MEK’s paid speakers, “to be or not to be”

The latest news on US politics included a bad one for the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (the MKO/ MEK/ PMOI/ Cult of Rajavi). President Trump fired one of the most vocal supporters of the MEK, his national security advisor John Bolton because he “disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the Administration”.

Bolton is notoriously known for his warmongering attitudes, especially, against Iran. He is well known for his op-ed in the New York Times in 2015, headlined: “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” [1]
This extremely anti-Iran stance makes him sexy enough to get in bed with the MEK. That’s why after his departure from the White House all reports and analysis point out to his many appearances in the MEK’s events as a paid speaker.
“One group that is no doubt devastated by Bolton’s departure is the MEK — the Iranian exile group that wants regime change in Tehran, by force if necessary, and has paid Bolton & Rudy Giuliani to make speeches”, tweeted Edward Wong of the New York Times. [2]
Barbara Slavin, director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank, welcomed Bolton’s departure from the administration. “Bolton is an absolutist; it’s all or nothing, black and white. He’s not very good at step-by-step or incremental agreements, and those are the only kinds of agreements that are realistic with adversaries,” Slavin told the Middle East Eye. “So I think he’s been a major impediment to diplomacy. He is a war-monger. He’s somebody who’s advocated for bombing Iran, as recently as this past summer, and he has ties with the Mujahideen-e Khalq, an Islamo-fascist cult. So I’m glad he’s out.” [3]
Jason Rezaian of the Washington Post states, “His absence also means that the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), a reviled Iranian opposition group that long lived on the State Department’s list of foreign terrorist groups, no longer has a powerful ally in the White House.” [4]
Rezaian truly suggests that the MEK’s money does mean more to Bolton compared with its almost no support among Iranians. “The MEK can claim no popular support, and among Iranians of nearly all political orientations, inside the country and in the diaspora, it was Bolton’s paid alliance with the cult-like group that made him such an odious character,” he writes. [5]
Daniel Larison of the American Conservative who had previously warned about Bolton’s paid sponsorship for the MEK, a few months earlier, in June, denounced Bolton’s policy towards Iran due to his notorious links with the Cult of Rajavi. “Bolton’s long relationship with the MEK discredits everything he has to say about Iran,” he wrote. “No one that has praised this cult as a potential replacement for the Iranian government should have anything to do with U.S. policymaking at any level, much less at the White House. No one foolish or fanatical enough to side with this cult should be entrusted with any government position.” [6]
Larison strictly warned about the MEK-Bolton dirty connections. “Bolton’s ties to the MEK should be mentioned in every story that reports on him and the administration’s Iran policy, but unfortunately they are only rarely included in media coverage,” he stated. [7]
“It is unacceptable for a top government official responsible for shaping U.S. foreign policy to have been the paid shill of this awful organization that previously killed Americans,” Larison continued. “It is wrong for an official with ties to the MEK to be influencing decisions on Iran policy. There are many reasons why Bolton should be fired, and this is right at the top of the list.” [8]
On September 10th, after Bolton’s departure, Daniel Larison published an article on The American Conservative, titled “Good Riddance, Bolton” in which he expresses his pleasure to the “good news”. According to the senior editor of TAC, as far as Bolton is not a member of the administration his ardent support for the MEK is not dangerous for the region. “He should never have been hired, but at least he is out of government. Now he can go shill for the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) full-time,” Larison suggests. [9]
Definitely, the Saudi funded establishment of the Mujahedin Khalq is able to buy the support of any warmonger figure in the US political scene but as far as the group is despised by the Iranian nation, its paid sponsors are not capable of running their agenda. To be or not to be in the US administration team will not make Bolton a proper person to run the MEK’s agenda. The MEK can keep on expending dollars to buy the support of American high profiles. However the will and determination of the Iranian nation is certainly against the will of the longtime traitors who fought alongside Saddam Hussein against their country fellow men and opened fire against innocent civilians in the Iranian cities.
By Mazda Parsi

References:
[1] Bolton, John, To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran, The New York Times, March 25, 2019.
[2] Abshenass, Emad, ‘I Rule the White House’: Will Bolton’s ouster help Trump facilitate US-Iran negotiations?, United World Data, September 15th, 2019.
[3] Middle East Eye, Trump sacks national security adviser John Bolton, September 10, 2019.
[4] Rezaian, Jason, Bolton’s departure will fundamentally alter Trump’s Iran policy, The Washington Post, September 10, 2019.
[5] ibid
[6] Larison, Daniel, Bolton’s Relationship with the MEK Is a Scandal, The American Conservative, June 6th, 2019.
[7] ibid
[9] Larison, Daniel, Good Riddance, Bolton, The American Conservative, September 10th, 2019.

Tags

Recommanded

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button
Close