Camp Ashraf Affairs

Iraq to transfer Iranian dissident group to Baghdad

Iraq to transfer Iranian dissident group to Baghdad Iraq will move exiled Iranian dissidents based at a camp close to the border between the two countries to Baghdad, a government spokesman said on Thursday.

"We will move residents of Camp Ashraf to buildings in Baghdad on Tuesday," he said, without giving details.

The members of the People’s Mujahedeen have lived at Camp Ashraf, a refugee base in Diyala province north of the Iraqi capital, for more than 20 years.

Iraqi security forces launched an operation to take over the camp in July.

The group was founded in 1965 in opposition to the shah of Iran and subsequently fought the clerical regime that ousted him in the 1979 Islamic revolution.

About 3,500 Mujahedeen and their families have lived in Ashraf since former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein allowed the Iranian opposition to set up bases on his territory during his 1980-88 war with Tehran.

Following the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, American forces disarmed the Mujahedeen in Ashraf and placed the residents under protection.

Iraq’s increasingly independent government has moved to take charge of the site.

December 12, 2009 0 comments

Iraq

Nuri al-Maliki: Iraq to move Mojahedin Khalq to remote south

BAGHDAD – Iraq plans to uproot an Iranian exile group that has become a headache for the Baghdad government and move the activists to a remote southern area until it can expel them, the prime minister said this week. Moving them to Nuqrat al-Salman is a step towards expelling them (from Iraq)," Maliki

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki vowed to oust members of the People’s Mujahideen Organisation of Iran (PMOI), an Iranian opposition movement that the United States considers a terrorist organisation, from a camp northeast of Baghdad where they have been living for two decades.

Their clamor for greater rights within Iraq and aggressive international outreach has been an irritant for a government seeking to nurture its fragile relationship with Tehran.

Maliki did not say when officials would try to move the exiles from Camp Ashraf to the southern province of Muthanna.

"Moving them to Nuqrat al-Salman is a step towards expelling them (from Iraq)," Maliki wrote in a question-and-answer session posted on a state website. He was referring to a remote area that is home to a well-known prison. The entry was dated Dec. 7.

Iraqi forces clashed with residents in late July when they forcibly took control of the camp, which had been protected by U.S. troops since Saddam Hussein’s ouster in 2003.

The Iraqi government, which sees the camp’s 3,500 residents as enemies who enjoyed Saddam’s protection for years, is keen to force the PMOI out of Iraq but wants to avoid being seen as trampling the exiles’ rights or endangering their lives.

The PMOI began as an Islamist leftist group opposed to Iran’s late Shah, but fell out with Shi’ite clerics who took power after the 1979 revolution and was crushed.

Mujahideen guerrillas carried out attacks against Iranian targets and collaborated with Baghdad in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. Iran executed a large number of PMOI prisoners at the end of the war.

Maliki suggested the exiles would be less troublesome in largely Shi’ite Muthanna than they were in Diyala, an ethnically and religiously mixed province that remains volatile.

"Their presence at Ashraf is a major risk because of the historical ties with some groups and political powers in that area, especially the remains of the former regime and al-Qaeda," the prime minister said.

He dismissed objections to the move from local officials in Muthanna. "The province is a part of Iraq and it must assume its responsibility," Maliki said.

Reporting by Waleed Ibrahim and Missy Ryan, editing by Paul Taylor

December 12, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Iran-Interlink welcomes transfer of Camp Ashraf residents to Baghdad

Dr. Ali Al-Dabbagh, Spokesman for the Government of Iraq (GOI), announced today that Iraq will remove residents of Camp Ashraf in Diyala province to buildings in Baghdad.

Since January 2009 the GOI has tried through negotiations with all interested parties, including the leaders of the MKO terrorist cult, to find a humanitarian outcome to the problem of closing Camp Ashraf and expelling its residents from Iraq.

Since no western country has been willing to take any of the MKO members, Iraq has looked inside its own borders for a solution. Several locations have been proposed and rejected by the local councils and officials for the same reasons as stated by western officials. The Americans have been trying to keep the group in Iraq, but according to advice from Iran-Interlink, the transfer of the MKO members from one closed camp to another will not provide a viable solution.

