be victimized. It is certain that Rajavi never entangles himself and his relatives and intimates in the conflicts of camp Ashraf like that of last June and nor in the cold war initiated in the Europe by MKO sympathizers. The history of the organization shows that MKO rank and files have no role but being victimized in the hands of Rajavi for furthering his totalitarian objectives. If hunger strike and complaint could solve the problems posed to Mojahedin, why MKO leaders and high rankings refrain to take part in these strikes themselves? If as claimed by MKO leaders, the present struggles aim at defending Ashraf residents, how those responsible for providing security for MKO members in Iraq evade it despite their presence under the focus of attention of western media and politicians?

In other words, what is the role of some well-known and effective MKO leaders like Abbas Davari, Mehdi Abrishamchi, Mohammad Hayati, Sedigheh Hosseini, Mahvash Sepehri, etc in the current critical situation of Mojahedin? None of them risked his/her life to be in front-line of the human resistance and human shields formed in camp Ashraf but stood far behind and pushed others against the gates to confront Iraqi forces. As in the terrorist activities of Mojahedin in 17 June, they were the main defendants of European courts accused of instigating MKO members to carry out suicide attacks. Although they were put on trial, the negligence of the concerned courts on the one hand and lobbying efforts of organization on the other veiled the reality. They are known to be the main instigators of clashes in camp Ashraf and Europe. They are not hew to international conventions and human rights yet try to achieve organizational objectives by victimizing a number of deceived individuals trapped in the cultic relations of a notorious terrorist organization.

If Mojahedin truly claim that Maryam Rajavi is recognized by European politicians and parliamentarians, she could have proved her concern and love for Ashraf residents and human rights by taking part in hunger strikes herself or at least one or two of her mentioned apostles. Maybe she thought the world failed to be attentive enough to ask why the leaders were absent from the scene of struggle!

October 22, 2009 0 comments

The MEK to launch Armed Struggle

Rajavi’s illusional strategies

In world of politics, there are various parameters that lead a politician to achieve his political objectives. One of the most essential factors in political success is realism. The more a politic man views political phenomenon realistically, the better he can deal with situations, never pretending the situation is different.

Therefore he is always prepared to present practical ideas of what can be done in that proper situation. A realistic, logical attitude will rarely end with failure or disappointment but this imperative attitude is one of those characteristics that MKO leaders fail to have. As the ideological leader of MKO cult, Massoud Rajavi has never had a realistic view on the world and especially Iranian political situation so he could never state a rational viewpoint about the political changes taking place around the world including Iran.

Since 1970s, following the execution of most MKO key leaders in Shah’s prison that left Rajavi as the main leader of Mujahedin, he has never made a realistic decision. The starting point of his illogical approach was the declaration of his armed struggle in June 20th, 1981 when he thought that he could defeat the Iranian Islamic Revolution that had succeeded the previous year due to the outstanding support of Iranian people for Ayatollah Khomeini’s leadership.

Then he fled to France where he found his so-called National Council of Resistance. Once more he dreams of the coalition of Iranian Opposition groups against IRI although the majority (about 95 %) of the council members are from Mujahedin Khalq Organization! The failure of his second step (foundation of NCRI) led him to take the third absurd step: going to Iraq and sheltering near the most hated Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In Iraq he based his organization’s structural system on cult-like practices. He used his illusions to deceive some revolutionary–minded individuals by manipulative indoctrination methods.

He founded his cult of personality based on worshiping the leader ( Massoud Rajavi) and absolute obedience of leader’s orders. He trained some devoted members who were always prepared to kill themselves for their “Ideological Leader”!

In camp Ashraf, Iraq, around the cult of Rajavi nothing seems realistic. The members are isolated in an unreal world that Massoud Rajavi has created for them due to his illogical ambitions.

Another example of Rajavi’s illusionist personality is his so-called Eternal Light Operation in which Mujahedin were supposed (according to Rajavi) to reach Tehran in three days. In a crazy operation, Mujahedin drove their armored vehicles toward Iranian border in the vain dream of moving on Iranian cities one after the other and reaching Tehran. Of course, the operation failed and left thousands of casualties for MKO.

Once again Rajavi’s illusive mind lost the game.

After the defeat of Eternal Light, he launched stricter cult jargons to keep the members in the illusional atmosphere he had made for them. Celibacy became obligatory under his order, sexual relations were forbidden, and children were separated from parents. And all this was because of the struggle that he always convinced the members to win soon. But the truth is that his so-called struggle has had no outcome except the victimization of thousands individuals and families.

Massoud Rajavi even continued his delusional attitude in the incidents after the Iranian presidential election in June. He saw himself as an influential leader in Iranian political scene, published a message suggesting solutions for critical situation of Iran. Imagining to have public support, he followed his dream of power in Iran but the clear fact is that today the least minority of Iranians know a little about MKO.

During the 3 decades that Massoud Rajavi was dreaming of power in Iran, and trying to capture some people for his cause, no significant change has happened to MEK. Their only skill and trick as well is launching propaganda against Iranian regime on its nuclear program. As another misfortune for MEK leaders, the West pays no significant attention to MKO’s show-off about Iranian nuclear program since their claims could not be verified due to the ambiguity.

The world Rajavi has created is far from wisdom and logic. Nowadays, in the era of democratic changes, in the world of civil behaviors and negotiations, the crisis mongers of Rajavi’s cult seem so amazing. They are actually fighting the reality and this fight will definitely end with failure.
By Mazda Parsi

October 22, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

How ‘Terrorists’ Become ‘Freedom Fighters’

How ‘Terrorists’ Become ‘Freedom Fighters’?: Tom Tancredo and the Iranian Mujahedin

Over past few months neoconservatives in Denver, Colorado, have been exploiting a political How'Terrorists' Become'Freedom Fighters'?: Tom Tancredo and the Iranian Mujahedin window of opportunity opened by two unrelated events, one in Iran and the other in Iraq, using the publicity surrounding the events to subtly reiterate their hawkish call for war against Iran.

Americans Against Terrorism (AAT), the organization that held demonstrations in Denver to support the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, has joined with a little-known charity called Colorado’s Iranian-American Community (CIAC), a former congressional representative and current chair of the conservative Rocky Mountain Foundation think tank, Tom Tancredo (R-CO), and a number of other pro-Israel hardliners and neo-cons alike.

Their aim has been to use the unrest following the June elections in Iran and the July 28 police crackdown on Camp Ashraf, Iraq, as propaganda to support a group the State Department calls terrorists.

The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), also known as the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), among several aliases, has been the subject of desire by neoconservative lawmakers in the West, in recent years, to use as a proxy army for a "regime change" in Iran, developing another angle of pressure on US President Barack Obama. The MEK has been listed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the US State Department since 1997.

The group, at first, appeared to be demonstrating for "Democracy For Iran," as their signs read at the Colorado State Capitol building on Saturday, August 8, the “International Day of Solidarity with Camp Ashraf,” as AAT representative Ana Sami called it. The group has been holding these demonstrations at the State Capitol "regularly, as [they] see fit," she said.

They claim that the Iraqi police crackdown on Ashraf, during which 36 people were arrested and 12 allegedly killed, with hundreds injured, was in compliance with the government of Iran, however, they consistently over-emphasize the protests against the results of the last Iranian election, which is not related to the crackdown on Ashraf.

"Iranian Americans and Americans, of course, have gathered here today to show our support and solidarity for what’s been happening in Iran since the elections took place in June," Sami said at the August 8 demonstration.

She made that statement while standing near a large poster displaying images of the faces of MEK members allegedly killed during the July 28 police raid in Iraq.

However, the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq has been noted by news reports dating before the June Iranian election as being keen on expelling the MEK.

The groups also held a panel on August 30 under the title; "The New Iranian Revolution: Done or Just Begun?" Sami sat on the panel for AAT, and it was headed by Rabbi Daniel Zucker of the group Americans for Democracy in the Middle East.

Tom Tancredo also sat on the panel and next to him was a little-known but highly active chair of CIAC and owner of the Lone Tree/Denver-based Alborz Real Estate Company, Tim Mehdi Ghaemi.

Again, just as the demonstrations hook an observer out of compassion for human rights, the panel speakers blurred the two events, and the bulk of the discussion focused on neither, rather, instead on scenarios of an Iranian nuclear threat, and the notion that the MEK should be supported by the United States as a military asset against Iran, all culminating into repetitive calls for ‘regime change’.

Zucker headed the panel with an over-the-top claim about Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.

"One missile sent from a, uh, rogue freighter out in the Atlantic, exploding a nuclear warhead, no larger than the size of that of Hiroshima" could theoretically be used by Iran, or for that matter anyone, to cause "magnetic resonance" by detonating the warhead in the atmosphere, Zucker explained.

Tancredo further illustrated Zucker’s imagination by asserting that in the event of a ‘magnetic resonance’ attack "200,000 people would fall out of the skies immediately," due to the effect on computer chips in airplanes.

"Then a dark age descends upon that area affected by it," Tancredo hyperbolized, putting the icing on the cake of this bourgeoning false dilemma presented by the panel.

Tancredo and Zucker gave credit to the MEK for being a valued source of intelligence on Iranian nuclear weapons programs, claiming they had proven their credibility with reports of a clandestine weapons program in Iran in 2003, which did prompt an investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), but has turned up no violations of any weapons treaty or nuclear non-proliferation treaty, thus Iran’s nuclear facilities are perfectly legal.

According to Gareth Porter’s article "Iran nuclear leaks ‘linked to Israel’," for Inter Press Service (IPS), dated June 5, 2009, the "alleged studies" documents that the IAEA has been investigating ever since may very well be as fake as the evidence of Saddam Hussein’s desire for uranium from Africa, used as a justification for invading Iraq in 2003. The IAEA accepted evidence from the MEK, allegedly fabricated by their allies in Israel, with whom they have had relations since the early 1990s, according to Porter’s article.

A more recent article by Porter, also for IPS, dated September 14, titled “IAEA Conceals Evidence Iran Documents Were Forged,” explains that the IAEA has been ignoring evidence, brought to the agency’s attention by Iran, that the documents were fabricated, which appears in the press as though Iran has not been fully cooperative, but how cooperative should they be when they have evidence that the premise is bogus?

Pressed with this question the panel speakers would have simply accused Iran of misinformation because it’s Iran, a fallacy they consistently recommitted on August 30.
The panel framed Iran as a miniature evil empire. For example, Mehdi Ghaemi claimed that mass graves were recently found near Tehran.

The overall focus was ‘regime change’ in Iran and not human rights.

The part that focused on Camp Ashraf was a presentation of Youtube videos of the July 28 police raid. The footage showed crowds of people being beaten by riot police in a variety of uniforms, wielding large, 2-x-4 wooden sticks as batons, and wrecking fences and buildings with bulldozers. They also showed several enlarged, and full-color, photographs of the bodies of 11 members of the MEK who they say were killed by the Iraqi police.

They also mentioned a hunger strike underway in Washington DC to pressure the Obama administration, and have lately been claiming online that some of the hunger strikers have died in the midst of the strike, although I could find no independent support for that information.

At both the rallies and the panel it quickly became very clear that the victims of violence in both Iran and Iraq, to the hosts of these events, are nothing more than propaganda.

At the August 8 rally Sami shamelessly evoked the identity of Neda Soltan, a young woman shot in the chest during the election unrest in Iran, and whose death the world witnessed via social networking websites. Sami spun her death into propaganda for the MEK within but a few words.

"The Iranian government is, uh, an incredibly oppressive government and there’s been a lot of bloodshed since that time. I think the world has gotten to know the image of Neda, who was the female who got shot by a sniper in the chest … and I think the world was so touched, and I think the voice of Iranians really [is] what’s symbolized by Neda’s … death," Sami said, shortly before saying, "since the election the unrest has not been able to be silenced … and in addition to that you have an opposition that has been fighting for 30 years. It’s time we support them."

By ‘them’ she is obviously referring to the MEK, which is not part of the democracy movement popular among the youth of Iran today, and there is no relationship between the two even ideologically.

However, when one so bravely questions whether or not the Iranian people, even those who protested against the election results in Iran, who are average Iranian’s like Neda herself was, would support the MEK, the panelists of this estranged bed-fellowship claim that anyone who believes otherwise has somehow fallen under the spell of the Iranian government.

Responding to a comment by one very skeptical audience member, Zucker said, "I think that the image of the MEK being unpopular in Iran is part of the Iranian regime’s very successful disinformation campaign."

The audience member shook his head in rejection.

Tancredo responded to the comment as well.

"You may have a different [opinion], and certainly then if you do then I would think … that I can totally understand your unwillingness to have the United States do anything that would, that would cause the present regime [of Iran] some degree of heartburn, and this would, taking them off the list would certainly do that," said Tancredo.

Tancredo also mentioned that when he signed a letter to have the MEK removed from the terrorist list it provoked a critical response from the now-defunct Rocky Mountain News. He stopped just short of accusing the Rocky of being influenced by the Iranian government.

"I do not know the extent to which the influence of the regime in Tehran, um, actually extends, but I know it’s, it is enormous … they’ve used the money that they have; oil revenues; to influence politicians throughout the world," he said.

Tancredo went on to explain that whether or not the MEK is popular does not concern him.

Tancredo said that he is "mostly concerned right now with Ashraf."

"That’s [his] immediate concern, trying to do something to protect these people who are truly being held hostage."

However, he also said; "I’m really not concerned with whether or not they win the vote in Iran."

"It’s a murky world out there," he said, "but I am convinced that these people are who they say they are. They are dedicated to the overthrow … of this Islamic Republic."
"To me [the MEK] are allies."

The truth of Tancredo’s view finally peeked out from behind the façade of concern:

"I believe that our interests, the interests of the United States of America; by the way, I think Western Civilization, to tell you the truth; are advanced, by, by using the advantage, by using the things that are available to us in the fight against radical Islam."

According to Dokhi Fassihian, an expert on Iranian-American affairs, with the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), the notion that the MEK is supported by anyone inside Iran is not even realistic. Most Iranians around the world detest the MEK, and in the case of dissidents inside Iran it is even likely that they hate the MEK more than the Ayatollah.

Part of the reason it would be in error of international law to allow the repatriation of the MEK to Iran is that not only would the government persecute them but they could face mobs and lynching among the population as well.

According to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Amnesty International (AI) has reported that Neda’s fiancé was just released from prison in Iran, and allegedly the Iranian authorities attempted to coerce him into signing a statement blaming the MEK for her death.

Fassihian explained to me almost a week prior to that AI report that in the face of the threat posed by the MEK, among average Iranians, feelings of support for the leadership and patriotism ensue, just as in any society. To blame the MEK for Neda’s death would, therefore, be Iran’s attempt to preserve what popular support it still has. The government may be repressive but it has defended the country since the revolution against such threats for 30 years.

World-renowned critic of US foreign policy and host of the popular syndicated radio program Alternative Radio, David Barsamian, also said that the MEK is far from popular in Iran and is commonly misconstrued as being so only by hardliners while beating the drums for further ventures of US imperialism. In fact Barsamian explained that when such advocates of these types of policies use terms like "democracy," or "freedom," they often mean just the opposite.

The way Sami used the terms ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ at the August 8 demonstration certainly implies that this is the case.

"The way freedom and democracy works in America is not necessarily the way it might look in Iran, but still, there are some very, very basic, core elements that exist everywhere that we deem to be a free or democratic … society," she said.

The term ‘regime change’ was repeated again and again on August 30, overemphasized to say the least.

The MEK formed during the 1960s and 70s as a Marxist-Islamic and feminist militant student group that took up arms and participated significantly in the revolution against the Shah, Reza Pahlavi. The US sponsored a coup d’état against the popular secular leader, Mohammad Mosaddeq, in 1953 and reinstalled the Shah who was ousted in 1979 by the Iranian revolution that ushered in the power of the Ayatollah, expelling the US from country with a dramatic hostage crisis played out on Western television from the US embassy in Tehran. The first Ayatollah, Khomeini, purged the leftist factions after the revolution, and honed in especially on the MEK, persecuting and killing many members.

In the Early 1980s the MEK was exiled to Iraq and France where they established a military and political wing respectively, at the invitation of Saddam Hussein. As the Iran-Iraq war (1981-1988) flared up the MEK worked directly for Saddam against Iran, and were involved in campaigns of repression against the Kurds and Shiite communities in Iraq.

In 1997, while the MEK was still working for Saddam, the US State Department put the MEK and its political wing in France, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) on the list of FTOs. The listing was upheld again in 2001 and 2003, under the Presidency of George W. Bush, and they remain on the list today. The US Treasury Department listed the NCRI as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) organization under Executive Order 13224 in August of 2003, and their assets were subsequently frozen by the US Treasury Department.

In March of 2003 the US military carried out Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and occupied Iraq, ending the rule Saddam, and during this operation engaged in combat with the MEK when they approached Camp Ashraf, bombing the camp and leaving several MEK members dead.

The Department of Defense (DOD) was ordered to have the group disarmed and failed to do so at the time. The MEK signed a disarmament agreement after repeated attempts for DOD compliance by the State Department, finally, once they were guaranteed status as "protected persons" under Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Conventions, even though they remain on the State Department’s FTO list.

The DOD declined to respond to my inquiry for this report.

After the US installed the government of the current Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and began withdrawing troops from Iraqi cities, the responsibility for protection of the residents of Ashraf was handed over to the Maliki government.

The Maliki government is dominated by Shiites like himself and is thought by many to be friendly with Iran. In a July 31 press release Human Rights Watch (HRW), Joe Stork, deputy director of the HRW Middle East and North Africa division said the MEK "has made lots of enemies among Iraqis with their support for Saddam Hussein." Stork’s comment was part of a call on Iraq to conduct "an independent investigation into the deaths of at least seven Iranians during [the] police raid on Camp Ashraf" on July 28.

However, the status of ‘protected persons’ does not legitimize aiding covert terrorist activities.

According to a May 2005 report by Human Rights Watch called No Exit: Human Rights Abuses Inside the Mojahedin Khalq Camps, the MEK has a history of human rights violations against its own membership. The RAND Corporation said in a 2009 report, The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq: A Policy Conundrum, that many of the MEK’s members were people who fled Iran not expecting to be smuggled to an MEK camp in Iraq, and the report implied that the group’s popularity even among Iranian dissidents fleeing the country is highly questionable.

"Although the exact figure is not known, it is estimated that approximately 70 percent of [MEK] members now in Iraq joined the group after its relocation there and subsequent decline in popularity. Many of them were victims of these fraudulent recruiting practices," (original emphasis) the report reads (RAND, 2009, p. xvi).

The loyalty of the membership to the leaders of the MEK, Maryam Rajavi and her at-large husband Massoud, last seen in Iraq, is merely a result of the group’s cultish practices, far from its roots in popular and rational ideologies like Marxism, Political Islam and feminism. This implies that there is cause to protect the MEK membership from the MEK leadership.

In the January 17, 2007, broadcast of BBC Newsnight, Tim Whewell aired interviews with former MEK members who described the organization as a deceptive group that uses "psychological manipulation" to enforce a "system of control," Whewell narrated.

The MEK is largely made up of women and the freedom of women in this group amounts to a rigid obligation against any sexual pleasure or relationship, regular arbitrarily enforced disclosures of everything in their personal lives, and the group even issued a "decree" forcing all married members to divorce. Equality of men and women in the MEK is merely equality of total devotion to the leader, Maryam Rajavi, who lives in France and heads the NCRI.

In a March 30, 2007, report on an AhlulBayt Islamic Mission (AIM) TV program called Dateline, entitled "US Intelligence on Iran & the MEK," which can be viewed on the AIM website, two former MEK members explained that the group’s internal practices are "like a cult."

Tom Tancredo has apparently fallen under their sway, enough to argue that they are nice and friendly people, supporting this notion with an alarming, and somewhat incriminating anecdote in which he admitted to having traveled to France and meeting Maryam Rajavi on two occasions in Auvers-sur-Oise, a little town just north of Paris.

However, Mr. Tancredo is not alone.

According to the November 8, 2007, report, "Breaking Stories: Paris Sojourn" by Matt Potter, for the San Diego Weekly Reader, Tancredo’s former colleague and co-chair of the US Congressional Iran Human Rights and Democracy Caucus (IHRDC), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), had also traveled to France to make a speech to the NCRI, and his travel expenses of almost $8,000, were covered by Ghaemi’s charity, CIAC.

A March 15, 2005 report compiled for the Center for Policing Terrorism (CPT), Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) Dossier, by Nicole Cafarella, reveals on page 11 that the MEK demonstrably uses front groups to raise money and support. Among these groups, according to the CPT report, is the Iranian-American Community of Northern Virginia (IAC-NV), which held a fraudulent fundraiser for the victims of the Bam Earthquake in Iran, but was a fundraiser for the MEK, and the quake victims never saw a penny. According to the report several agents of the US Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) attended the fundraiser and the US Treasury Department has since frozen the IAC-NV’s assets.

The FBI press agent for the Denver branch office took my questions regarding their possible concerns about similar front groups in Colorado but they have thus far not responded.
The MEK description on the State Department website, regarding their funding, agrees with the CPT report that they have increasingly resorted to front groups for fundraising following the 2003 occupation of Iraq, and before that relying mostly on material support from Saddam (MEK description, "External Aid," in "Country Reports on Terrorism 2006" on the US State Department website).

An article in National Journal, dated January 19, 2008 (Vol. 40, Issue 3), titled "Touting ‘Terrorists’," by Julie Kosterlitz, raised the notion that CIAC may well be one of those front organizations for the MEK.

The Colorado Secretary of State’s office told me that they had no record of even the existence of CIAC, and a search on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) online listing of businesses and charities revealed nothing as well.

Possibly the organization operates on a budget under $25,000, making them exempt from disclosures or registration at the Secretary of States office, the representative explained, but the fact that the IRS has no information either is suspicious.

AAT is also an organization with a spotty record to say the least. The group was originally founded in Colorado by a Boulder Real Estate lawyer Boulder, Matt Finberg, whom according to a DC Journalism Collective report, "Not All Politics Is Local: A Colorado Race And the International Kahanist Network" (August, 2008), is a staunch follower of the right-wing fringe ideology of Meir Kahane, and in 2007 moved to Israel to live in an "illegal settlement" in the Palestinian West Bank. The report said that AAT disbanded in September of 2004.

The current chair of AAT is Finberg’s former AAT director and co-founder, Dr. Neil Dobro.

According to the DC Journalism Collective article AAT, implicated in an attack ad campaign against a Republican legislative candidate, Rima Sinclair; attacking Sinclair using anti-Islamic defamation (she is Palestinian American); in favor of her Republican competitor Joshua Sharf; the alleged Kahanist founder of AAT is tied to another organization whose name appears on the very same State Department FTO list, and on a similar Israeli government list, the extremist Israeli Kahanist group known as Kach, or Kahane Chai. Kach was the subject of a 2005 Frontline documentary on PBS called "Israel’s Next War?"

Dobro said AAT is a 501c3 non-profit organization, however, the person I spoke with at the Colorado Secretary of State’s office said that if they are operating on a budget at or above $25,000 then "they are out of compliance with our office."

Upon formal request of IRS Form 990 from AAT I have thus far not received any response. AAT was collecting donations at a table during the panel.
Current co-chair of the IHRDC, who took Tancredo’s position, Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), has also been an outspoken supporter of the MEK, and along with Filner, signed a letter from the IHRDC to President Obama to demand that Ashraf residents be protected.

Rohrabacher’s career has long been funded by billionaire Charles Koch, according to his profile on SourceWatch, a website of the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), and during his career he has been known to cuddle with some of the world’s most dubious names, including the Afghan Mujahedin (no relation to the MEK) that fought the Soviet Union, and bore the notorious Al Qaeda, which allegedly carried out the most extreme terrorist attack ever in history on September 11, 2001. Rorhabacher was no supporter of Al Qaeda at that point, however, his knack for fraternizing with such groups over the years is nothing new.

The Koch family is known to be funding the anti-Obama town hall-meeting disruptors and anti-tax rallies via FreedomWorks, a think tank now headed by another long-time supporter of the MEK, former US House Majority Leader, and former policy adviser to the Bush administration,…

by Evanherzoff

October 21, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Sarkozy proposed transport to MKO terrorists

Sarkozy proposed transport and political asylum to MKO terrorists

Recently, during their monthly meeting, the 27 foreign ministers of EU decided to remove Mujahedin Khalq Organization from the list of terrorist groups. It is the first time that the EU derives a group from its terror list and allows the cult to develop its terror activities in Europe, increasing tensions between EU and Iran. Iran, according to the head of National Security Committee of Parliament, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, has already warned that this “mistake” will result in retaliation. “In this case, there is no reason that Iran continues to spend tens of billions in economic activity and trade with the EU” he said. The Iranian parliament has passed a law permitting the government and judiciary to seek all those MEK members who have committed crimes to be tried.

Founded originally to fight the Shah of Iran, MEK was an organization with a mixed ideology of both Marxism and Islam. It was military organized and turned into a cult. It was first sided with Islamic Revolution in 1979 but then went into hiding in Iraq to fight against IRI. MKO organized attacks in Iran, of which the most famous is the one that cost lives of Minister of Justice Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti and 71 of other Iranian officials,in 1981. Mujahedin helped Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988) launched by Saddam Hussein with the support of Western countries and also participated in the massacre of thousands of Iraqi civilians during Operation Morvarid against Kurds of Iraq.

The armed wing of the cult found refuge in Iraq, while some of its members took refuge in Europe including France where they are headed by Maryam Rajavi as both the guru and chief agitator. Some NGOs on human rights defense like HRW accused the cult of torture against its dissident members and also of submitting them to long-term solitary confinement.

On June 15, 2004, in a room of seventh reunion of Paris, the four former members of Mujahedin Khalq addressed the press:

Hadi Shams Haeri, ex-member of central committee, left the organization in 1991.
Ali Akbar Rastgou; charged by MKO to gain the support of influential politicians in Germany.
Mohammad Sobhani who resigned in 1997 was MKO’s security official. He was imprisoned for over two years when he announced his intension to leave the group.
Massoud Khodabande, security official close to Maryam and Massoud Rajavi, benefited a trip to Europe to escape from the cult in 1995.

For two hours, recounting their experiences, they immersed the audience in horror. They described the detention torture and inhuman treatments toward those dissident members who wanted to resign, a universe dominated by a dictatorial couple, the Rajavis. They discussed the forced recruitment of Iranian war prisoners that were then sent to fight against their own country. They explained how Massoud Rajavi had broken the families of Mujahedin, forcing the couples to divorce, sending their children thousands of miles away to adaptive families.

They also accused their former comrades of carrying out terrorist acts in the strictest scene of term by launching indiscriminate attacks in which civilians were the victims.
Massoud Khodabande who is currently working as an analyst at French Center for Terrorism Studies and is also advisor to Iraqi government, described MEK as a cult based on its leaders’ personality and obsessed by celibacy. “I have witnessed forced divorces within cries and tears.

I witnessed how 150 children under 7 years old – the youngest was only two months – were separated from their mothers and sent to other countries because the leader of MKO has said that “ (children) disrupt my relationship with you”.

Other testimonies were made by Mustafa Muhammadi, father of a girl with dual Canadian – Iranian nationality. He tried, unsuccessfully, to contact his daughter who disappeared after an offer to stay two months at Camp Ashraf, proposed by one of the recruiters. He explained how the cult forced families of recruits to attend the demonstrations in European countries, threatening them to kill their dear ones. MKO, which has neither root nor public support in Iran, recruits young Iranian teenagers living in exile, often a little flustered, to indoctrinate them and then force them to join the cult.

You can ask yourself whether the decision made in Brussels is really going in the direction of its so-called commitment to fight for human rights and combat terrorism. It seems that there are double standards in EU policies. Hamas, democratically elected by the majority of Palestinians in 2006 legislative election which was recognized as free; still remains on the list and continues to be accused of “terrorism”.

This delisting will allow the cult to raise money in Europe but also to recover the 9 $ million of the frozen assets in France while it also has several tens of millions of frozen assets in other European Countries. The MEK is still considered as a terrorist organization in the US although some of its supporters have worked with the CIA and Mossad in filtration operations and attacks in Iran. It is this organization that in 2002 made some revelations on Iranian nuclear program from the information transmitted to them by the Mossad.
Currently, there are about 3000 members of the cult based at Camp Ashraf in Iraq under the leadership of Massoud Rajavi guru. The responsibility of the Camp which was previously under US occupation troops – Washington had given its members the status of “protected Persons” under the Geneva Convention –transferred to Iraqi government last month.

