The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) claims that it has publicly stated a commitment to non-violent regime change since 2001, advocating for a democratic, secular, and non-nuclear Iran. However, reports and visual evidence, including videos attributed to their “resistance units” (Kanoonhaye Shooreshi), continue to depict activities that suggest a more complex and contradictory stance on violence. These videos often circulated on the group’s social media and channels, sometimes show individuals displaying weapons and expressing support for the MEK’s leadership and their struggle against the Islamic Republic.
Armed Resistance Units
While the MEK maintains that these “resistance units” are engaged in acts of civil disobedience and symbolic defiance, critics and some analysts interpret the imagery of armed individuals and explicit calls for overthrowing the regime as indicative of a continued belief in the efficacy of armed struggle, or at least a willingness to employ it if deemed necessary. The distinction between “resistance” and “violence” in this context remains a point of contradiction.
The perception of support for the MEK among Baluch Iranians in Sistan and Baloochestan, an area with active drug and arms trafficking is a complex issue. The region is also potentially at risk of Balooch separatists and so the MEK strategically makes efforts to exploit the existing discontent and instability in the region.
The MEK has a long history of leveraging ethnic and religious minorities within Iran to further its objectives against the Iranian government. The Sisitan and Baloochestan province, characterized but its porous borders, ethnic Balooch majority and Balooch separatists, and significant economic disparities, presents a fertile ground for such exploitation. The presence of armed group and criminal trafficking networks can also create an environment where alternative power structures, even those with violent histories like the MEK, might gain a foothold by offering protection or economic opportunities, however illicit.
Criticizing the MEK’s video that has been recently published showing some armed Balooch resistance units, Siamak Naderi, former member of the MEK writes: “The MEK published a video of Balooch smugglers who receive money under the guise of resistance units and the MEK’s Liberation Army inside Iran. These smugglers and even their literate head cannot read correctly from the text sent by the MEK from Albania and Ashraf 3. There is a ridiculous mispronunciation.”
Violent acts of “Resistance Units”
The MEK’s violent acts often involve actions such as setting fire to government buildings and religious centers. While the MEK frames these actions as acts of resistance and civil disobedience, the intentional destruction and damage of property are interpreted as violent acts and even terrorism. Such actions even if symbolic, contribute to violence.
From the perspective of the Iranian nation and many independent analysts, such acts are indeed examples of violent struggle and are considered terrorism. The historical record of the MEK’s use of violence, coupled with these actions, support this view. The scale of the MEK’s experience in acts of violence is undeniable, given its history as an armed organization.
Mazda Parsi