The concerns that had been challenges to MKO’s leadership in the past three decades can be well met in Rajavi’s message of January 20. Of the main issues is that of overthrowing and changing the Iranian regime. The strategic cul-de-sac and failures of Mojahedin in recent years
In answering to strategic questions on uprising and overthrow, it has to be clarified primarily that they are not to be answered immediately nor chimerical and delusive solution are to be found since their solving depends greatly on the occurrence of some events that have not yet happened. I mean logical analysis and thinking is mainly founded on certain conditions rather than on astrology and prevision. In other words, if the conditions are not clear enough to be understood, the first thing to do is trying to get a true understanding of them.
Before expounding on these claims, the common policy of overhanging and gamesmanship of Rajavi is to be taken into consideration. He pretends to be the sole solution for the existing challenges in Iran. Promising strategic solutions to the future conditions due to political considerations are instances of this gamesmanship and it may instill some readers with the idea that he may solve many problems inside Iran. Rajavi makes an attempt to infuse the idea that internal protestors and critics in Iran are agog to follow strategic guidelines and solutions offered by Rajavi to respond to encountered challenges. Although the internal issues of Iran have nothing to do with the outdated solutions of Rajavi and his armed and aggressive strategy, Rajavi resorts to connivance.
Evidently, Rajavi is to misuse recent disturbances in Iran. His unstable situation in Iraq, intra organizational crises and many other unsolvable challenges resulting from his lack of support and political legitimacy in Iran have made him to get rid of his present challenges by various levers including propaganda blitz and fabrication. The publication of his serial message in recent months can be evaluated in this regard. However, his January 20th message demonstrates that he is taking a new approach different from the past ones. Some differences and his objectives will be mentioned hereinafter.
1. The main objective pursued by Rajavi, particularly after delivering the message of January 20th, is infusing this idea that the depicted visage of Mojahedin in books or articles by the Iranian regime for global community is a distorted and unreal. The main part of his message is refusing the terrorist nature of Mojahedin; an issue that seems to be of a high significance for him.
2. He also tries to conform to Iranian internal critics and pretends that Mojahedin have originally been a democratic and non-aggressive trend yet the policies of the regime have victimized it by advertizing it as an aggressive organization. He mainly aims at distracting the attention of the world of the terrorism nature of MKO to the sympathy of the world.
3. His next objective is pretending that the present critics in Iran are reminders of Mojahedin who are following its footsteps after three decades absence of the organization from Iran’s political arena.
4. Furthermore, he makes the demands of Mojahedin parallel to that of Iranian internal critics and invites them to enjoy his facilities as well as strategic and tactical solutions and guidelines for meeting these demands.
5. Being aware of the fact that the internal political conflicts in Iran are solvable, knowing that the organization is of no place therein, Rajavi tries to usurp the power of their body after a short and superficial support of the leaders of Iranian critics. A look at the position taking of Rajavi during the recent Iranian election reveals that he has already noticed his lack of social support in Iran and the fact that his intervention may even endanger the social as well as political status of the critics.
In spite of all his attempts to cover his totalitarian and authoritarian visage under a pro-democratic mask, he fails to bear hearing any voice other than his own due to his egocentric and authoritative nature. His focus on giving the Iranian critics some strategic and tactical solutions has its roots in his megalomania that is evident in various parts of his message.