Instead, Iran-Interlink welcomes the dismantlement of the MKO’s Camp Ashraf garrison and the removal of its residents to the city of Baghdad. The residents of Camp Ashraf, many of whom have not left its confines for two decades, will now be able to return to normal society – albeit not their own.

Returning these reclusive, enslaved individuals back to live among ordinary people will allow them to reconnect with normality and begin to think for themselves. The spell of cult manipulation will be broken and they will be able to make contact again with their families, with one another and with the present. They can then have the freedom to decide for themselves when offered whatever choices there are for their futures.

The transfer of Camp Ashraf residents to buildings in Baghdad represents a significant step forward in finding an eventual humanitarian solution to the necessary expulsion of the MKO from Iraq.

In this light, any violent resistance –as happened in July – will be the responsibility of the cult leaders and their western backers. The death toll of 14 US soldiers, 11 MKO members and 2 Iraqi police is already on their account.

Reported by AFP, December 10, 2009:
Iraq to transfer Iranian dissident group to Baghdad
Iraq will move exiled Iranian dissidents based at a camp close to the border between the two countries to Baghdad, a government spokesman said on Thursday.

"We will move residents of Camp Ashraf to buildings in Baghdad on Tuesday," he said, without giving details.
The members of the People’s Mujahedeen have lived at Camp Ashraf, a refugee base in Diyala province north of the Iraqi capital, for more than 20 years.

Iraqi security forces launched an operation to take over the camp in July.
The group was founded in 1965 in opposition to the shah of Iran and subsequently fought the clerical regime that ousted him in the 1979 Islamic revolution.

Following the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, American forces disarmed the Mujahedeen in Ashraf and placed the residents under protection.

Iraq’s increasingly independent government has moved to take charge of the site.

December 12, 2009 0 comments

Britain says MKO in Camp Ashraf subject to Iraqi law

Britain says MKO in Camp Ashraf subject to Iraqi law – protected persons status not applicable

Iraq: Iran Britain says MKO in Camp Ashraf subject to Iraqi law - protected persons status not applicable

Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
Written answers and statements, 25 November 2009
Andrew Dismore (Hendon, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his Department’s assessment is of the status in international law of the residents of Camp Ashraf, Iraq; and if he will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis (Minister of State (Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs), Foreign and Commonwealth Office; Bury South, Labour)

Camp Ashraf is in a sovereign and democratic Iraq and the camp residents subject to its laws.

The UK is of the view that the residents of Camp Ashraf, as with all people in Iraq, enjoy rights and protections under the Iraqi constitution and applicable international obligations to which Iraq is a signatory. We do not consider that they have ‘protected persons’ status.

We do not feel a ministerial statement is necessary at this time.

House of Lords, London

November 30, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Saddamist lobby’s lies exposed in U.K. parliament

[Iran-Interlink – The MKO do not have Protected Persons status under the Fourth Geneva Convention. The group has no legal status in Iraq. The U.N. has refused to give them refugee status in Iraq.

The Government of Iraq has stated that the relocation of the 3,400 MKO members in Camp Ashraf to a place distant from Iran’s borders is necessary for their safety. The MKO has violently resisted any attempts to enforce Iraqi law inside the camp.]

Iraq: Camp Ashraf — Question

All Lords debates on 23 Nov 2009

Saddamist lobby’s lies exposed in U.K. parliament
Lord Corbett of Castle Vale (Labour)
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the Government of Iraq about their threat to use force to relocate 3,400 Iranian dissident refugees at Camp Ashraf to elsewhere in Iraq.

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
My Lords, we encourage the Iraqi authorities and the Camp Ashraf leadership to find a lasting and acceptable solution for the future of the residents. We have relayed this message to the Iraqi Government at the highest levels, including to the Iraqi Prime Minister. Camp Ashraf is in a sovereign and democratic Iraq and, ultimately, decisions on the future location of the camp are for the Iraqi Government to resolve.

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale (Labour)
Will my noble friend confirm that the United Kingdom supports the views of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq, the ICRC and the UNHCR that it would further breach international humanitarian law if Iraq carried out its threat to again use violent force against defenceless Iranian refugees at Ashraf, so adding to the toll of 11 dead and hundreds injured in its July assault? Will the Government join efforts to persuade Iraq to accept a UN monitoring force at Ashraf to help talks between Iraq and the residents on their future to continue in a calm atmosphere?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
My Lords, in light of the tragic deaths of 11 people and many others injured at Camp Ashraf on 20 July, the Government have raised the issue with the Iraqi Government seeking a review of the event. We also raised the question of a UN presence in the camp.

That was acceded to in discussions between the PMOI and the Government of Iraq and is now established, with a mission that is monitoring human rights and the humanitarian situation at Camp Ashraf, liaising with American and Iraqi counterparts as well as with the PMOI, regularly reporting on the situation to the SRSG and the OHCHR in Geneva, and assessing the possibilities and the presence of enabling conditions by the GoI-the Government of Iraq-for a later deployment of UNHCR staff and other actions as required.

Lord Waddington (Conservative)
Perhaps the noble Lord can help on this. Did Her Majesty’s Government make representations to the Iraqi authorities about the blockade of Ashraf, subsequent to the attack in July, and about the outrageous situation in which the authorities prevented even doctors from entering the camp to look after people who had been injured in the attack, or are Her Majesty’s Government washing their hands of the whole matter and saying that they no longer have any real responsibility for the people of Ashraf as protected persons under the Geneva conventions? If it is the view of Her Majesty’s Government that they have no responsibility in that regard, how did they come to that conclusion?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
I refer the noble Lord to an answer that I gave to the noble Lord, Lord Eden of Winton, when I dealt with the whole question of the immunities that people believe exist but which do not exist in relation to Camp Ashraf. It is in sovereign Iraqi territory-a democratic state.

On the other hand, we do not resile at all from trying to ensure that humanitarian conditions exist and that assurances are kept that no one will be transferred from that camp to a country in which their lives are in danger. In that sense, we are clear about the issue. We are less clear about accusations, for which we have no independent authoritative evidence from the UN or anywhere else, that people are being prevented from having medicines and other things. If there is any hard evidence, I would be more than delighted to refer it to my Foreign Office colleagues for investigation.

Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne (Liberal Democrat)
Why is no European nation, or North America, willing to accept any of the residents of Camp Ashraf? May it have something to do with their previous activities? Is the Minister absolutely determined either to prove that the Camp Ashraf residents cannot return to the Islamic Republic of Iran or to press European nations to bring them out? What responsibility do the Iraqi Government have to keep these former enemies of the Iraqi people?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
The noble Baroness raises a question that has undoubtedly been the subject of considerable discussion in Iraq. People in the camp probably find no favour in the country from which they came and little favour in the country of their adoption, given their previous adherence to the regime that has now been removed. The short answer is that no one outside the country seems to show any great enthusiasm for bringing in people in Camp Ashraf. Many of them may be innocent, but there are people in that camp with a clear history of attacks in Iran-attacks which they may have now abandoned-that makes them unpopular in that country and of support for a dictator that makes them equally unpopular in Iraq.

Baroness Turner of Camden (Labour)
My Lords, is my noble friend not aware that these people have protected person status under United Nations law? That being so, would it not be possible to persuade EU countries to provide these people with refuge? These are genuine refugees who deserve protection.

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
Alas, it is not the case that people in Camp Ashraf have protected person status under the Fourth Geneva Convention. That has ceased to apply. That view is shared by the United Nations, the Government of Iraq, the United States and us. It is a mistake to believe that there is international protection for these individuals. However, that does not mean that we should abandon them to be subject to inhuman treatment or to be transferred to regimes in countries where their lives would be in danger.

Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Liberal Democrat)
My Lords, I appreciate the clarification provided by the Minister regarding the status of these people in Camp Ashraf. However, in light of the Iraqi Government’s pledge that these people will not be forcibly repatriated to Iran, have Her Majesty’s Government been in any discussions with the Iraqi Government as to whether they might be given political asylum in this country?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
As I said, the UK Government have no locus in Iraq in relation to these people. The discussions have been held internationally through the United States, which had control prior to the ending of the Geneva Convention status. That status was given in the first place only because the Americans chose to accept and adopt it, rather than because there was any international obligation. It is clear that there is no nation-alas, it might be said-for these individuals outside the country that they are in, albeit that they are very reluctantly accepted; no other country is prepared to give residence status to them.

Lord Dholakia (Liberal Democrat)
My Lords, following the violence that was perpetrated on residents of Camp Ashraf, Members of the House of Lords met the Minister, Ivan Lewis, who promised to make representations when he visited Iraq and to convey our concern. The Minister has given the answer in relation to making representations, but what was the response of the Iraqi Government?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
The Iraqi Government agreed to put in place an inquiry, the results of which we do not know. My ministerial colleague Ivan Lewis will visit Iraq in December and will no doubt keep the promise that he made to the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, and colleagues to raise this issue at the highest level.

Lord Elton (Conservative)
My Lords, there are many settlements around the world of people who are unwelcome in the country from which they have fled and unwelcome in the country to which they have fled. The United Nations does a considerable job in getting them settled in third countries. What steps are we taking to assist that effort in this case?

Lord Brett (Government Whip (technically a Lord in Waiting, HM Household); Labour)
The United Nations is seeking a solution to the problem but, as I hope I have explained, it is not easy when the country of origin sees the individuals as people who attack them and the country that they are in sees them as people who attack them. In that sense, we are protecting the humanitarian support for these individuals where they are and trying to ensure that they are humanely treated and not transported to other countries. But we have a very limited locus in this matter.

House of Lords, London

November 25, 2009 0 comments

Massoud Rajavi

Ashraf, Rajavi’s favored horse to ride

Rajavi’s message of November 4, seemingly addressed to Iranian mobs who instigated the recent sporadic domestic crises, is nothing more than desperate struggle to cease the already started measures to put an end to the issue of Mojahedin in Iraq and the Camp Ashraf residents in particular. The message contains points that explicitly indicate, in contrast to Rajavi’s But Rajavi never mentions who has paid for the construction of Ashraf instantaneous reaction to and analysis of the post-election social chaos, Rajavi has completely lost any hope of exploiting the opportunity to expend it for the accomplishment of organizational causes. Starting with lines of repetitious slogans and slanders that are typical of his messages, he suddenly changes to the main issue, that is Camp Ashraf, to express his concern about its future.

Of course, as usual his tone is threatening and warns the Iraqi Government of a possible human tragedy inside the camp and those acquainted with his words know well what he means by the stated “human tragedy”. Although he accepts the relocation of the camp to a third country, preferably to the United States or a country member of the European Union as he names, the move is subject to certain conditions that he knows will not be accomplished at least until the end of 2011. Of the interesting points to mention is his demand of over 200 million dollars as the price of Camp Ashraf from the Iraqi Government. He states:

Mojahedin in Ashraf welcome and respect the recent plan of the Iraqi Government to relocate them to a third country from among the member countries of the EU or the U.S. with the provision that the issue of their properties and belongings there, all the result of their travail for 23 years, that exceed 200 million dollars is dealt with under the judgment of the international lawyers and according to the articles 52 and 53 of the Hague Convention.

But he never mentions who has paid for the construction of Ashraf. A look at the documents disclosing huge amounts of dollars Saddam had allocated to Mojahedin indicates the real owners of the camp; for sure, if brought before the Hague Tribunal, Rajavi fails to be recognized the owner but the Iraqi poor people whose money was expended for the unwanted guests. No doubt, Mojahedin were empty handed when they arrived at Iraq in 1986 and in need of aid. Now, Rajavi has to explain how he managed to build a “city” with an empty pocket or where all the aids came from? But it is not only the question of the expenses and aids spent for Ashraf. As Rajavi points out:

The fighters of the National Liberation Army (NLA) surrendered 20 thousand pieces of arms and 20 thousand tones of ammunition to the American forces as a deal to give them protection until the ultimate solution.

Not speaking of all those granted sums of dollars by Saddam as well as paying for daily military, logistics, espionage and training expenses. However, nobody questions him why on the one hand he is trying to connect his organization to the periodically fomented crises in Iran that he believes will promise an imminent victory while on the other hand he does his utmost to stay in Iraq and to postpone the organization’s expulsion. We read:

First, the United Nation has prohibited any forceful relocation of Ashraf residents as protected persons. Second, we least expect the American forces to guarantee any violent assault against the residents and their relocation to another camp in Iraq until the end of 2011. Third, the Iraqi Government must respect the rights of Ashraf residents according to the European Parliament’s Resolution issued on 24 April 2009 until they are transferred to the U.S. member countries of the E.U.

Rajavi himself knows better than anybody that the best thing to do at the present is to do and say nothing since at least the past thirty years has proved that his promised democratic revolution is nothing more that childish fancies and that he is living by fancies and slogans rather than reality. How can he chants the slogans of leading a revolution while he is hiding somewhere far behind the people he tries to push and instigate for violence as a move to fulfill democracy? Where are these so-called vanguards of revolution and what are their legal rights when, in his message, he says:

By respecting the Iraqi sovereignty and all countries wherein the members, supporters and sympathizers of Mojahedin Khalq Organization reside, we insist on our legal rights to our last breath.”

We have nothing to do with whom are harboring Rajavi and his close disciples but one thing is clear that his stressed legal rights are acceptance of him and his adherents in the referred countries; that is the essence of his message and what you can read between the lines of his blustering and fuss. This message, as were his last messages and will be the case with his future one, focuses on the preservation of Ashraf as his cult’s main abode rather than leaving for any far better host country. To depict it in a figurative way, Ashraf is Rajavi’s favored horse he loves to ride whenever he encounters an opportunity!

November 24, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Camp Ashraf – A Tale of Fairies and Devils

These past few weeks and months we have witnessed the extensive uproar and hubbub from the PMOI’s leader Mrs. Maryam Ghajar Azdanlo [aka Rajavi], regarding her Iraqi Garrison, Camp Ashraf, which is the legal property and real estate of Iraq and its prominent and distinguished government. Decades ago, Camp Ashraf was of course, given over to the PMOI by the former president of Iraq, the toppled dictator, Saddam Hussein. However, the PMOI never have had legal ownership of the land or its facilities.

The PMOI and its political wing, the NCRI, have insulted and slandered Iraq’s honorable prime minister, Mr. Nouri Al Maliki, and the distinguished and popular government of Iraq over taking control of its property. The PMOI described them as “mercenaries of the Iranian government” verbally and in written statements which have been published in their websites and broadcast on their TV on several occasions.

Mrs. Maryam Ghajar Azdanlo, who is leading one of the most vicious and inhumane cults which has committed many crimes in Iraq during the era of the previous overthrown government, should accept the dazzling and eye popping fact that Saddam Hussein and his government have already been overthrown by Iraq’s freedom-loving people, and that the current popular government is totally in charge of its land and territory. Consequently, according to their national sovereignty and new constitution after the fall of Saddam Hossein, they are entitled to take over their property, the garrison, which was loaned to the PMOI as a gift for their participation in suppressing Iraqi people during the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein as well as acting like a scarecrow for Saddam’s political and military benefits vis-a-vis Iran.

Mrs. Maryam Ghajar Azdanlo should and must answer this rational and logical question; how come has she not expounded on or taken any position against the savagery and brutality of the former Iraq dictator, Saddam Hussein up to now? And instead, she and her colleagues have tried their best to distort and defame the current popular government of Iraq and its prominent and dignified prim-minister. They have not spoken a word regarding their previous host and landlord, Saddam Hussein and his atrocities and suppressive attitude. WHY? This is a question that politicians and the PMOI’s lobbyists and backers should ask Mrs. Azdanlo.

Under Saddam Hussein, Ashraf Garrison and Saddam’s Private Army (aka PMOI) was under the direct supervision of the Iraqi soldiers who lived and worked inside Ashraf. So, how come your personnel inside Ashraf were not subjected to rape and assault by Iraqi soldiers then, but they are subjected to that now?

Calling its current landlord and host ‘mercenaries of the Iranian government’ and linking them to Iran and worst of all, accusing and slandering the Iraqi police of committing assault and rape against the residents of this garrison is a totally absurd and preposterous allegation. It is used deliberately by the PMOI, and in fact Mrs. Azdanlo and her colleagues are trying their best to provoke and instigate the government of Iraq to retaliate so they can take advantage of the alleged retaliation and divert the public opinion away from the reality of the scene on the ground which is that Iraq’s national sovereignty gives it the right to take back its property and deal with Saddam Hussein’s associates, co-operators and mercenaries (who suppressed Iraqi people shoulder to shoulder and alongside their boss, Saddam Hussein), and that this be done by Iraq’s current popular government and its judicial system.

Mrs. Maryam Ghajar Azdanlo and her associates are provoking their desperate members to continue a deadly hunger strike and lose their lives just because she wants to cover up and hide the horrifying fact which is their bloody hands and their cultic content from being exposed and revealed by putting the PMOI’s suspects on trial in an Iraqi court of law and before Iraqi judicial system.

In Rajavi’s cult, there is a rule which says, whoever is with me is my friend and if not, is my enemy. This is the main criteria and guideline which this organization utilizes to deal and adjust with its own members and the world. It does not matter who is that person, organization, or government, they will be labeled as an ‘agent or agents of the Iranian intelligence ministry’ or ‘subordinates of Iran’s supreme leader’ and ‘mercenaries of the absolute clerical rule’ if they do not pay homage to Mrs. Maryam Azdanlo and her inhumane cult. In their cultic Ideology, they believe that only the people who are on their side are honorable and the rest are evil and they are entitled to be labeled as mercenaries, torturers, agents, rapists, wrongdoers and etc.

In their ideology they believe that Ashraf garrison is their fairyland and the people who are residing there are the best God created creatures, Massoud Rajavi is the God sent leader and Maryam Azdanlo is an innocent fairy and the rest of the world are criminals and devils unless they convert and accept their cultic ideology and begin flattering and eulogizing PMOI leaders and their cultic ideology.

By all descriptions in this article, it is not very strange to understand why Rajavi’s cult and its leader continues to label, insult, swear at and slander whoever criticizes Mrs. Maryam Ghajar Azdanlo and her cult, even the prime minister of Iraq and his government are not exceptions in this issue. By the way, who is next to be labeled, sworn, insulted by this fairy and her God sent cult? Only God knows.

November 18, 2009 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Muthanna provincial council refused the transfer of Camp Ashraf to Samawah

Muthanna provincial council refused a government request for the transfer of Camp Ashraf to Samawah

Samawah: The Muthanna provincial council has refused a government request to transfer [the Muthanna provincial council refused a government request for the transfer of Camp Ashraf to Samawah residents of] Camp Ashraf to the province of Muthanna, noting that they are known as the "hypocrites organisation" who have committed crimes against the Iraqi people and that they will disturb the security of the province.

A source in the provincial council, told our news reporter that "a request from a government committee came to the province for the transportation of Camp Ashraf to the province." Adding that, "the unequivocal request was turned down by the Department to maintain compliance with its Council and the Mayor when he told the President of the Council that "the hypocrites organisation" committed crimes against the Iraqi people and contributed actively to and were substantially involved in the suppression of the popular uprisings of 1991 in the south and north."

The source, who declined to be named, said: "The rejection of the Commission’s request matched the view that the" hypocrites organisation" will be a heavy burden on the people of this province which is peaceful and quiet." He added that "the existence of Camp Ashraf, especially in the countryside of Samawah would present major threats to its security and destabilize the province".

Akhbar News, Iraq

November 18, 2009 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization's Propaganda System

The UN monitors the situation in Ashraf

Despite of attempts to demonize the Iraqi government to show a strong objection to the decisive decision of its expulsion from Iraq, Mojahedin-Khalq Organization (MKO, MEK, PMOI) seems not to be intelligent enough to realize that it fails to dupe all the world as it has done with its own insiders. There are those who may be misled by its propaganda blitz that the Iraqi government has packed a number of innocent people inside an isolated camp just in the middle of a scorched desert and imposing all kinds of rough and inhuman pressures on them. And there are also those who may come to believe that it has won a great victory against the Iraqi government to press it return back 36 arrested members on many charges that need to be brought a legal court of justice.

And that is what has to be done concerning these terrorist culprits whose file is open to be dealt with. But are the world’s responsible organizations and bodies unaware of what is truly passing and happening in Ashraf? It is not at all as some may think. All the humanitarian organizations have the camp under their monitor in spite of MKO’s strong objection to any interference in its internal affair as it harshly reacted when the Iraqi forces tried enter the camp and to establish a police station within its walls just to monitor its suspicious activities and stop further exploitation of its members. And the United Nation knows all about Ashraf.

In paragraph 6 of resolution 1883 (2009), adopted on 7 August 2009, the Security Council requested the Secretary-General to report to the Council on a quarterly basis on the fulfillment of the responsibilities of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). On 11 November 2009, the first report pursuant to that resolution was released. Here is the part dealing with MKO’s Camp Ashraf:

With regard to the situation in Camp Ashraf, tensions escalated on 28 and 29 July between Iraqi security forces and the camp’s residents who belong to the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran. When Iraqi security forces entered the Camp to establish a police station within its boundaries, the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran strongly objected and the ensuing confrontation resulted in 11 residents killed and approximately 200 wounded. Iraqi security forces further arrested and detained 36 residents, who then staged a hunger strike in conjunction with another 136 residents. On 7 October, the detainees were released and returned to the Camp, after agreeing to appear before an Iraqi court if summoned and to leave Iraq for third-country resettlement if the opportunity were made available. Subsequently, Iraqi Government officials have called for the closure of the Camp, but have repeatedly given assurances to UNAMI of their commitment to treat the residents in accordance with international humanitarian law and the principle of non-refoulement. In response to numerous requests UNAMI, supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, has undertaken monitoring of the humanitarian situation in the Camp as part of an effort to find possible solutions involving various interested parties.

Blacklisted a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) whose activities are banned in the US, the terrorist group was amongst the firsts to come under the US protection rather than the Iraqi people. Emboldened by the given protection, the terrorist MKO is combating versus the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s earlier announced decision to expel it from Iraq according to the Iraqi Constitution and in an attempt to uproot terrorism there.

Evidently, the group’s harsh reactions have even jeopardized Iraq’s internal and national security to some extents. Its own threatening tone and some of its advocates inside and outside of Iraq against the taken decision is just a repetition of MKO’s hostile attitude shown at the inception of its armed phase immediately after it fell out with Iran’s Islamic regim. Regardless of MKO’s potentialities to onset yet another military phase in spite of trying to be taken off the terrorist lists, MKO is doing its manipulating all ploys to force the Iraqi government to consent to its stay in Iraq.
Mojahedin’s presence in Iraq has no rational justification after Saddam’s fall. Getting advantage of the chaotic situation in the region, MKO’s leadership in 1986 moved the organization’s headquarters to Iraq which was considered an opportunistic decision at the time for some reasons and to achieve desired objectives. The main strategic goal for both MKO and Saddam on which the two were making the alliance was overthrowing the newly formed Islamic regime in Iran. The Iraqi soil offered MKO the opportunity to form the Liberation Army so it could stage cross-border attacks at the right time.

Saddam’s fall frustrated their political arithmetic all. The possible regional transformation and Mojahedin’s disarmament on the one hand and Iraq’s internal, political transition as well as the new government’s policy to establish friendly, cooperative ties with the neighbors on the other hand led Mojahedin to isolation to desperately wait an unknown future. But the protected status granted to Mojahedin by the coalition forces offered them a prolonged opportunity to stay in Iraq until a final decision was made or they would be transferred to a third country.

No country has yet accepted to receive Ashraf residents although the group is delisted from the UK and the EU terrorist lists. It is only a matter of legal enforcement and the very same countries are well aware of the group’s terrorist nature and thus, they will actually avoid letting it roam in the streets of their countries to jeopardize their social-political security.

November 18, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Possible transfer of Ashraf residents to a camp near Samawah

Government Commission investigates possible transfer of Ashraf residents to a camp near Samawah

Muthanna / Aswat al-Iraq: The official source of Muthanna province said a government delegation arrived in the city of Samawah on Tuesday to discuss the possibility of transferring the population Government Commission investigates possible transfer of Ashraf residents to a camp near Samawah of Camp Ashraf to a camp near the town of Samawah, indicating that the proposal has been categorically rejected by the Governor and provincial Council.

The source told Aswat al-Iraq that the government "arrived at the city of Samawah on Tuesday morning and discussed with the Governor of Muthanna and a number of local officials the possibility of the transfer of Camp Ashraf residents (MKO) to the Iraqi military camp west of Samawah, established by Japanese troops." He pointed out that "the proposal has been categorically rejected by county officials."

The Japanese Self-Defence Forces had established a camp at the end of 2004 and used it as its headquarters until its withdrawal from Iraq in July 2007 when Japanese troops handed the camp over to an Iraqi army brigade deployed in the province.

The source explained that "the Governor and provincial Council refusal is linked to the idea that Al Muthanna province will be a safe haven for the group. It will reflect negatively on the security reality and sabotage the security of the region."

The Iraqi government took the decision at a meeting of the Council of Ministers on June 17, 2008, as the endemic presence of the MKO on Iraqi territory is illegal and it must leave Iraq. Iran is also opposed to the continuation of Ashraf camp site (renamed Camp New Iraq) in Khalis (15 km north of Baquba.

The source, who asked not to be named, told Aswat al-Iraq that the Commission "has, this morning, visited the camp to study the site and identify the areas of possibility for the new headquarters for the residents of Camp Ashraf”. He alluded to the fact that the Commission "found that the camp mentioned is not suitable accommodation for residents of Camp Ashraf and lacks a lot of facilities”.

"Another option for the Committee is a camp taken by American forces based near Diwaniyah, but not cleared until several months ago, according to the proposal by the Commission”.

The transfer of MEK to the province of Muthanna, "an old idea dating back to 2008, was completed in a manner allowing the authorities to reject the proposal." He pointed out that the option for the transfer of that group to the camps in the province of Muthanna and Diwaniya, "is still in the process of proposals and is not yet a decision of the government of Iraq”.

It is noteworthy that on July 28, 2009 Iraqi security forces had entered Camp Ashraf in Diyala province to take control of it, which led to clashes which killed seven and injured 400 other residents of the camp, as well as two people killed and 60 wounded members of the Iraqi security forces.

The People’s Mojahedin Organization, opposed to the Iranian government, took Camp Ashraf in Diyala province (north-east of Baghdad) as their headquarters after the transfer of the MKO leadership to Iraq in 1985, where they were received in a timely manner under the auspices of the former regime and from where it has launched attacks in Iran.

After the American intervention in Iraq in 2003, its members remained at their base at Camp Ashraf, which was placed under protection of the U.S. Army Corps, although classified as a terrorist organization. After signing the security agreement [SOFA] between Iraq and the United States late last year, the Iraqi government took responsibility for Camp Ashraf while U.S. forces remained at the camp, and then withdraw from it in accordance with the timing of the Convention.

The town of Samawah, capital of Muthanna province, lies 280 km south of Baghdad.

Aswat al Iraq, Baghdad – translated by Iran-Interlink

November 17, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts