Rajavi’s new staged battle is in fact directed at responsible international organizations
The UN Security Council is facing an angry backlash from Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO/MEK following Martin Kobler’s official report and briefing situation on Iraq before the UN Security Council on July 19. In a statement addressed to the UN Security Council in June 21, Alejo Vidal-Quadras, chairing the MKO’s alias International Committee of In Search of Justice (ISJ), strongly denounced claims made by the UN envoy in Iraq in his briefing speech in regards to Camp Ashraf. Mr. Vidal-Quadras states that Martin Kobler’s report is filled with statements that have no basis in reality and have been made to please and corroborate the Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki and the Iraqi government’s actions.
“ISJ report to the UN based on abundant documentations and factual details clearly indicates the depth of the misrepresentations and distortion of facts in Mr Kobler’s report to the UN. This falsification of facts is the main pretext for continuation of the siege of the camp and possibly carrying out a third massacre in there. Mr Kobler’s seven month tenure and his report clearly indicate that he is not impartial nor he complies with his duty to protect the weakest part.”
However, the real shock comes at the conclusion part of Mr. Vidal-Quadras’ statement when he stresses dismissal of the UN’s ambassador to end part of the existing problem in the stalemate: “ISJ would like to reemphasize the need for appointment of an objective and competent personal envoy by the Secretary General to Ashraf and Liberty so that all issues could be addressed in a fair and unbiased manner.”
Mr. Vidal-Quadras’ statement actually set the launching pad for many other MKO’s fed bloggers to follow his line to attack Martin Kobler and question his impartiality in dealing with Ashraf residents and the issue of their relocation to Camp Liberty. A few tried to dig up his career and one of them, Rahman Karimi, in an article stated that Mr. Kobler was appointed the UN Secretary General Special Representative because he was affiliated to Germany’s Green Party best known for following a policy of appeasement towards the Iranian regime. Another one, Jamshid Peyman, warned Mr. Kobler of having his hands stained with residents’ blood and accusing him of being a stirrer.
There is no doubt that such attacks will follow in coming days, but a question might raise that were these flood of malign attacks a spontaneous act or had roots in an earlier cause? For MKO any phenomenon is the effect of a precedent cause. In his message of the first May addressed to residents of Ashraf and Liberty, Massoud Rajavi stated that “It does not mean that we expect action from this or that state and power or the United Nations or an international body. Rather, it is us with our struggle and our people’s brave children that accurately define the terms they utter, like human rights, refugees rights and international humanitarian rights.”
Rajavi had already corroborated that he never waited the fulfillment of any action by any international organization but acted under the enforced circumstances. Somewhere he clearly depicts a short illustration of fluctuations in MKO’s history and the necessity of acting under duress: “Once you were inside Iran in a political phase, … once you were at Kurdistan border lines, once you were in abroad and then you came to Iraq. Once you were in Camp Habib, once in Camp Homayun and once in Alavi Foundation and now you are in Ashraf. Then, the story continues and that is us who have to decide under any circumstances and how and where we can have more productive return out of the conditions.”
The truth is that the serious impediment at the present is not Mr. Kobler alone but all other international institutions engaged to solve the humanitarian crisis in Iraq. In the past months not only the UNAMI but also ICRC, UNHCR and even the US have been claimed to be engaged in a policy of appeasement and acting as mercenaries for Iranian regime as well as violating the reached and signed agreements between MKO and the Iraqi government. As a result, MKO’s press for a replacement for Mr. Kobler is the first taken step to be followed by similar bids of ousting other heads in cooperation unless one-sided demands of the group are met altogether.
Rajavi’s new staged battle since two years ago that underscores a “battle for freedom” is in fact directed at responsible international organizations with the UN at the top: they have to be either subject organizations submitting to irrational demands of MKO or counter attack the psychological warfare aimed to derogate their reputation. The truth pinpointed in Rajavi’s message is that he no more recognizes them let alone their constructive role and decisions concerning the relocation crisis. Rajavi’s started battle indicates his misinterpretation of a compromising solution involving an appreciation and respect for humanitarian causes. How they will counteract such unbearable reactions to stop turning a domestic humanitarian issue into an international controversy depends on their exercising a constant vigilance.