The Iraqi authorities has clearly declared that the group was “not wanted” on their territory. About 1000 of them had previously lived in Europe where some of their family members live.

According to some sources, Sarkozi has volunteered to airlift members of MKO to get them in France. Israel has also offered to recruit members of MKO to use their intelligence.
The treasury of the state is empty. Until when the taxpayers’ money should be used to transport members of a violent cult that violates the most basic human rights, and to grant them political asylum?

Mireille Delamare
Translated by Nejat Society

October 20, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

Cultic backlash against a legal intervention

The survival of cults, and the political-terrorist groups like MKO in particular, depends mainly on their organizational as well as a dominant iron discipline that are the cause of numerous human tragedies and cultic practices that that risks the lives of the cult victims. The main factors resulting in total obedience and submission to cult leaders are convincing systems and brainwashing techniques as well as some other levers including intimidation and coercion of the members.

Therefore, the main consideration in dealing with cults and averting their danger is organizational split of cults through separating the leaders from the rank and files in order to break down the inter-twined and steel-like discipline exerted on the latter.

However, this issue has been ignored by the US forces while taking the control of camp Ashraf, the cultic bastion of the notorious terrorist cult of Mojahedin. Surprisingly enough, the Americans’ negligence in this regard not only led to the stability of organizational relations of Mojahedin but also resulted in a number of negative consequences like illegal resistance of Ashraf residents against the legal demands of Iraqi government.

The statements made after the process of transitions in Iraq resulting in Iraqi forces’ taking control of camp Ashraf imply that the American forces have behaved passively toward Mojahedin taking no preventive measure against them. In fact, since the fall of Saddam up to the deployment of Iraqi police in camp Ashraf, no effort has been made for the organizational dissolution of Mojahedin. Seemingly, this is the reason why Mojahedin disagreed to let the Iraqi police in.

Considerable evidences indicate that the coalition forces and the Americans were so indifferent and passive toward Mojahedin that they never cared about the authoritarian approaches of MKO’s leaders exerted on MKO Ashraf residents and also failed to prevent the exit of opposition forces from Ashraf based on some hidden agreements made between Ashraf leaders and the US commanders.

In fact, there was no control and surveillance on the internal and external relations of Mojahedin. There are many reports that verify the active cooperation between the US commanders and Ashraf leaders. There are numerous evidences indicating that American forces were obliged to classify organizational and military forces of Mojahedin based on their rank and control them separately but they refrained to do so and in some points it seemed that Mojahedin had the upper hand compared to the invading forces.

What is of great importance is that Mojahedin have been aware that the presence of Iraqi police in camp Ashraf will not be limited a physical presence. The reason of the violent reactions of Mojahedin and victimizing Ashraf residents in the course of June events is in this regard.

According to the statements of Iraqi officials, the palisades inside camp Ashraf are mainly used for controlling Ashraf residents, their movements, and relations and imply the complexity and organizational hierarchy of MKO. While the control of camp Ashraf was in the hands of the US forces, Mojahedin felt safe; however, the presence of Iraqi police in Ashraf as well as removing the palisades poses a threat to MKO leaders loosing the control of their bastion. In fact, the measures had to be implemented on Mojahedin seven years ago are just on the agenda of Iraqi officials. These are the primary steps for setting MKO rank and files free from cultic relations of Mojahedin.

Footages of the human shield of MKO members in complaint to the removal of palisades by Iraqi police shown in Mojahedin TV indicate the importance of these fences as a symbol of the internal and closed relations of Mojahedin. This action as well as separating MKO leaders from the rank and files may pave the way for dissidents to leave camp Ashraf and find the chance to govern their own destiny free from the cultic bonds of the organization. The demolishing of the strategic and ideological container of Mojahedin, camp Ashraf, should have been accomplished right after the invasion of coalition and American forces. Now, the presence of Iraqi forces in camp Ashraf is a step forward to fulfill the objective; the harsh backlash of Mojahedin leaders was not unexpected since it challenged its cultic sovereignty.

October 18, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Study faults US handling of MKO terrorists in Iraq

A recent report by the RAND Corporation, a prominent think tank that does research for the US Government, illustrate that Washington committed a judgmental error when dealing with the terrorist Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO) in Iraq. Study faults US handling of MKO terrorists in Iraq

During the 2003 Operation Iraqi freedom, an ongoing military campaign that resulted in the invasion of Iraq by the coalition forces, the MKO was designated as an enemy force.

The "Rajavi cult", as the MKO became to be known, had provided security services to Saddam Hussein from its camps in Iraq and had been listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the US Secretary of State.

It had also targeted Americans in Iran throughout the 1970s. They assassinated a number of American citizens, namely William C. Cottrell, Colonel Lewis L. Hawkins, Donald G. Smith, and Colonel Jack Turner inside Iran.

After a cease-fire was signed, the then US Secretary of Defense designated this group’s members as civilian “protected persons” rather than combatant prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions

A RAND study, which examined the evolution of this controversial decision, says the designation has left the United States open to charges of hypocrisy in the war on terrorism.

The MKO was founded in Iran in the 1960s, but its top leadership and members fled the country some twenty years later, after carrying out numerous acts of terror inside the country.

The group masterminded a series of assassinations and bombings inside Iran, including the 1981 bombing of the offices of the Islamic Republic Party, in which more than 72 senior Iranian officials were killed, including the Judiciary Chief, Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti.

The Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had invited the MKO into Iraq to fight on his behalf during the eight-year Iraq-Iran War. Once it settled in Iraq and fought against Iranian forces in alliance with Saddam, the group, already hated within Iran for its indiscriminate terror campaign, incurred further ire of the Iranian people.

MKO members where housed in ‘Camp Ashraf,’ in a city approximately 40 miles north of Baghdad, thereby establishing a base for planning operations against the Tehran government during the eight-year war as well as conducting operations against Iraqi Kurds and Shias during the 1991 uprising against Saddam Hussein.

From the early weeks of Iraq’s invasion in 2003 until January 2009, the coalition forces detained and provided security for members of the group, described in the RAND report as “an exiled Iranian dissident cult group living in Iraq".

"Despite their belief that the MKO did not pose a security threat, coalition forces detained the group and provided protection to prevent the Iraqi government from expelling MKO members to Iran, even though Iran had granted the MKO rank and file amnesty from prosecution," RAND says.
"The coalition’s decision to provide security for an FTO (Foreign Terrorist Organization) was very controversial because it placed the United States in the position of protecting a group that it had labeled a terrorist organization," it adds.

In April 2003, US forces in Iraq negotiated a ceasefire between its troops and the MKO, based on claims that later turned out to be false.

"Because they had no information about the characteristics of the group, the Special Forces officers who received the request were persuaded by MKO leaders (who spoke fluent English) that, prior to the invasion, the group had offered to fight on the coalition’s behalf and that many of its members had been educated in the United States."

In May 2003, the Washington establishment agreed to direct coalition forces to secure MKO’s surrender and to disarm the group.

The coalition officers who negotiated with the MKO leadership were dissuaded from carrying out this instruction. Rather than insisting upon the MKO’s surrender, they accepted a cease-fire agreement under which the MKO would be disarmed and its 3,800 members (at the time) would be consolidated and detained through assigned residence (rather than internment) at Camp Ashraf.

Coalition forces, however, took no action to determine the legal status of the MKO for more than a year. The report says this was due to the fact that the US Department of Defense (DoD) was not sure ‘what law should be enforced for the MKO.’

"The United States had adopted the contentious policy of not applying the Geneva Conventions to foreign terrorists fighting in Iraq, though it did apply them to enemy forces while invading Iraq, and war planners had named the MKO an enemy force."

To make matters worse, the group, who had a long history of trickery, had asserted that it had not engaged coalition forces in combat. Officers responsible for detaining the MKO accepted this claim, even though at least one special-forces-casualty had resulted from combat with the group.
"If coalition forces, and particularly those involved in any type of negotiations with the MKO, had been appraised of the group’s long history of deception, they would have been far less likely to have made the kinds of concessions that proved so troublesome later on."

In June 2004, the US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld tried to determine the legal status of the MKO, by designating its members as civilian “protected persons” under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The designation, which presumes that the ‘Rajavi cult’ had not engaged coalition forces in battle, went against recommendations by the Department of State, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
"It has proven to be extremely controversial because it appeared that the United States selectively chose to apply the Geneva Conventions to a designated terrorist organization and, further, to grant it a special status," RAND reported.

When, in late 2003, the Iraqi government and the Iraqi Governing Council passed a resolution calling for the expulsion of the group from Iraq, the United sates refused to return MKO members to Iran.

The White House, labeling their return as "a ‘gift’ to the Islamic Republic of Iran," announced its intention to seek the MKO’s relocation elsewhere.

According to the Geneva Convention, when detainees are released from assigned residence or internment, they may either be reestablished in their country of residence prior to detention, resettled, or “accommodated” in third or neutral countries or repatriated to the country of their nationality.

Iraq had made it clear that the terrorists had no place within its boundaries. Iran was not an option either. Though Tehran had offered amnesty to the MKO’s rank and file, Washington bluntly refused to send them back.

“Despite the broad-based expectation that the IRI would persecute all former MKO members who returned to the country, that has not proven to be the case for the approximately 250 individuals who have already been repatriated through a process managed by the ICRC," RAND adds.
The only solution was to send them to any country that would accept them. No western country is willing to offer asylum to the individuals — even though 1015 MKO members have a passport or residence permit of a third country.

"The MKO was a minor issue in the overall conflict in Iraq, but it was an important one because the issues that emerged in the course of detaining the MKO were, in many ways, a microcosm of the larger challenges posed by detainee operations in general."

“To date, there is no evidence that any MKO members who were repatriated to Iran through the ICRC have been persecuted or tortured," The report says.

“JIATF (Joint Interagency Task Force) personnel and former MKO members believe that many members of the MKO rank and file would volunteer for repatriation if they were freed of the MKO leadership’s authoritarian, cultic practices,"

The group practices public self-deprecation sessions, mandatory divorce, celibacy, enforced separation from family and friends, and gender segregation.

One of the MKO’s cultic characteristics is a focus on suicide.

"Although it had not used suicide as a tactical weapon in terrorist attacks since 1981, the MKO has frequently used the threat of suicide as a negotiating tactic or to frustrate investigations."
"This proved particularly effective after 10 members immolated themselves in Paris as a protest action following the arrest of Maryam Rajavi, the MKO’s co-leader, in 2003."

Although MKO leaders and supporters vigorously deny that the group is a cult, the report’s findings suggest that these denials are not credible.

As part of the “ideological revolution,” the Rajavis mandated divorce and celibacy.
Compulsory divorce required couples to place their wedding rings in a bowl and renounce their affections for one another.

Masoud Rajavi would separate couples claiming that "such practices would liberate the members" from competing loyalties. Their children were also sent to European countries, former MKO member, Mohammad-Hossein Sobhani, said in August.

Because "the organization forbids matrimony, for the past 25 years no child has been born to a man and a woman inside the organization," he adds.

October 17, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Terrorism transformed

In the past eight years of the post-911 terrorist attacks, the US and the international community have been unanimous to find a decisive solution to overcome the phenomenon of terrorism and its various forms and to fully eradicate it. Meanwhile, the Americans have learned many lessons and have been aware of the inevitable costs of interacting with terrorist groups yet there have remained many more lessons to be learned. The first lesson to be learned by the US is the fact that terrorism cannot be used as a lever and threat for establishing democracy in other countries.

The dual and paradoxical policy of the US toward MKO in recent years confirms this fact. This approach has provoked heated discussions among the government layers of the US. The report of RAND on MKO, regardless of unexpected events due to the hidden aspects of the true nature of Mojahedin, can be considered an evidence of conservative and ambiguous behavior of the US toward MKO. The lack of a defined relationship between the US and Mojahedin is the main mistake made by the Americans.

According to this report, Americans failed to annihilate the organization intentionally or for any reason and also refrained to encourage MKO members to leave camp Ashraf. Although this is considered the main mistake made by the US in dealing with Mojahedin, it has to be pointed out that the US was unfamiliar with the cultic nature of Mojahedin and their intra-organizational mechanisms and potentials. After the disaster of 911 and its feedbacks inside nations and governments, terrorist groups were inevitably influenced. In other words, the terrorist activities of terrorist groups, including MKO, underwent a qualitative and quantitative shift. The public hatred of terrorism made Mojahedin to make effort to be removed from the terrorist list claiming to have denounced armed struggle. However, this claim and the removal of the name of MKO from the terrorist list of the EU failed to be accepted by those European countries that were well acquainted with the nature of the organization. And it did not take long to prove that they had been right in their judgment as Mojahedin practically proved that they could not make any change in their past policy and indoctrinations.

The innate violence has only changed in the application of the approaches. They have just concealed themselves from the global attentions resorting to other forms of cultic-terrorist activities like self-immolation for furthering their totalitarian objectives. The suicide attacks of Mojahedin in 17 June in France, 2003 occurred only two years after the terrorist attacks of 911 and was an inevitable consequence of their critical situation resulting from their presence in global interactions as well their indoctrinations based on which the ideological and strategic solution for all barriers and challenges is considered to be violence and terrorism. The suicide attack of 911 and that of 17 June have the same background and theory yet have different external manifestations. They enjoy the same ideology and mechanisms too yet the former is considered an action on the part of a reactionary and barbaric group and the latter comes from a scientific-evolutionary philosophy.

There is no doubt that despite the superficial differences, the shared point of al-Qaeda and MKO is their internal mechanisms and techniques. However, after the events of 911, Mojahedin came to the belief that resorting to blind terrors and suicide attacks could no more solve their problems but also may lead to the intensification of their tensions and public hatred. Its registration as a terrorist organization on the very same list that recognized al-Qaeda made Mojahedin do whatever necessary to be removed from terrorist list just due to evading the negative and hostile viewpoint of the global society and western governments. Consequently, Mojahedin were enforced to stop their blind terrorist activities for a while. The insistence of Rajavi on the peaceful approach of MKO on the one hand and the critical situation of the organization in Iraq has enforced him to focus on the possibility of a human disaster in the form of self-immolations in case of the intensification of tensions and constraints in camp Ashraf.

This is the reason why Rajavi has resorted to cultic levers like hunger strike and using human shields in camp Ashraf and it is simple-mindedness to dismiss the possibility of Mojahedin’s committing other terrorist activities. The fact is that there is no guarantee for other countries to be secure from the intrinsic violence of such a cultic group unless Mojahedin would abandon their cultic activities like self-immolation, hunger strike, human shields, etc. As it was pointed out, this is the shared point linking Mojahedin and al-Qaeda together as well as to other cultic trends. The only difference is in their power of adoption to conditions at which Rajavi looks with pride.

According to many MKO former members, Rajavi has repeatedly referred to the point that Mojahedin can remove all barriers as long as they have no fear of death and take part in regular inter-organizational cleansing sessions. The present position of Mojahedin can be considered in this regard not as a tactical retreat but a newly adopted form of employing violence. It seems that Americans need to be notified about the dangers of terrorism, its ideology and how it may operate under a variety of disguises and cults.

October 15, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization

MKO in historic isolation

Today the process of developments in Iran-Iraq relations has created difficult situation for Mujahedin Khalq who are facing a complicated cul-de-sac. Therefore, the MKO’s claim as the most powerful opposition to Iranian regime is viewed as funny by Western politic men

The new phase was accompanied with the takeover of Camp Ashraf’s control by Iraqi government in January.

However, when the Iraqi control on Ashraf base was leading its executive procedures, MKO leaders ended the takeover by Iraqi Police to a bloodshed which risked the lives of hundreds of members, in vain.

After the bloody clashes in Ashraf, MKO leaders did not obey Iraqi decision and did not make a logic decision and launched a new idiot game. Their hunger strike show was to take ransoms from Iraqi government. The leaders allegedly declared their objective as the takeover of control of Ashraf by American forces but actually the main objective of MKO leaders is maintaining their base in Iraq. And the Iraqi government is determined to expel the terrorist destructive cult of Rajavi from its territory.

The destructive cult of MKO has always claimed to be the most viable alternative to IRI and its large scale propaganda machine has always tried to deceive Western politicians with this claim.

The recent protests after the Iranian presidential election in June took MKO’s card. The international community and Western governments are concentrating on Iranian green movement as the main opposition to Islamic Republic. Western governments, who were not satisfied with IRI’s policies, today hope that the green movement could make changes in Iranian policy. Therefore, the MKO’s claim as the most powerful opposition to Iranian regime is viewed as funny by Western politic men. This make MKO leaders to try extremely to find the least support among Western countries including their new propaganda show for the so called revelations on Iranian nuclear program in a press conference in Paris.

Although the act, once more, confirms the MKO’s treasons against Iran, ignoring the MKO’s propaganda, Western governments called 1+5, are negotiating with Iran in Geneva these days. The considerable fact is that for the first time, US’s representative sat at the same table with his Iranian counterpart. The MKO is now in a historic isolation which will definitely end in its death.

The only way to save the cult is the official declaration of its shutdown by its leaders, but they are so politically stupid that they will never make this rational decision.

By Mohsen Abbaslou

October 13, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts