MKO Fails to Win the Global Trust

MKO fails to convince the world that it has actually forsworn its shameful, anti-human past

In recent weeks, it has become an everyday routine for the press to release news and reports of the US officials urging the MKO residents in Camp Ashraf to leave there to end the critical humanitarian life the residents face in the hot, unbearable weather of Iraq. But, it will not be wrong to say that the current impasse in the relocation of more convoys from the paramilitary Camp Ashraf to the Temporary Transit Location TTL near Baghdad airport is mostly due to the encouragement Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO/MEK receives from a number of former and retired politicians. Of course the support lent does not necessarily mean that these advocates heartily believe in the cause of what the designated terrorist group struggles for, rather, it is a type of resolved political business in which they are fed on substantially spent funds of the group.

Except a few who are tasked with walking with the group for political causes and interests, majority of the advocates are beguiled into the highly profitable job of being a mouthpiece of a seemingly pro-democratic, freedom-seeker group for a few minutes. While not every advocate and speaker accept payment, MKO umbrella groups spend millions of dollars on speaking fees and arrangement of rallies and events since the group’s activities are forbidden under its real names and titles. Everything seems ok and no fraud is committed since all payments and expenses are already covered. It is only after someone has agreed to speak or after he has made a speech at an event sponsored by this group that he is informed or learns that he has been enthusiastically underpinning a designated terrorist cult that is doomed to collapse.

Take one of those who appeared at a rally held in Paris on 23 June for instance. The Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page was paid $20,000 to speak for nearly 5 minutes at the rally in support of MKO to be removed from the State Department’s list of designated foreign terrorist organizations. His talking points to this group besides his belief that they should no longer be considered a terrorist group were:

* “Thanks for inviting me to speak up for values I believe we share: Freedom, democracy and respect for human rights for men and women across racial, ethnic and religious lines.

* “I believe we share a desire for regime change in Iran to a more fair and democratic society.

* “The historical record shows – and a variety of experts have told me – how the MEK has been America’s ally in our war against terrorists, but as former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card has said, the State Department appears to have been left behind with outdated information. Now a federal court has said the State Department should check its relevance.

* “You have allies to whom you should reach out in common cause as long as you advocate the values all decent human beings share. As long as you work for freedom, equality, human rights and democracy, you are not working alone.”

Although an experienced journalist, the highlighted remarks indicate that Mr. Page was either badly misinformed or was following footsteps of already misled officials and politicians whose views were also based on misinformation. Page’s words are just the very same principles MKO has been trying to fabricate in its disinformation campaign over the last decade, but the fact is that it has no belief in the principles it has propagated. In a testimony before the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on July 7, 2011, Ray Takeyh says that MKO can neither abandon terrorism nor is commitment to democracy in deed nor word:

Terror has always been a hallmark of MEK’s strategy for assuming power. Through much of its past, the party exulted violence as a heroic expression of legitimate dissent. One of the central precepts of the party is that a highly-dedicated group of militants could spark a mass revolution by bravely confronting superior power of the state and assaulting its authority. Once, the masses observe that the state is vulnerable to violence, than they will shed their inhibitions and join the protest, thus sparking the larger revolution. Thus, the most suitable means of affecting political change is necessarily violence. Although in its advocacy in Western capitals, the MEK emphasizes its commitment to democracy and free expression, in neither deed nor word has it forsworn it violent pedigree.

Nowhere in the history it is record that MKO has been America’s ally in any cause. In contrast, it has been a sworn adversary of the United States as the predatory capitalist and imperialist. MKO’s long-lasted animosity towards the US and its change of attitudes and language is best depicted by Ray Takeyh:

The core of MEK’s ideology has always been anti-imperialism which it has historically defined as opposition to U.S. interests. The MEK opposed the Shah partly because of his close associations with the United States. MEK’s anti-American compulsions propelled it toward embracing an entire spectrum of radical forces ranging from the Vietcong to the PLO. Given its mission of liberating the working class and expunging the influence of predatory capitalism, the United States has traditionally been identified as a source of exploitation and injustice in MEK literature. As the organization has lost its Iraqi patron and finds itself without any reliable allies, it has somehow modulated its language and sought to moderate its anti-American tone. Such convenient posturing should not distract attention from its well-honed ideological animus to the United States.

And how MKO could have been America’s ally in its war against terrorism when the main cause for invading Iraq was Saddam Hussein’s committing or supporting terrorism, or allowing terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. In the statement released by the White House entitled Saddam Hussein’s Support for International Terrorism, it is well asserted that “Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians.”

Some people utter the words without paying the least attention to their meanings and in support of whom they are spoken. Freedom, democracy and respect for human rights are internationally advocated words for mankind in general but abused by a terrorist cult with no respect for their real meaning. To win the trust of the world to show that it has actually forsworn its shameful, antihuman past MKO has to start from its within by complying with an international decisiveness to help it close a military camp that stands as the relic of a close collaboration with a fallen dictatorship. Unfortunately, it has failed so far.

Service

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button