In Iran’s contemporary history, Mojahedin Khalq Organization (MKO,MEK, PMOI, NCRI, NLA) is the exact illustration of a political movement that strongly advocated a strategy of armed struggle that has proved defeated and unproductive. A review of its function in the course of all these years well depicts the clear and basic controversy between its organizational instructions and that Iran’s social-political conditions. They were moving on a wrong path from the very beginning but kept pretending an avant-garde of a struggle manner that people disapproved. It is always people, however, who have paid the heavy price of the factions’ deviation and dogmatism in the accomplishment of their ambitions.
Nearly four decades ago, Mohammad Hanif-Nezhad along with a number of other students, formerly active in National Front, came together to establish an organization that has so far moved in a struggle path totally different from other previously established armed movements like Sazman-e Cherikhai-e Fedaye Khalq (People’s Devoted Militia Organization). Approved by the leaders of many pro-Marxist militias, none of the armed struggle moves in the process of Iran’s political and social fluctuations has proved to be productive and MKO has been no exception. Compared with its parallel armed groups, MKO seem to have suffered a more pitiful and deplorable destiny after selling itself to liberalism and imperialism.
The group’s past history is intermingled with a variety of different and controversial phases. It received two devastating internal and external blows, namely, the ideological split and mass arrests by monarchical regime’s notorious SAVAK. In both circumstances, the organization nearly lost 90 percent of its insiders, but a passing look over its activities, from its inception to the Islamic revolution, evidentially indicate that it had had no influential impact on social milieu and ambiance.
In contrast to the group’s baseless analyses claiming to have played a crucial role in Iran’s contemporary political history, in many cases it acted as a deterrent trying to misconduct the justly guided march of people to achieve their right wants. The armed move that MKO announced against the will of nation to overthrow the Islamic Republic proved to be a total failure; the outcome was a bloodbath targeting many innocent civilians and officials. 
The MKO’s first attempt to create a military spectacle the same as Fedayan’s daring operation of Siahkal failed, that is to say, its plan to disrupt the 1971 celebrations surrounding the 2500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy. In fact, although it was an attempt to win the control and leadership of the armed struggle, but the armed strategy in itself was in no way justifiable. The historical necessity of the armed struggle at the time was still a big question; yet, the important point was the influence of the rising tide of the guerilla struggles.
Mojahedin were imitators of Fedayan militia who also imitated the guerilla and armed activities of other countries like Algeria, Cuba, and Vietnam. The strategy heavily influenced by the struggling experiences of the guerillas in those countries was in absolute contradiction to Iranian social, cultural, and religious context.
Moreover, Fedayan were under the heavy influence of Marxism and were running on a path to corroborate the theoretical and philosophical aspects of Marxism while Mojahedin believed they were holding an ideological supremacy over other leftist rivals. Mojahedin were basically formed according to the left parties’ structure. Ideologically, the organization was under the heavy influence of the National Front’s scientific theory. Thus, Mojahedin and other active rivals advocating armed strategy against Shah, actually distanced from the main objectives of the armed struggle aimed to prepare a background for the masses to rise and join the struggle. The armed struggle, under the pretext of fighting against Shah’s tyranny, turned into a battle of the ideologies. Well aware of the fact that they were all walking in a wrong path, none of the sides dared to make a rational critique of the strategy; the discouraging factor was being labeled as compromisers. That is to say, if anyone made an appeal to justify that the objective conditions were inappropriate for revolution, he would be labeled a compromiser, reformist, opportunist, and lacking the needed political courage.
Disregarding the role of people in struggle and insistence on armed strategy as well as imposing its ideological dogmatism has raised big questions, after the Islamic revolution, over its formation and the cause for its existence. The motivation and the real objectives of the main founders, among whom faithful, devoted ones existed, have also encountered a big question mark. Mojahedin’s change of guideline aiming to assume power at all costs led it to an absolute ideological drift and, consequently, to the precipice of being dependant on imperialism. The heavily advertised glories of its past military achievements evaporated soon after its collusion with Saddam, an archenemy of Iran, its transmission into a cult, and its direct beg of support from the US to overthrow the Islamic Republic.
leader who has a long history of revolutionary struggle and claims to lead Iranian revolution against the current oppressive regime. The significance of this issue has its roots in the fact that while the act is a scandal offending woman and distorting the meaning of leadership, it is introduced as an ideological revolution aiming to esteem the status of women. 1 
(ambushes, raids, etc) to fight a larger army or enemy. 
MKO lost its public support in three phases. The first phase happened following their use of terror after the Islamic Revolution, when they launched terror operations in civil targets and assassinated a large number of their compatriots. Like the communist forces in the Philippines and Malaysia, these strikes helped turn civilian opinion against the so-called freedom fighters. Such tactics had no result except the withdrawal of the support of Iranians for MKO terrorists. 
of Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad, the terrorist training camp leased by Saddam Hussein to 3500 members of the Iranian MEK cult. The MEK carried out terrorist attacks inside Iran on behalf of Iraq, as well as spying on, and making false allegations about, Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program. MEK have probably been triple agents, sharing information with and pushing disinformation on Saddam, Israel and the US through various channels. They also served Saddam as an SS, repressing Iraqi dissidents. When the US took Iraq in 2003, the Neoconservatives at the Pentagon wanted to adopt the terrorist group for covert operations against Iran and against the Shiite fundamentalist parties in Iraq that had been hosted in exile by Tehran. The Pentagon/ Neoconservative interest in the MEK appears to have been connected to its secret ties to Israel, and prominent members of the American Israel lobby such as Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson went to bat for this motley crew of bombers and saboteurs (ironically, they have been prolific in accusing ordinary Americans of being ‘terrorist supporters’ if they declined to ask ‘how high’ whenever Bibi Netanyahu commanded us to jump). The State Department, in contrast, pushed for listing the MEK as a terrorist organization. In the end, as usual in the Bush administration, Washington gave us the worst compromise possible, declaring MEK a terrorist organization and going on using it for espionage and sabotage in Iran as well as against Iraqi Shiites. In 2005 the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and the Da`wa Party came to power in elections in Baghdad, the very parties against which MEK had been conspiring, and they have repeatedly tried to get rid of the Mojahedin, but were stopped by the Pentagon. The ‘Islamic Marxist’ guerrillas are likely now to be expelled. Al-Maliki said that they would not be forced to return to Iran, and could go to other destinations of their choice, but could not remain in Iraq.
according to Joseph Rowntree Foundation includes three principal elements of the exploitive relationship: