Articles

Ethics defined by the cult of Mojahedin

One of the prevalent issues in studies on cultic relations of MKO is to determine to what extent the group acknowledges application of ethics in its internal as well as external relations. A review of the manifesto and publications of the organization and their ontological viewpoints indicate that MKO tend to equate ethics with their political feelings and ambitions. On the other hand, for MKO ethical standards are defined as whatever they relatively accept as the right and essential to the ultimate ends. It may give us a better understanding of the correspondence between MKO ethical standards and that of Machiavellianism as well as Marxism that incorporate a belief of “ends justify means”. In Machiavellian viewpoints, the application of levers including pressure, deception, breach of promise, betrayal, fabrication and all possible means for achieving and preserving political power is legitimate. Furthermore, in contrast to some contemporary thinkers who make an attempt to interpret ethics as a relative issue by means of complicated and equivocal philosophical discussions and theories, Machiavelli and his followers are outspoken in disregarding ethical principles.

However, the ideology and methodology of Mojahedin is based on the former policy. They managed to integrate philosophy and science to find a way of expressing their Machiavellian ideas in a novel form. As Machiavelli justifies using all means for achieving and maintaining political power, Mojahedin grab at ontological issues and the ultimate goal of creation. They feel much attachment to philosophical terms like dispensing of existence and absolute truth by which they try to justify their philosophical, political, social, and historical dogmatism. Here, the main viewpoints of Mojahedin on ethics as reflected in their pamphlets and organizational principles are to be reviewed.

Mojahedin distinguish between good and evil with regard to the factor of achieving objectives. In other words, they do not believe in substantive status of ethical values rather define them based on the extent to which they succeed to make the ground for attaining objectives. According to theoretical principles and doctrine of Mojahedin “Good and evil are always determined with regard to the objective”. 1

But what is the objective meant by Mojahedin? As it was mentioned before, Mojahedin believe in absolute good and absolute evil in their worldview yet on the other hand, recognize the legitimacy of using all possible means for achieving that absolute truth. In addition, they maintain the universality of material world and consider evolution as a general law governing all phenomena including man and the society. Consequently, all activities aiming at achieving absolute truth are considered an ethical issue and in contrast, all activities hindering the attainment of that absolute truth are regarded unethical. They define absolute truth and ethical values as follows:

The process that moves the society toward retaining the most dominant humanistic features, (unlimited to a certain time and place), is known as the absolute truth. Absolute good is those actions done for the achievement of absolute truth in any circumstance. 2

Therefore, according to Mojahedin, absolute truth and its opposite are two sides of a coin and there is no third option:

Non-truth is all actions done against truth as a barrier in its way unlimited to a certain time and place. 3

Also, absolute evil has been defined in the theoretical sources of Mojahedin as:

Absolute evil are all actions correspondent to non-truth unlimited to any certain form, time and place. 4

From this viewpoint, ethical standards have no value in themselves and it is only social and political conditions that determine their values. Consequently, in such a context individuals follow their own demands which may make them recoil from doing what is right and thus, they are frequently deviated from what is ethical. As a result, the concept of truth is metamorphosized into a relative issue, too, and is defined according to predetermined objectives as posed by Mojahedin. According to Mojahedin:

Based on circumstances, truth takes various forms. In other words, it is likely that a procedure in a certain time and place is considered as truth because of its furthering us in achieving our objective, yet in other circumstances it is considered false since it fails to help us and rather hinders the achievement of our objectives. 5

Undoubtedly, the terms “good” and “evil” have their roots in all acts that are accordingly evaluated and defined. It has to be pointed out that the terms objective, evolution, and truth are used as equivalence and complementary whenever needed. Mojahedin have elaborated on the integration of these concepts and their function, stating:

Truth is a practice moving parallel to evolution and all actions carried out in this regard are good. Non-truth is a practice done in opposite direction that is in the direction of decadency hence all actions done in the way of untruth are considered evil. 6

Coming to political power is the first step of achieving the stated objective, evolution, and truth. From this viewpoint, all actions are evaluated based on the extent to which they lead to getting the objective, evolution or truth:

All actions needed for achieving the final objective are evidently essential and necessary. 7

In a nutshell, positive ethical concepts like honesty, sincerity, … in contrast to negative ones like crime, absolutism, dishonesty, and betrayal cannot be evaluated and defined separate from conditions and their relation to the intended objectives rather they are defined according to external issues.

References:

1. Evolution, Second book of ideology. Theoretical sources of MKO, Mojahed publication, Tehran, 1979, p.97.

2. ibid, p.93

3. ibid.

4. ibid

5. ibid

6. ibid

7. ibid, p.96.

March 2, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

The use of politics for MKO

In the politics arena, the politic men come to the scene either to achieve power or to serve people. Naturally, if the politic men work for the profit of their own pockets or their own ambitions, their reputation will be damaged soon because the people will no more tolerate the abuse of their support or funding. The true use of politics is in fact to bring freedom to people.

Unfortunately, for MKO leaders the only definition for politics is the power over their victims including their cult members and Western politicians. Given the use of politics is only to achieve power; the means to reach such a goal is justified to be anything. The means could include resorting to deception and lie to deceive western powerful governments, so dependence has no place in such a policy, an organization like MKO, without any internal support in Iran, has only one way to not only gain power but also to survive. The deception policy has been a very useful trick to win western support for MKO.

But the west, especially the US government has had various groups on its payroll at one time. Now, they are funding MKO, a decade ago, they funded and trained Bin Laden to fight Russians and even further back, they worked with Ho Chi Minh to bring change in China. As it has been the fate of any group depended on US administration, the role of MKO for the US will also be expired finally, as well as what happened to AlQaida.

All the above-mentioned groups, as well as MKO, used politics to gain control over people to practice their extremist revolutionary ideas and eventually as soon as they lost their western support, they lost their existence. The history has always witnessed various examples of extremist movements’ attempts to gain the support of superpowers for their ambitions and their collapse after missing the external support.

As a matter of fact, if any movement regards the politics as a means to serve people and to bring about freedom and democracy for people, they will definitely win public support and any movement which enjoys the support of the masses is never concerned about its survival.

Mazda Parsi

February 28, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Why is Rajavi holding onto Camp Ashraf?

In the last six years, mountains quaked yet Camp Ashraf stood stable. This is the chorus of mottos, messages, guidelines, victories, and hopes fabricated by Rajavi to foster hope in MKO members held captive in Camp Ashraf. The rationale behind considerable emphasis given to keeping Camp Ashraf, and its strategic advantage for Rajavi are evident and have to constitute one of the major issues to be elaborated on. It has been pointed out repeatedly that Camp Ashraf is the ideological bastion of Mojahedin and Iraqi soil is its strategic lever and instrument. Rajavi is well aware that its destabilization may result in the disintegration of the organization in ideological, political, and military aspects.

Rajavi’s problems have their roots in his tying Mojahedin destiny to the existence of Camp Ashraf; however, it was so at a time when Saddam was the dictator leader of Iraq and as Rajavi repeatedly asserted in his meetings with Saddam and Iraqi officials, he was out-and-out hopeful to Saddam and their ideological and even family ties and relations. Upon entering Iraq, Rajavi called his settlement there a historical event paving the way for immediate overthrow of the Iranian government. Now, after 20 years he still insists on his never-achieved promise and idea that Iraqi soil is the sole solution for furthering his so-called liberating war. The fall of Saddam was considered a turning point in his strategy enforcing him to run off to another region to evade the encountered cul-de-sac. His running away might result in the annihilation of his organization hence he attracted the attention of the world to a secondary issue, i.e. that of the necessity of keeping the integrity of Camp Ashraf for humanistic causes.

How long the process of Rajavi’s resorting to various subterfuges may last and what are his final objectives is unclear since Rajavi is always hew to the strategy of grabbing at the opportunity and now is after misusing the historical conflict of Iran-US to achieve his totalitarian and egocentric objectives. He assumes that the US-Iran conflict may lead to military conflicts that pave the way for Rajavi’s compensating his failure in forming a so-called liberation army in the reign of Saddam. Two years age, Rajavi put the termination of Bush’s taking office as the deadline of the fulfillment of the promise of overthrow and asked Ashraf residents to wait until then when they could decide on their destiny freely. Now, Obama’s anti-war policies has made Rajavi keep silent on his unfulfilled promise holding grab to the claim that even mountains quaked but Ashraf stood stable. In other words, he considers keeping Ashraf as his biggest political and strategic achievement in recent years. He considers the time being as a starting point in the history of MKO.

He still follows his past policies yet refrains to determine a deadline for his false promises. He seeks the sole solution to MKO challenges in two main factors. First, he attempts to keep Camp Ashraf as the ideological stronghold of Mojahedin and the sole factor securing the political and military integrity of Mojahedin in international scene. Second, he aims to use Camp Ashraf and its residents as a pretext to avoid taking a final decision concerning the destiny of the members kept there. It seems that he is waiting for troubled waters in the region to fish as he wishes.

The emphasis of Rajavi on keeping Camp Ashraf running implies that he equals its relocation to the disintegration of Mojahedin entity that also means his own degradation as the leader, another loser added to many other political losers. The sympathy of the world for an opposition that considered itself as the sole alternative for the Iranian government is but a complete defeat for Rajavi. It is likely that Rajavi’s undergoing relocation to another country works as a psychological and mental shock for Ashraf residents to overcome their deep frustration and disappointment but the fact is that the sole achievement of Ashraf for Rajavi is its overhanging role in postponing his answering to all his failures.

February 28, 2009 0 comments

The cult of Rajavi

PMOI’s Intimidating leadership

Cult leadership is feared. To disagree with leadership is the same as disagreeing with God. The cult leaders will claim to have direct authority from God to control almost all aspects of your life. If the cult is not a religious group then questioning the leaders or program will still be seen as a sign of rebellion and stupidity.

As Ann Singleton (former member of MEK) writes in her book “ Saddam’s Private Army” ,Masud Rajavi “ implied in his speeches that if such a leader has done his job well enough, then he starts a relationship with Imam Zaman ( the last and still awaited Imam in Shiite Islam) and therefore has direct contact with God.”

A brochure on MKO in Geostratos website explains that in 1990 Masud Rajavi declared himself ”as a person who receives his power directly from God” so the members were told to surrender their free will to the God’s representative and in case of disobedience they are called guilty or stupid. By this claim Masud Rajavi immunize himself against any criticism or opposition because the members feel guilty to oppose the order of God and also they are intimidated by their high officials in the peer pressure meetings where their character is assassinated.

Guilt, Character Assassination and Breaking Sessions. Guilt will be used to control you. Maybe the reason you’re not making money is because you’re not "with the programme". Maybe the reason you’re not able to convert new recruits is because "your heart is prideful and full of sin". It could never be that the programme isn’t working, or those new recruits have valid reasons for not joining. It’s always your fault, you are always wrong, and so you must try harder! You will also be made to feel very guilty for disobeying any of the cult’s written or unwritten rules.

Character Assassination is used to help create the guilt in you. Character Assassination is a type of false reasoning used by people and groups who have no real arguments. The technical name for Character Assassination is "The Ad hominem Fallacy". This is how it works. Imagine if you will a conversation between two men, Ford and Arthur…

"One plus one equals three", says Ford.

"No I don’t think so. You see when I have one thing, and I have another thing, then I have two things not three", replies Arthur.

"I see your point, but what you must realize is that one plus one when calculated in relation to this complex number domain, which I just invented, and then squared by the sum of the ninth tangent in the sequence of the Fibonacci series results in three!", stated Ford triumphantly.

Ok, Ford is wrong, but that is not the point. The point is that Ford tried to answer Arthur’s reasoning with more reasoning of his own. This is the healthy way people and groups debate subjects. Now lets see what would have happened if Ford had used Character Assassination…

"Arthur I have been a mathematician longer than you. How dare you disagree with me! You are obviously a very smug and prideful person. I think you are disagreeing with me because you are jealous of me, and to be honest with you Arthur your rebellion has really hurt me and a lot of other people too", stated Ford his face intimidating close to Arthur’s.

You see Ford didn’t answer Arthur’s argument, instead he attacked his character. If you are not aware of how Character Assassination works then it is a powerful way to exert control over you.

CHARACTER ASSASSINATION IS A SIGN OF A CULT

Breaking sessions are when one, two or more cult members and leaders attack the character of another person, sometimes for hours on end. Some cults will not stop these sessions until their victim is crying uncontrollably.

CULT MEMEBRS ARE USUALLY VERY FEARFUL OF DISOBEYING OR DISAGREEING IN ANYWAY WITH THEIR LEADERSHIP.HEALTHY ORGANIZATIONS HOWEVER ARE NOT THREATENED BY OPENLY DEBATING ISSUES.

Batoul Soltani is one of the eye-witnesses of character assassination sessions of the Rajavi’s cult who has been the victim of such sessions too. In her memoirs, she describes such meetings in detailed:

“ … while the member is confessing his sins (facts) in the meeting, the others in the group are insulting him with an abusive language using terms like lumpish, idiot …just because he has thought of his ex-fiancé.”

Therefore, after the deceptive methods were used to recruit the members the fearful and intimating atmosphere made by the God-like leader will keep the members in the cult.

Mazda Parsi

Reference: HowCultsWork

Washington may court moderates WITHIN Iran

Washington may court moderates within Iran rather than outside opposition
The change in tone from Washington toward Tehran is complicated not only by historic acrimony but also by a complex relationship with Iranian opposition movements.
U.S. officials have made it clear that the Obama administration represents a possible opening for Iran.
"With respect to Iran, there is a clear opportunity for the Iranians … to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community," in the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
This is in stark contrast to the previous administration and its policy of isolation. Gary Sick, a top White House aide on Iran during the Iranian hostage crisis and now senior research scholar at Columbia University, says though the administration of George W. Bush had hoped for a better relationship with Iran in the wake of the conflict in Afghanistan, that policy was largely abandoned when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.
Ali Safavi, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran — a Paris -based group calling itself the Iranian Parliament in exile — said the approach to the Iranian regime, as well as its opposition, would be a litmus test for the Obama administration.
"There has been no shortage of goodwill gestures from the Americans toward Iran with the goal of moderation, but so far this course has failed," he said.
The NCRI, which includes members of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, a dissident group based in Iraq’s Diyala province, has lobbied the international community to back a 16-point plan for regime change in Iran. It led a successful campaign in January to remove the PMOI from the terrorist list adopted by the European Union.
Maryam Rajavi, the controversial leader of the NCRI, hailed the decision as a victory for the Iranian resistance, saying the move paved the way for democratic change in Iran.
But the group’s image as a cult with a storied history of terrorist activity, both in Iran and across the globe, makes courting the opposition as a viable avenue for regime change in Iran tenuous at best.
The PMOI and the NCRI are both listed by the United States as terrorist organizations for their links to violent opposition to the Iranian regime.
President Bill Clinton in 1997 included the PMOI on the U.S. State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations following the election of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Sick says that effort was part of a broader policy of appeasement toward the moderate Khatami, adding the State FTO list is a reflection of who Washington likes as much as who it doesn’t.
The PMOI arrived on the scene in the 1960s as a movement opposing the Western-backed Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran, and supporting the Iranian Revolution in 1979 that brought Ayatollah Khomeini to power. The ideology of the PMOI, centered on Marxism, was in contradiction to the Revolution, however, and the group was exiled to Paris in 1981.
With France recognizing the Iranian regime in 1986, however, the group established itself in various camps throughout Iraq from which it ran a campaign of violence against Tehran. Though largely targeting Iranian government officials, its killing of American contractors in Tehran in the 1970s, participation alongside Saddam Hussein’s forces in suppressing Kurdish and Shiite rebellions in Iraq in 1991 and its later attacks on Iranian embassies in 1992 earned it a spot on the terrorist lists of several nations.
Its reputation for militancy, however, was not supported by recognition as a major fighting force. The PMOI surrendered its tanks and heavy artillery to U.S. forces following the 2003 invasion. Its members are now considered protected persons in Iraq under the Fourth Geneva Convention and claim to have abandoned their militant agenda in favor of peaceful opposition.
The PMOI, and its representatives in the NCRI, claim to hold valuable intelligence on Iranian operations, including Iran’s controversial nuclear program. The group often touts its unveiling of the nuclear program at the Natanz weapons facility in Iran, though several analysts note developments at Natanz were all but flaunted by the Iranian regime.
Massoud Khodabandeh, a former member of the PMOI, said those claims, and the intelligence value of reports from the NCRI/PMOI in general, are at best questionable, at worst useless.
"It is widely believed that intelligence given out by the PMOI about Iran’s nuclear facilities was given to them by Western intelligence contacts," he said.
Meanwhile, allegations have mounted that the U.S. intelligence community has funneled money to the PMOI for operations against the Iranian regime. An article in The New Yorker magazine in 2008 suggested the Bush administration had set aside some $400 million for covert operations against Iran, with a portion going to the PMOI.
The NCRI’s Safavi, however, called those allegations "completely bogus," and U.S. intelligence officers contacted for this story said there was no evidence to support those claims, though the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said he "wouldn’t be surprised if the allegation turned out to be true."
Meanwhile, with Iraq emerging from U.S. occupation with a shaky democracy, the relationship between Baghdad and the PMOI remains tense.
With the PMOI widely reviled in Iraq for supporting the violent suppression of the Shiite and Kurdish rebellions, and in Iran for its historic assassination policy, the group has few friends outside its groups of supporters in Europe and the United States.
Though Iraq does not have an extradition treaty with Iran, several top Iraqi officials, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, have said the group is no longer welcome in Iraq.
Both the NCRI and PMOI, through persuasive and astute campaigns aimed at generating sympathy both in the media and among world leaders, including those in the United States, have pushed for a delisting campaign with an effort to sever its ties to its terrorist past.
International lawyers in Washington, D.C., representing the PMOI filed a petition in July with the U.S. State Department seeking removal from the FTO list there, but U.S. officials say the FTO designation is appropriate.
Speaking to reporters following the Jan. 26 EU delisting, State Department deputy spokesman Robert A. Wood said "nothing has changed from our standpoint" concerning either group.
Meanwhile, the outcome of the January provincial elections in Iraq may indicate a subtle shift in Iraqi relations with Iran as the pro-Tehran Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council was trounced in the elections, largely by Maliki’s more secular State of Law slate.
Former Iranian President Khatami — widely seen as a moderate — has announced plans to run for president again in June, and though an appeal in the PMOI FTO listing case is expected to reach the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit this summer, with U.S. policy currently leaning toward courting moderates within Iran, rather than outside opposition groups, little seems likely to change in the future.

By DANIEL GRAEBER, UPI Correspondent,
http://www.upi.com/Emerging_Threats/2009/02/20/
Washington_may_court_moderates_within_Iran_rather_
than_outside_opposition/UPI-42961235157864/

February 23, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

Mojahedin, Iraqi government and the future

There are some issues that have attracted the attention of the world toward MKO. The settlement of Mojahedin in Iraqi soil and recently the recent statements made by Nouri Al-Maliki claiming that the Iraqi government refrains to deliver organization members to the Iranian government and seeks their transfer to a third country is another issue. The world is also encountering propaganda blitz of the organization on the position taking of the US in keeping on its control over Camp Ashraf and also the MKO’s petitioning the world to hew to international conventions concerning individual rights of MKO members. The focus Mojahedin put on these issues in their sites on the one hand and their recent claim of calling their present situation a remarkable victory on the other hand seems contradictory and calls for a deep study on the overall issue and the concerned parties, i.e. MKO, Iraq, Iran, and the US. In this regard, position of Iran, Iraq, and the US toward MKO has to be reviewed to make us find an appropriate answer to the question; what are Mojahedin after by means of their present considerable propaganda blitz?

1. US position toward MKO

As acknowledged by Mojahedin, US officials consider MKO as a terrorist group; however, they insist on keeping them in Iraqi soil according to international conventions as long as its members will have been settled in a second country; yet the US considers the Iraqi government responsible for controlling Camp but recognizes its rights of deciding to keep or expel the organization from its soil. The US is after all trying to find a solution to prevent the transfer of MKO members to Iran.

2. Iraq positions toward MKO

Up to now, Iraqi officials have desisted to make any statement on their decision to deliver MKO members to the Iranian government; on the contrary, their statements imply that they will never do it. Nevertheless, Iraqi officials believe that national constitution of Iraq necessitates it to expel Mojahedin from Iraqi soil due to their committing terrorist activities therein and has let them free to decide whether relocate their camp to another country or return to Iran. It has to be noted that Iranian officials have repeatedly declared their disinclination to admit MKO members and leaders who have taken part in numerous terrorist attacks inside Iran and even have reveled a prepared list of them in advance. Therefore, there is no possibility that Iraq and the US transfer MKO members to Iran.

3. Iran position toward MKO

Although the Iranian government asked for the transfer of a number of MKO leaders as terrorist criminals to Iran after the fall of Saddam, the fact is that despite a great number of MKO detached members have returned to Iran deliberately, it is a long time when Iranian officials have declared their unwillingness to accept MKO members or even the deliberately detached members. It has to be pointed out that Iranian officials have repeatedly asserted that they have allowed MKO detached members to enter Iran due to humanistic causes and with no political motivation. However, the coming events may prove or disapprove the honesty of Iran in its claims. It is likely that the US-Iran conflict has its roots partly in the approach followed by the US toward MKO and the fact that it defends a notorious organization whose name is in its terrorist list.

***

Despite the clear position of the three parties mentioned, Mojahedin insist on pursuing their common approach of perverting and fabricating Iraqi and Iranian officials’ statements. In this regard, they make an attempt to inculcate their European advocators with the idea that Iraq has decided to deliver them to Iran in an act of breaking international conventions and human rights. However, the fact is that due to the crises and tensions posed to the organization during years of exile, Mojahedin cannot solve their problems legally and rationally and are used to resort to illegal shortcuts. The tactics grabbed at by Mojahedin reveal that they have always held grab to putting pressure on their dissidents to further their interests and achieve their objectives. Likewise, they are to put Iraqi government in a position to make inappropriate reactions favored by Mojahedin.

In this way, they resort to heavy propaganda blitz and illegal activities like making contact to Iraqi terrorists, intensifying the tensions inside Iraqi soil, etc. Their hostile position toward Iraqi government and their relation with problematic groups therein implies the fact that they rely much on these relations to further their interests in Iraq and also one of their pretexts for refraining to deliver the control of camp Ashraf to Iraqi government is to pave the way for their misusing of the present conditions for making contact to Iraqi problematic groups. Therefore, the Iraqi government has to concentrate its efforts on preventing Mojahedin to misuse the tensions occurred inside Iraq and also be careful not to give them any subterfuge to get their own way. However, does it mean Mojahedin are to be let free to make contact to problematic and insurgent Iraqi trends?

The fact is that perversing tactics of Mojahedin has put the winning card in their hands. The legal measures taken by Iraqi government against MKO may increase the chance of their unexpected reactions and also pave the way for their petitioning the world, yet any negligence of Mojahedin’s illegal activities may result in Mojahedin’s favored condition in furthering their illegal interests in Iraqi soil. Taking this viewpoint into consideration, whatever the course of events in the future, Mojahedin would be the winner. Furthermore, the experience shows that Mojahedin easily take advantage of suicide operations when encountering any impasse to win over, like the self-immolation of a number of MKO members in June 17th 2003 in France. However, it suffices not to take preventive measures against these activities since Mojahedin have proved that they are masters of plotting unexpected activities. In fact, they are like time bombs that despite their high destructive potentials can be deactivated if detected in time. What is of importance at the time being is that the world has to believe the destructive potentiality of MKO leaders and members.

What is to be done?

Now, this question arises: what is to be done? Evidently, the one-sided decision making of Iraq on MKO’s destiny is a risky and problematic action since, as it was experienced in global scene, Mojahedin may resort to defensive measures to foil Iraqi governments’ efforts by means of fabricating false information, suppressing the truth, initiating psychological and propaganda war, poisoning atmosphere in their own favor, and presenting themselves as the victimized party in the existing crises. In this regard and taking the strong support the US offers to Mojahedin and Mojahedin’s inclination to receive the support of the US as well as other international bodies like the ICRC, Red Crescent, and human rights activists into consideration, the cooperation of the US and international organizations with the Iraqi government may prevent MKO’s misusing the critical situation.

Therefore, the collaboration of the US as a mediator to control the overall process, the internationally recognized bodies and the Iraqi government seems necessary to arrive at a general consensus. The necessity of the presence of the US and international bodies is due to the fact that Mojahedin have proven that they have a big hand in changing their strategy and position taking in a blink of an eye and it is likely that they may accuse the Iraqi government of engaging in plots against the group as it has already spread fabrications over explosion of water pipes of camp Ashraf, missile attacks to camp Ashraf, hijacking some MKO members, and terror of Mojahedin leaders. However, the presence of the US and international bodies may put a stop to such fabrications. Also it is necessary to exercise full security control over Camp Ashraf, Mojahedin have to be totally disarmed and the cyanide capsules as well as explosives located therein be detected and collected.

In the second phase and after the formation of the council consisting of Iraq, the US and a number of concerned international organs, MKO’s high rankings should be separated from its rank-and-files so that the latter may find the opportunity of making free contacts to their families. It has to be noted that Rajavis’ refusal to separate top officials from rank-and-files implies the fact that there is a high possibility of plotting terrorist attacks regardless of the cost and form.

Also, it is necessary to declare the names of Ashraf residents openly since there are some families that are unaware of the presence of their relatives therein. Second, Ashraf residents are to interact with the outside world freely. Providing internet, satellite, journals, newspapers, and books for them is necessary in this regard. Third, they should be let free to choose their own destiny and decide for their future.

Another responsibility on international organizations in this regard is to identify those volunteer to separate MKO, and according to their will, make the ground for their transfer to Iran or other countries that may let them in. It may convince Iraqi government to allow the settlement of Mojahedin in Iraq until the time when a country consents to provide MKO members with asylum. As it was mentioned before, this solution and the interference of the US and international bodies in Iraq-Mojahedin conflict may put an end to it and prevent any possible misuse on the part of the concerned parties.

February 23, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MEK; Controversial freedom fighters

The Iranian resistance group “mujahedin khalq” as fifth column against Tehran during the Iran-Iraq war

Since the end of the Saddam era, it plays a very ambiguous role.

Behnam Sanati (name changed by the author) could have had a quiet life in Paris, where his parents after the Islamic revolution in Iran, emigrated in 1979. But in the mid-90s, he made the mistake of his life. He fell in love with a young Iranian girl who convinced him, to join “mujahedin khaq” (the word means “holy warriors”),and then become a militant for Iraqi ex-dictator Saddam Hussein who supported the group formed to overthrow the regime in Tehran.

In 1998, the MEK sent him to Ashraf Camp in Iraq, 100 kilometers from the Iranian border. Later he was supposed to launch an attack on a senior military officer in Tehran. “The mission was not successful,” says Sanati cool and emotionless. But the failure of the action

meant that he eventually swallowed a cyanide capsule and then – because the poison had not killed him – he blew up a hand grenade in the air. Here he lost his left hand, but he was received in an Iranian military hospital and survived. He followed five years in prison.

Today he is stunned sitting in a small Parisian bistro and shaking his head. Last week was in fact the struggle time

for the status of mujahedin khalq, a three-year dispute to an end: the group was removed by the EU, like the British model, from the terror list. And last December, Europe tipped the Supreme Court for the EU’s decision on dismissal of the organization’s assets freezing. “This is hopefully not the last word in this matter. Just because the ruling of European Court against the successful listing as a terrorist organization in the European Union has sued, does not alter their crimes in the past,” says Behnam angrily.

Divided opinions

He is right. The contradiction continues, because the EU states are divided in the assessment of the Iranian opposition movement. France wants to appeal the decision of the EU’s Court of appeal. States such as Austria, Ireland, Denmark and Luxembourg, however, argue that the Iranian opposition group after the decision of the EU judges could not stay on the terrorist list.

This list, via a unanimous decision made by all 27 EU member states is renewed every six months. Benham hopes that soon MEK will be on the list again. “mujahedin was founded in 1965 and acted against Shah mohammad Reza Pahlavi who was supported by the west the until the Islamic revolution in 1979. In their worldview, the first supporters demanded an obscure mixture of revolutionary Marxism, guerrilla struggle ethos à la Ho Chi Minh and Shiite Islam, as the protest movement against class exploitation and state violence. The armed struggle from the outset was MEK’s favorite tool to its anti-American and anti-monarchist propaganda with the necessary efficiency to lend, “he explains.

Behnam knows the history of the movement by heart: “MEK planned their first major attack in 1971, when the 2500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy was celebrated. They wanted to blow up E-factory in the capital Tehran what Pahlavi’s security forces prevented. Waves of arrests were the result, Rajavi who now leads the MEK authoritarian was imprisoned. After the Islamic revolution the MEK broke out with the Iranian regime that had originally supported and consequently Rajavi fled to France. MEK led the remaining members in home launch bombings, murders, and attacks on Iranian interests.

Exile in Iraq

The emigrants were not only in the West, where a large number of Iranians live in exile, but also in neighboring Iraq. In 2003 the US-led military coalition toppled dictator Saddam Hussein and made mujahedin disappointed because he had granted them shelter since 1980’s as mercenaries in the first Gulf and war against Iran. Also in the repression of Kurdish and Shiite uprisings, they were involved, what finally shattered the support of the Iranian people of their mother country, “said Behnam. He continued:” This sect has perpetrated attacks on Iranians! How can you shoot to your own compatriots? How could I just join? ”

Behnam takes out a photo from his pocket and shows it to us. “They are from Austria but then they are interested in here,” he says. It shows the ex-Mujaheddin fighters Golzar Farid (name changed by the author). ” In 1984, Farid graduated from the University of Vienna began in 1985 in Austria by the Mujahedin recruited. He flew with Austrian Airlines to Baghdad and came first in a warehouse to Kurdistan. During the Iran-Iraq war, he fought mainly against pro-Iranian Kurdish units. Shortly before the end of the war, the leader of the MEK, Massud Rajavi, moved a tactic to change his group as an army into battle against Iran. As in the UN Resolution 598, July 1987 peace plan that ended the Iran-Iraq war was decided, Rajavi was before his group and stated that their credibility was under question if they would not hit. On July 18th, shortly after Iran signed the ceasefire agreement 7000 MEK fighters began the operation “Eternal Light” for the disastrous failure: at least 1315 fighters were killed.

The organization now shifted its activities to terrorist attacks inside Iran: In 2001, Farid Golzar with antitank missiles and a Kalashnikov sent to Tehran in order to execute an attack. “He was arrested and sentenced to nine years in prison. In 2005, he was released from prison,” says Behnam. “Why there were no death sentences, why he came and Golzar released too early? ’’, We want to know. “Iran’s government began to change in the era of President Mohammad Khatami its policy towards the MEK. With mild penalties and the possibility of reintegration, the 4000 fighters who are still in Camp Ashraf could be, to be convinced to return to Iran,” Behnam said.

Dissatisfied with the news about the MEK is also an employee of the Iranian Center for Strategic Studies: The 35-year-old complains about the unwillingness of the United States, to hand over the camp in Iraq to Iraqi government. “That’s a double morality of the West. How they claim to fight against terror, while they remove a terrorist group from the list,” he asks angrily.

Maryam Rajavi, leader of the National Resistance of Iran (NCRI), provides as legal representative of the exiled opposition group that is completely different. “The decision is a valuable beginning. Now, the U.S. should follow the European example and delete MEK from the list too” she asks. Although they proclaim that their organization for several years has had no longer militant operations, it should be considered as serious that they can not deny that the role of the political orphans of mujahedin in the eventful history of the Middle East.

Joker militant U.S.

After the fall of Saddam there is no use from the cult-like militia, the U.S. is wary of them, because even killings of U.S. soldiers during the Shah’s time go to their account. The hawks in the Pentagon, would still like to be militant Joker against Iran. It was this group that in 2002 uncovered the existence of the uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and the heavy water reactor in Arak, is regarded as evidence of their importance.

On the other hand, the former weapons inspector Scott Ritter says, Israel’s secret service had been the source. For “PR reasons” – Israel itself has nuclear weapons and refuses to acknowledge the NPT to sign – he did the group fed with information. Iraq wants the fighters to get rid of any event and suspected them to cooperate with extremists.

Before Behnam goes, he raises the finger warningly and says: “I will only find my peace when all can live Mujaheddin in the Iranian society, and none of them longer is forced to live in camps where violence and dictatorship prevail.”

Wiener Zeitungat By Arian Faal, born 1977, lives as a journalist and university lecturer in Vienna and Paris.

February 22, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Inter-organizational defiance of a cult leader

As already elaborated on, irreparable damages to Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) under Rajavi’s lead had their roots mainly in his flaws and characteristics like his arrogance, egotism, ambitiousness, narcissism, etc. They are so inherently rooted in him that even organizational instructions and indoctrinations succeeded not in changing his attitude and to convince him take a different approach.
Here the aim is to review his ambition to submit members and as he calls it exploit organizational hierarchy that turned to a principle in his initiated ideological revolution and gave him the pretext to make internal purges. The open-minded and impartial readers may raise the question why, despite the existence of more experienced members who were more intimately related to MKO founders, Rajavi assumed power while he was less qualified and had revealed signs of weakness in some phases like the interrogations conducted by SAVAK (Pahlavi’s notorious security agency) in prison. There is no doubt that Rajavi had some qualifications and enjoyed an open and active mind and was good in lectures and theoretical discussions; however, they made MKO founders more concerned rather than pleased. In addition to factors referred to at which Rajavi grabbed to attain a high rank in the organization, there are other factors contributing to his organizational promotion.
In fact, if we consider the ideological revolution of Rajavi as an instrument at his hands to fulfill his ambitious objectives, we have to take his role as an MKO member into consideration to find out how he managed to usurp the leadership of Mojahedin after the mass arrests of 1971 despite the presence of more qualified cadres. This is a question posed by many remnants of MKO answered in different ways with regard to various factors. According to an MKO former member:
There is a point to be noted: Rajavi was one of those not to go a long way in the organization recruitment. MKO leaders were affected by his youth and foray and soon entered him in the central cadre. I think he was the youngest member of the central cadre of the organization in 1971. 1
As his intimates state, Rajavi lost his popularity in a phase of his imprisonment due to his anti-revolutionary and anti-value characteristics and activities. Taking a look at the events of 1971 and mass arrests reveals that he used all possible means to eliminate more qualified cadres. In addition, he made an attempt to indoctrinate founders and leaders with the idea that he had the required potentiality to shoulder major responsibilities. From a professional point of view, he was rightful in competing with others to prove his qualifications; however, in a revolutionary organization, blowing the organization for achieving personal ambitions is considered an anti-value phenomenon.
There are many evidences that Rajavi was always after questioning and criticizing cadres and leaders to make them passive and give them a feeling of inferiority to obtain organizational rise. Even in some cases he openly declared his objective in competing against other cadres and eliminating them from the organization scene. In a condition that his activities can affect MKO founders like Asqar Badizadagan, its influence on lower cadres seems inevitable. As Meisami puts into words:
Masoud [Rajavi] acted in a way that made all cadres including Asqar [Badizadegan] subject to inferiority. As Behrooz stated, he acted in a way that Asqar [Badizadegan] even left teaching chemistry and function of explosives. 2
Or when the organization decides to make contact with Al-Fatah (a Palestinian organization) to exchange experience and military training, Rajavi considers himself the most qualified member, even more qualified than the organization founder, Hanifnejad, and says:
I have the qualification to write a letter to Palestinians. 3
Lotfollah Meisami refers to the same event in more details and writes:
Rajavi went to Palestine as a translator and refrained to pass the instructional phase and there made all cadres (Badizadegan, Bakeri, and Torab Haqshenas) feel inferiority. When members decided to write an article for Palestinians, Rajavi said he is the one who could write it and made other members passive. Asqar [Badizadegan] who was a chemical engineer left teaching the formula of explosives to members under the influence of Rajavi. 4
It has to be pointed out that Rajavi pursued his egocentric activities in a condition when the organization founders and Hanifnejad in particular put a great deal of significance on ethical principles and considered anti-value features of members destructive. The reasons why they blinked at Rajavi’s violations may constitute the subject of other articles.

References:
1. The memoirs of Dr. Mohammad Mehdi Jafari: MKO from inside, Negah-e Emruz publication, 2002, p.48.
2. The memoirs of Lotfollah Meisami, vol. 2, 2002, Tehran, p.75.
3. ibid.
4. Meisami, Lotfollah, Degeneration of a Mojahed, No. 32.

February 21, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

MKO’s violence originated in its theory Structure

MKO’s violent acts and atrocities are originated in its theory structure

The presence of the organization [MEK] in Iraqi territory has nothing to the Iraqi nation except danger.
MKO’s violent acts and atrocities are originated in its theory structure The recent annual report of the Department of State might not have anything new on the status of the Iranian Mujahedin Khalq Organization which has been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization since years ago. But the speech made by Condoleeza Rice following the publication of the new list, which called the group as substantially terrorist, should be taken as serious.

The MKO tries to pretend that it has denounced terrorism and represents a peaceful struggle because they claim to have abandoned violence for years. But, the investigations by the State Department’s experts did not include its recent acts but the terrorist nature of MKO of which its ideology and strategy completely originates and will never get separated. MKO is a destructive cult with a terrorist potential, according to the experts, and will not lose such potentiality without arm and camp and will never miss its real nature.

Therefore from a technical viewpoint – if one doesn’t want to work on political interests and benefits – the investigation on the nature of a group is prior to its short-term functions. If we don’t evaluate the nature correctly, we will make mistake in viewing its short–term function, as many unprofessional people made the same mistake.

Terrorist designation of the groups or entities by various countries is primarily done due to the national security (although sometimes the lists get a political flavor) and its objective is to determine the organization with terrorist potentiality and take them under direct supervision.

However, the designation of the terrorist nature of a group is based on the interests and acts of the group through its background and many other criteria, so it requires a deep and multilateral investigation.

We do not intend to punish before the commitment but we want to investigate this case more deeply trying not to view MKO’s short-term claims as a base.

The nature we are discussing includes long-term functions and we would like to confirm that the potential capacity of MKO will be definitely actualized if the condition is appropriate and when the facilities are provided eventually the previous status will be revived.

In the recent report on MKO published by German federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, there is no difference between MKO and NCRI and also it is mentioned that there is no evidence to approve that the organization has denounced its violent acts. The report also notes that the organization is a cult, the fact that many experts agree.

The cult-like and terrorist nature of MKO requires it to commit terror acts in case of necessity, because it has theorized the engagement in violence in its theory system. Therefore such an organization is always dangerous for its environment. It is a destructive risk for the security of every society and could be considered as a substantial threat. Thus it must be restricted and neutralized.

Unfortunately, today the main body of MKO is located in our country. Saddam Hussein brought them to our territory due to his own benefits as well as other disasters he left for us. The west that has once used the group against the Islamic Republic, now doesn’t want to accept them in its soil. This is exactly like they want to get rid of their nuclear garbage that they have used it and now that it is a threat they want to get rid of it. The presence of MKO in our territory brings nothing except danger and threat to Iraqi nation who has no reason to suffer the risks of this nuclear garbage. The west should keep them in its own territory since they are well aware of their threats.
Al Mo’tamar Newspaper

The presence of the organization [MEK] in Iraqi territory has nothing to the Iraqi nation except danger.

the investigations by the State Department’s experts did not include its recent acts but the terrorist nature of MKO of which its ideology and strategy completely originates

February 19, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Reiteration of Paris self-burning disaster in Ashraf

Alert and alert, the West states must be on the highest alert and feel moral and political responsibility to prevent more disastrous incidents in Ashraf garrison which can terrorize then jeopardize the local peace and security.
Maryam Rajavi (Iranian Ben Laden) has already tested the success of such an adventurous experience in Paris in June 2003 to achieve her terrorist aims and political blackmails. so that, she issued an ideological command to her cult innocent and deceived members to resort holy self-burning suicide with the intention of de-stabilizing the French political atmosphere to impose her illegitimate conditions on French govt. not to extradite her to Iran because of her terrorist committed crimes in Iran. The price of such an adventurous action was the destruction of two tempting women in France in June 2003. The more delay the heavy human losses in the Ashraf garrison as occurred in Paris in June 2003. Therefore, as a separated ex- member of the “People Mujahidin Organization of Iran” (PMOI) who have been under inhuman psychological and physical torture by this chaotic sect cal l for the urgent and press actions and efforts without any hesitation to salve the live of thousands incarcerated innocent victims in Ashraf garrison situated in Iraq. If the West public opinion and political elites consider the demoniac and inflamed message of Maryam Rajavi’s husband who is the ideological leader of this cult, they will find out that the history is going to be repeated again and create a new Paris self-burning disaster in Ashraf garrison with the highest dimensions of creature of the human catastrophe. Masood Rajavi stimulated and encouraged the caged victims of Ashraf garrison to upheaval against Iraqi elect govt. sovereignty and not to obey the rules and regulations, which has been passed by Iraq constitutional assembly. He intimidated Iraqi govt. to imply with his illegal demands not to impose Iraq dominion over his unlawful self-govt. in the territory of Iraq. Otherwise, he will openly goad and compel his deceived innocent victims in Ashraf garrison to start a hunger strike and if they cannot get their demands from Iraqi govt., they must resort self-holocaust solution to make the West public opinion to support his illegal demands. The authentic sources familiar to his violent nature and characteristics believe that Masood Rajavi’s message is too bloodthirsty and full of intimidations, desperations, and self-contradictions and he does not care how many people will be on fire and killed in his self-created holocaust. Now, I, as a survivor of this terrorist cult ask the West public opinion and responsible authorities to take Masood Rajavi’s message serious to avert Masood Rajavi’s latent holocaust in Ashraf garrison. According to an Iranian axiom, “when you push a wild cat on the ring or on the corner of the room; the cat will scrape and claw you.” It means that when there is an absolute impasse and no alternative to rescue the live and change the conditions, the reaction of such wild animals with violent natures towards such dead end conditions are unexpected, desperate, vague, and outrageous. As a result, the reaction of wildcat is adventurous and violent, it may invade you by any weapon, and way and bomb commit either suicide or self-burning. Based on the past Masood Rajavi’s terrorist adventures in the occasions of impasse conditions and political catch-22, the experience shows that, he is always endeavoring to theorize his cultic conspiracies to prepare the atmosphere for terrorist adventures. That is why he used the language of threat in his message vs. Iraq elect govt. several times in different ways and tried to place the responsibility of his future prepared terrorist activities on the shoulder of Iraq govt. and the rest of the world. That is why; the most significant part of his message is that “the world can not be in the peace and security without the establishment of security in the Ashraf garrison” where is his main and key base for preparing terrorist activities. The reality is that, if the West states are not determine to take necessary action regarding Masood Rajavi’s expressed threats today, thus, tomorrow will be too late. Moreover, the human beings will face the reiteration of Paris self-burning disaster in Ashraf garrison with the highest terrible dimensions. Therefore, the fenced in Ashraf garrison victims are expecting the human consciences and human rights organizations not to hesitate in rescuing them.
Iranpeyvand

February 17, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts