Camp Ashraf Affairs

UN Fourth Geneva Convention status is not for sale

The MKO’s supporters in the European Parliament today pushed through a last-minute resolution on Camp Ashraf just before the close of parliament for the Do the Geneva Conventions apply? elections. Although voting does not take place until tomorrow, the resolution is already defunct as it clearly contains false information and misleading political assertions.

The resolution, did not include any criticism of MKO behaviour in Iraq, nor did it oblige the MKO to abide by Iraqi and international law. Instead it re-iterates the false assertion that UN Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the group even though there can be no doubt that the Geneva Convention referred to has not applied since June 2005. Tomorrow members of parliament will be asked to vote on a resolution which is hopelessly flawed.

In my view, as I explained in my latest letter to the European Parliament, the only way forward is for the EU to cooperate with the Government of Iraq to open alternative camps and help these people to reintegrate into mainstream society.

From the UK House of Commons Library

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/SNIA-05022.pdf

(…)

Do the Geneva Conventions apply?

In July 2004, the PMOI forces in Ashraf were declared by the US to be ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, because they had not been belligerents during the Iraq War. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians who, as the result of an international armed conflict or of occupation, find themselves in the hands of a country of which they are not nationals. It states that in no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.

In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004.

(…)

April 25, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

A golden opportunity for Ashraf residents

The focal point of the recent statements of Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, the Iraqi security advisor, on MKO has been the necessity of detoxifying the ideological bastion of Ashraf to make its residents decide their own destiny. Also, it can At the time being, Iraqi officials can prepare the ground for Ashraf residents to make an informed decision and be master of their own destiny be used as a model for averting the potential danger of other cults and guaranteeing the freedom of their members. He further referred to the radical nature of MKO as one of their primary features and stated:

We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders.

These statements confirm the truth of the solutions offered so far by MKO detached members and experts of cultist relations. Furthermore, they prove the idealist viewpoints of the Iraqi security advisor toward the terrorist, ideological, and cultic nature of MKO. Although as a man of authority, he has to just take the political and security aspects of this issue into consideration, yet his attention to humanitarian aspects of the issue reveal his goodwill in finding a peaceful and appropriate solution for the challenge posed by Mojahedin to the Iraqi government and it is praiseworthy.

Meanwhile, Mojahedin have made a hostile and abusive propaganda war against him following his made statements. Despite the unethical and abusive reaction of the organization, the formal fair position taken by Mowaffaq al-Rubaie toward this terrorist and cultic group signifies his charity and tolerance. On the other hand, Mojahedin still grab at the lever of threat and aggressive behavior for postponing the enforcement of the decision made by Iraqi government in expelling them. The international bodies and western advocators of the organization have to take this point into consideration that the Iraqi government is doing its best to pursue its legal demands through international conventions and prohibit any kind of suicide attack and disaster in Camp Ashraf despite the hostile propaganda blitz of the organization.

Mowaffaq al-Rubaie has provided comprehensive explanation on the policy and position of Iraq toward MKO in his interview with Anne Singleton and now it is on the western countries and advocators of Mojahedin to find a fair solution for this challenge in an idealist mood far from any false judgment and prejudice. This needs the clear reports of Iraqi government on the course of events to prohibit Mojahedin from misusing the present circumstances.

At the time being, Iraqi officials can prepare the ground for Ashraf residents to make an informed decision and be master of their own destiny forever and free from cultic relations of MKO. It may also determine the final destiny of the organization once forever. The present conditions and regional transitions confirm the fact that Mojahedin have no hope in the future and are faced with a cul-de-sac.

It has to be acknowledged that these determining measures in themselves cannot solve any problem and all depend first of all to the will and decision of Ashraf residents. They have to move a step forward for building their free future. The focus of Mowaffaq al-Rubaie in removing the pressure of MKO leaders on Ashraf residents is an optimal solution for their detoxification and breaking the bonds of cultic relations. The entrance of Iraqi forces to Camp Ashraf and interrogation of all Ashraf residents under the control of international bodies that is an imminent event may pave the way for Ashraf residents to choose either their personal interests and a free life or organizational relations that have captured them for more than three decades in its chains. This solution that has been repeatedly offered so far yet needed legal levers and a relative majesty of law to be achieved. It seems that the present conditions have prepared all means for setting this solution into action and detoxifying Camp Ashraf. The rest depends on the will of Ashraf residents and their degree of awareness of their humanistic and legal rights.

April 23, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Ashraf ailing residents, a pressure tool for MKO

In its recent propaganda blitz over the condition of the members in Camp Ashraf MKO has claimed that the controlling forces of Camp Ashraf have prevented the entrance of Iraqi physicians to Ashraf for the treatment of a number of patients therein including one afflicted with cancer and two in need of a surgery operation as well as a case of appendectomy; whereas, Manoochehr Hezarkhani in his recent article on the facilities of Camp Ashraf has claimed that Ashraf has an equipped hospital and can even cure Iraqi people. In addition to these baseless claims, there are other points in this statement that are to be elaborated on.

1. Undoubtedly, one of the tricks of the organization in recent years has been misusing humanitarian emotions of the world and evoking sympathy of outsiders toward Ashraf residents especially in the critical periods when the organization has been under pressure of law and international conventions. An instance is the hunger strike of MKO members in Auver-sur-Oise after the events of 17 June 2003 when the strikers pretended to be in a very bad condition in front of media reporters to win the sympathy of their audience. The claims of MKO can be evaluated as another instance of the old tactic of the organization.

In this regard, Mojahedin have made their utmost efforts to channel their propaganda war against Mowaffaq al-Rubaie and incite public emotions against him. It is also likely that Mojahedin accuse him of some accidental or organized deaths occurred inside Camp Ashraf to revenge on him. In a nutshell, the likely future events may give many subterfuges to Mojahedin for threatening Iraqi officials. Iraqi government is to take these issues into consideration not to be deceived and misused by Mojahedin.

2. MKO has a big hand at misusing all events for its own interests like the case of these patients declared by the organization. Disregarding its truth or falsehood, the authorities of Camp Ashraf have to answer the question what they have done so far for curing these patients and whether their family is aware of their illness or not? It seems that all their hurly-burly is just a matter of killing time and distracting the attention of Iraqi government from the main issue that is expulsion of Mojahedin from Iraq.

3. The next point is that Ashraf authorities have no problem in transferring their patients to Iraqi hospitals. However, they refrain to do so. If they are truthful in their claims, the conscience necessitates it to transfer their patients to Iraqi hospitals as soon as possible and put their responsibility on the shoulder of human rights organs and Red Cross. Not only the organization feels no blame if the condition of the ailing members get worse, but also they are regarded as precious tools of pressure on Iraqis and the public opinion to push forward.

April 19, 2009 0 comments

European Union

Massoud Khodabandeh to the European Parliament

Massoud Khodabandeh to the European Parliament in relation to a proposed resolution on Camp Ashraf

As you are aware, since December 2003 successive Iraqi governments (from the first interim government to the present elected government) have demanded that the American Army remove Camp Ashraf and the foreign terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) militants in it from their country. This is not a new demand and is based on the MEK’s historical enmity toward the Iraqi people for two decades as part of the suppressive apparatus of Saddam Hussein.

Only since the American Army handed over responsibility for Camp Ashraf in January this year has it been possible for the Government of Iraq (GOI) to take action toward removing the MEK and closing Camp Ashraf as a fundamental aspect of taking full, sovereign control of the country. The GOI’s first and basic demand is that the individuals resident in the camp obey Iraqi and international law. The MEK, in any country they reside, regard themselves as ‘outside the law’ of that country – true outlaws. How and why they escape justice in these countries of course requires explanation from the governments and judicial systems of those countries. But for now, the Iraqi Government appears to be the only entity which is prepared to challenge this situation and to its credit is being completely open about the process.

As you are aware, there are 25 American soldiers posted at Camp Ashraf. To date, they have not reported any activity by the Iraqi authorities in pursuit of this sovereign right to dismantle and remove a dangerous, destructive terrorist group from the country which has given rise to concern.

On the contrary, there is plentiful evidence that the leaders of the MEK, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, continue to preside over a situation inside Camp Ashraf in which the individual members are subjected to a harsh and unremitting regime involving daily violations of their basic human rights. An article in The Economist (April 8, 2009) stated: “the PMOI is widely reviled by human-rights groups for nurturing a messianic cult of personality around Mr Rajavi and his wife, Maryam, and for enforcing a totalitarian discipline on its adherents. Several defectors testify, in the words of one of them, to a “constant bombardment of indoctrination” and a requirement to submit utterly and unquestioningly to the cause. No sources of news are allowed without the PMOI’s [MEK’s] say-so.”

I believe it is abundantly clear that in relation to human rights violations of the individuals living inside Camp Ashraf, it is the MEK itself which has proven to be the perpetrators. The MEK has also been actively obstructive, indeed provocative, toward those wishing to investigate and alleviate this suffering. So plentiful is this evidence that, after becoming aware that a resolution is proposed in the European Parliament in relation to Camp Ashraf and the people in it, I have been surprised to find that no representatives of the European Parliament have been on an official visit to Baghdad or to Camp Ashraf to investigate the issue. Indeed, it appears that no official contact whatsoever has been made by the European Parliament with the Government of Iraq to discuss this highly sensitive issue.

I urge the European Parliament to redress this glaring omission at the earliest opportunity. The GOI has been commendably transparent in explaining its activities vis-à-vis

Camp Ashraf and has shown itself ready to answer any questions. The GOI should have no hesitation in providing full access to Camp Ashraf to officially organised investigative missions, whether by political entities or humanitarian agencies.

Indeed, I have no doubt that the GOI would welcome international oversight of its activities in relation to Camp Ashraf. Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie, Iraq ‘s national security advisor’s plan for the difficult task of dismantling an extremist cult has revealed an enlightened, humanitarian approach which could become a blueprint for tackling similar organisations worldwide.

Dr. al Rubaie has stated: “This is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. In normal everyday language we can say that they have been “brainwashed”. He adds, “The Government of Iraq does not deal with the MEK as an organization. We deal with the residents as individuals.”

Under observation by the ICRC and the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights, Dr. al Rubaie has focused efforts to protect the individuals inside the camp following allegations that human rights abuses are being perpetrated by MEK leaders against the residents. To this end he has said, “We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders.”

In response to the many obstacles thrown up by the MEK to their removal from Camp Ashraf, Dr. al Rubaie said, “The Iraqi Army unit posted to defend and secure

Camp Ashraf has exercised patience and extreme restraint in spite of the staged provocations and demonstrations that Ashraf’s self-appointed leaders have launched in defiance of the legitimate exercise by the Government of Iraq of its sovereignty.” “Ashraf is not above the law,” said Dr. al Rubaie.

The Iraqi government has given guarantees that none of the captives will be forced to return to Iran against their wishes. The most serious threat to those left in Camp Ashraf comes from the MEK cult’s leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi. They will want to use their blood to extricate themselves from this crisis. American media has already quoted MEK officials threatening a ‘humanitarian catastrophe’ at Camp Ashraf. Experts in cult activity and experts on the MEK have interpreted this as the threat of mass suicides of residents by order of the MEK leaders.

I urge European and international governments as well as humanitarian agencies to cooperate fully with the Iraqi authorities to help restore basic human rights to the people trapped in Camp Ashraf.

I urge the European Parliament to give its full support to the Government of Iraq. Any resolution should reflect the realities on the ground and give support to the humanitarian approach taken by the Government of Iraq to resolve this difficult problem.

The aim of a European Parliament resolution must be to prevent any further political abuse of Mojahedin-e Khalq members in Camp Ashraf held captive by their leaders, and guarantee the individual rights of those who renounce violence and are willing to return to society.

A resolution should, above all, reflect the responsibility of European countries toward the victims of the Rajavi cult. In particular, for individuals in Camp Ashraf with residency or asylum rights in European countries, provision should be made in the resolution to work with the GOI for their rapid transfer back to these countries.

A resolution should, as a minimum, include the demands that:

1. The GOI re-open a separate temporary camp adjacent to Camp Ashraf to which people can physically escape and not be forced to continue as members of a foreign terrorist group in Iraq against their will. (Sahar Family Foundation has a list of over 200 individuals who have expressed their desire to leave the MEK but who have no alternative place to go until their final destination is determined.)

2. The MEK should be required to allow free and unfettered access to all of the individual residents inside Camp Ashraf to the Iraqi authorities and to official humanitarian investigative agencies.

3. The MEK should be required to allow free and unfettered access to the immediate family members of all the individual residents inside Camp Ashraf without supervision by MEK operatives.

4. The MEK should be required to allow all residents of Camp Ashraf access to external information, internet, radio, television, books, newspapers and conversation. Gender integration must be reinstated.

5. The European Parliament should work with the UNHCR to find third countries to which the individuals in Camp Ashraf can be transferred. Those with residence and/or asylum rights in European countries should be helped to return and reintegrate into normal society.

6. Mojahedin leaders, Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, and other leading members who have escaped the camp should be arrested and brought to justice through international courts.

April 18, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Iranian group in Iraq part of high-stakes politics

BAGHDAD (AP) — The Iraqi government is stepping up efforts to pressure Iranian exiles into leaving the country, pushing an obscure group to the forefront of Baghdad’s relations with Washington and the Obama administration’s overtures to Iran.

At stake is whether Iraq can resolve the fate of 3,500 members of the People’s Mujahedeen Organization of Iran without damaging its ties to both the U.S. and Iran.

In recent weeks, leaders of the People’s Mujahedeen, known by its Farsi initials MEK, claim the Iraqis blockaded their Camp Ashraf north of Baghdad, allowing in only limited food and water shipments.

And earlier this month, they say, the Iraqi guards prevented Iraqi surgeons from entering the camp to treat critically ill patients — although the Iraqis ultimately relented.

To outsiders, the MEK may seem a strange cult-like group that bans sex and family life. But both the U.S. and Iran consider it a terrorist organization.

The Iraqi government makes no secret it wants the MEK out of the country in order to improve relations with Iran.

“Remaining in Iraq is not an option,”said national security adviser Mouwaffak al-Rubaie.”They have existed in Iraq solely to overthrow the government of a neighbor, Iran. That past permissiveness is over.”

Iran has pressed for years to close the camp, but the issue came to a head after Iraqi forces took over security for Camp Ashraf on Jan. 1, under the Iraq-U.S. security pact. The government gave the Americans assurances they would not force the exiles back to Iran, where some face prosecution.

U.S. officials in Baghdad have declined to comment publicly on the MEK issue.

But the U.S. has a stake in the issue because the U.S. military signed an agreement with the militia after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, promising members would be treated as”protected persons”under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Al-Rubaie says that with Iraqis in control, the MEK is no longer protected by national laws or international conventions and must leave.

He dismisses claims of maltreatment and says Camp Ashraf residents are extremists who have been”brainwashed”by about 15-20 of their most militant leaders. The U.S. has tried to defuse the tensions but without much success.

The MEK has a long history in Iraq.

Founded by Iranian leftists, it opposed Iran’s U.S.-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and took part in the 1979 Iranian revolution that brought the Islamic regime to power. Members were implicated in killings of Americans and the U.S. Embassy takeover in Tehran — reasons that put them on the U.S. terror list.

But their blend of Marxism and secular Islamism pitted them against the Ayatollahs and they eventually settled in Iraq, where they fought alongside Saddam Hussein’s forces during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

During Saddam’s time, MEK members staged military parades at Camp Ashraf, marching in uniforms and flaunting an impressive arsenal, and carried out deadly raids into Iran to attack their sworn enemy — Tehran’s regime.

They transformed Camp Ashraf from a barren desert stretch in the heart of the volatile Diyala province and only 50 miles from the Iranian border into an oasis of well-kept gardens, sprouting water fountains and palm trees along marked-out streets.

The fenced-off 30-square-mile compound houses 3,418 residents, including 900 women. Men and women obey a strict regimen, sleep in segregated, barrack-style quarters, and are said almost to deify their Paris-based leader, Maryam Rajavi. The camp has mostly been off limits and the government rarely allows media visits.

Al-Rubaie says hundreds of the residents hold documents linking them to a third country. There are five U.S. citizens, 11 Canadians and some European and Australian dual nationals.

Baghdad has tried to get those countries to accept them, and promises MEK members Iranian passports, a one-way ticket to a third country and $1,000 in pocket money, al-Rubaie said.

But Camp Ashraf residents refuse to go.

“It’s like somebody comes and tells you to leave the only home you’ve known for the past 20 years,”said Mohammad Mohaddessin, a senior official at MEK’s political wing in Paris.

The camp, he says, is a modern”city,”with a museum, a cemetery, and a bakery— even an”Ashraf Cola”factory. As for sex and family life, Ashraf residents”left this behind them voluntarily,”Mohaddessin said.

MEK is now turning to supporters in Europe, where the European Parliament in January removed the organization from its terror list after a British court backed the group’s claim to have renounced violence.

If all else fails, the MEK says it may take the Camp Ashraf case to an international tribunal at The Hague.

The Iraqi government says 261 residents were returned to Iran over the last two years and reported no persecution. Spokeswoman Dibeh Fakhr of Iraq’s office of the International Red Cross — which visited the camp four times last year — says the last returnee went back to Iran in April 2008.

Although the MEK is no longer a military threat,”symbolically, it’s very important for Iran that they are expelled,”said Iranian analyst Saeed Leilaz. Washington’s acquiescence would be an overture to Tehran and a”good start”for Iran and the U.S., he said.

For now, Iraq’s stranglehold of Camp Ashraf has created a shortage of some commodities, including toothpaste, chlorine for water purification and generator fuel, said camp physician Hamid Gazaeri.

The camp’s modest clinic is serviced by a few general practitioners, all Iranians living in Ashraf, and depends on regular visits by Iraqi specialists.

Cancer sufferer Fatemeh Alizadeh, one of five patients who waited for a week for surgery until Iraqi doctors were allowed back last Friday, can’t imagine the camp closing.

“It would be a catastrophe,”she said in a frail voice on the phone, speaking from her hospital bed.”I am not going anywhere.”

By KATARINA KRATOVAC

April 15, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Iranian dissidents in Iraq. Where will they all go?

Iranians in Iraq who fought against the Islamic Republic face a shaky future

“IT WAS one of the strangest places I’d ever seen,” says one of the few Farsi-speaking Westerners to have spent weeks in Camp Ashraf, 65km (40 miles) Members are completely cut off from contact with their families. When wavering group members was enabled to talk to their some of their parents refused to believe it was their children, for they had been told by the PMOI that they were dead north-east of Baghdad, where some 3,400 Iranian dissidents are hunkered down and are now threatened with expulsion from Iraq, perhaps even back to Iran. It was “like a spiffy midsized town in Iran”, with parks, offices and buildings—but no children. It was “sterile, soulless and sad”. Nearly two decades ago, families living in the camp were “dissolved”, couples were forcibly divorced, and their children sent away, many of them to live with supporters living in the West, to be brought up in the faith of a movement widely described by independent observers as a cult.

For the past six years, the Americans have protected the camp, whose raison d’être is generally opposed by the surrounding Iraqi communities and by most Iranians, whether or not they are for or against the clerical regime in Tehran. But as American troops prepare to go home, the Iraqi government, which wants cosy ties with Iran, now says the camp must be closed and its inhabitants dispersed, probably back to Iran, where they would face an uncertain future, to put it mildly.

The group is variously known as the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (PMOI) or the Mujahedeen-e Khalq Organisation (abbreviated as both MEK and MKO). Founded in 1965 as a youthful underground opposition to Iran’s Shah, it was usually described as “Islamic Marxist”. When the Shah fell it at first backed Ayatollah Khomeini but soon fell out with him, embarking on a campaign of violence and bombings which, on a single occasion, is reckoned to have killed 70 civilians, including several senior clerics; the withered arm of Iran’s current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was a result of that bomb. The group’s political umbrella is called the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

The PMOI’s leader, Massoud Rajavi, fled to France in 1981 but he and his followers, many of them women, relocated in 1986 to Iraq, where Saddam Hussein gave them a big base at Camp Ashraf, which is thought to be around 20km in circumference. Saddam abundantly supplied the PMOI with Brazilian and British tanks (captured from Iran during the war of 1980-1988) and Russian armoured personnel carriers, among other arms. In return, the PMOI made attacks on Iran itself, which is why Iranians of all stripes tend to regard the group as traitors. It is also said to have spearheaded Saddam’s attacks on rebellious Iraqi Kurds and Shias in 1991, after the first Gulf war, a charge it strongly denies.

Follow my leader

No less controversially, the PMOI is widely reviled by human-rights groups for nurturing a messianic cult of personality around Mr Rajavi and his wife, Maryam, and for enforcing a totalitarian discipline on its adherents. Several defectors testify, in the words of one of them, to a “constant bombardment of indoctrination” and a requirement to submit utterly and unquestioningly to the cause. No sources of news are allowed without the PMOI’s say-so. According to one defector, around 50 members who rebelled were sent to Saddam’s prison in Abu Ghraib, west of Baghdad.

Members are completely cut off from contact with their families. When the above-mentioned Farsi-speaking Westerner, who visited Ashraf in 2004, enabled wavering group members to talk to their families in Iran by satellite telephone, some of their parents refused to believe it was their children, for they had been told by the PMOI that they were dead.

No one is sure whether Mr Rajavi is alive but most think not; he has not been heard of since the American invasion of 2003. His wife, known as “the president-elect”, travels the world, soliciting support from a wide range of sympathisers, including some in the American Congress, the European Parliament and the British House of Lords. No one is sure who really controls the PMOI in Camp Ashraf. It is thought that nearly 400 residents have voluntarily returned to Iran, where they are said to have been treated adequately so far. But who can really tell? Several hundred more are seeking refugee status elsewhere. A few dozen have—or rather had—passports to Western countries, some of which have verified their bona fides.

In the past year, the European Parliament and Britain’s courts have removed the label of “terrorist” from the PMOI, mainly on the ground that the group says it has disavowed violence, is not known to have carried out any acts of terror since, at the latest, 2002, and surrendered its weapons (at any rate, its heavier ones) at Camp Ashraf after the American invasion. This has irritated several national governments, especially the British and French ones, which think the PMOI is a nasty nuisance and its presence on their soil bad for relations with both Iraq and Iran.

The outfit is still officially deemed a terrorist organisation in the United States but has a fierce lobby there too, backed by a mix of neoconservatives and leftists, that accepts at face value the group’s insistence that it is a secular and democratic movement with mass support in Iran and a real chance of eventually displacing the mullahs’ regime. Its lobby in Europe is much exercised by recent statements of Muwafaq al-Rubaie, Iraq’s national security adviser, who makes it plain he wants the camp disbanded and its people sent abroad, mostly to Iran, whose rulers have become more vociferous in calling its fellow reigning Shias in Baghdad to send them back.

The PMOI has a sophisticated network of ardent supporters. Without a doubt, its voice of despairing outrage will rise to a squeal if the Americans give way to Iraqi and Iranian demands to cut the movement loose. But it may happen.

The Economist print edition

http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13447429

April 11, 2009 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

An Interview with Iraq’s National Security Advisor about Camp Ashraf

An Interview with Iraq’s National Security Advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie

about Camp Ashraf by Anne Singleton

After 2003 the disarmed Iranian terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) organisation Rubaie: mko is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. was consolidated from various locales in Iraq and protected by US forces at Camp Ashraf in Diyala province; a bizarre anomaly in Iraqi and coalition efforts to bring unity and peace to the country. The Government of Iraq has long regarded the MEK as a foreign terrorist group which continues to threaten internal security and is culpable for aiding Saddam Hussein in the violent suppression of Kurdish and Shia uprisings in 1991. Successive announcements in 2008 by President Jalal Talabani and Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari made clear their government’s determination to expel all the MEK members as soon as possible.

But solving the conundrum as to why the group has been protected and promoted by western interests for all this time has become clearer since January this year when responsibility for Camp Ashraf was handed over to the Government of Iraq by the Coalition Forces. As the Government of Iraq has moved swiftly to fulfil its decision to expel members of the MEK from the country, so the protests by those who have a stake in the continued presence of the group have intensified.

During March, three debates were held in the UK parliament by members supporting the MEK. In spite of being on the US terrorism list since 1997, CBS and CNN news channels have broadcast MEK films showing its personnel obstructing Iraqi authorities as they try to perform their duties. Additionally, the Washington Post has quoted an MEK spokesman in which he is threatening the Government of Iraq that “a human catastrophe" will follow further action.

Even though Europe and the UK have un-proscribed the group as it claims to no longer believe in violence, no moves have been made to have European and British citizens and those with residency rights removed from Camp Ashraf to safety. Instead, powerful lobbies who have used the MEK for their own interests are continuing their efforts to force the Government of Iraq to maintain the infrastructure of a terrorist organisation in its country. Keeping the group in Iraq can only serve the interests of those Saddamists who still believe the group will give them leverage over the Government of Iraq.

Spearheading Government plans to remove the MEK is Iraq’s national security advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie. His role is to advise the Government of Iraq and coordinate policies and activity in relation to national security and intelligence matters.

Over several months Dr. al Rubaie has fielded criticisms and attacks with repeated assurances that the residents of Camp Ashraf will be treated according to international human rights standards and that none would be forcibly repatriated. To date, nothing has occurred at Camp Ashraf to give any cause for concern to human rights organisations. In recent weeks two MEK members departed Camp Ashraf voluntarily. One confessed that he had been instructed to commit suicide in order to implicate Iraq’s Army. These two men, who were protected and comfortably accommodated by the Iraqi Government under observation by the ICRC and the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights, spoke openly of the human rights violations perpetrated by the leaders on MEK members. It was partly in response to this information that Dr. al Rubaie has focused efforts to protect the individuals inside the camp.

Indeed Dr. al Rubaie’s plan for the difficult task of dismantling an extremist cult has revealed an enlightened, humanitarian approach which could become a blueprint for tackling similar organisations worldwide.

However, as the clamour continues, I asked Dr. al Rubaie for an interview in order to further clarify his Government’s approach to events at Camp Ashraf.

Anne Singleton: You want to move the residents from Camp Ashraf for their own protection, yet the MEK commanders say they must remain in Camp Ashraf. What do you think motivates them?

Mowaffak al Rubaie: The self-appointed leaders at Camp Ashraf will have to speak for themselves. What I will address is how the residents of Camp Ashraf have cooperated or not cooperated with the policies and decisions of the Government of Iraq. The GOI does not deal with the MEK as an organization. We deal with the residents as individuals. The GOI has informed them that as members of a foreign terrorist organization they cannot remain in Iraq and must choose whether to return to their country of citizenship or some other country. Remaining in Iraq is not an option. The GOI has taken steps to assure their security while beginning to exercise sovereignty at Camp Ashraf as we do in every other part of our country. Ashraf is not above the law. Any infractions of Iraqi law will be handled by the GOI authorities with attention to due process and humanitarian standards. To date, the residents of Camp Ashraf have created a series of obstacles to the legitimate exercise of sovereignty by the GOI and this will not be tolerated. They must cooperate in order to avoid obstructing our authorities carrying out their legitimate duties.

AS: Some observers speculate that MEK leader Massoud Rajavi is in the anti-nuclear bunker inside Camp Ashraf and that is why the commanders refuse to move. Do you think this is possible?

MR: We do not know exactly what is within the bounds of Camp Ashraf. The GOI has informed the residents that we will diligently and progressively examine all areas of Ashraf to ensure there is no contraband, that there are no illegal activities taking place, and that they must cooperate with this legitimate exercise of Iraqi sovereignty and enforcement of the rule of law.

AS: You have spoken of ‘detoxifying’ the people in Camp Ashraf. Could you explain what this means and why you feel it is necessary? What do you hope to achieve?

MR: As you know from observing the behavior of the MEK and from their history, this is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. In normal everyday language we can say that they have been "brainwashed". As is common in organizations of this type, the indoctrination and discipline rely on the continuous pressure of their leaders and the total control by them of their environment. Therefore, individuals have little ability to exercise their free will because they exist in this closed environment and fear for personal reprisals if they are discovered to have deviated from the approved line of responses. As we strive to determine from each individual where they wish to go since they cannot remain in Iraq, we are conducting individual surveys and a census which are open to oversight by the ICRC and the UN. We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders.

AS: CBS and CNN have been broadcasting clips showing women shouting at and insulting Iraqi soldiers from behind closed gates. Could tell us more about what these scenes depict.

MR: You will have to ask CBS and CNN when and under what circumstances they obtained their filmed scenes. What I can tell you is that the Iraqi Army unit posted to defend and secure Camp Ashraf has been in full control since 20 February and has exercised patience and extreme restraint in spite of the staged provocations and demonstrations that Ashraf’s self-appointed leaders have launched in defiance of the legitimate exercise by the GOI of its sovereignty.

AS: Families are concerned about having access to their relatives without MEK minders being present. Do you see a time in the near future that such visits can be facilitated?

MR: The GOI has already facilitated visits by families and has provided the residents of Camp Ashraf written procedures which are fully permissive. Our security forces at Camp Ashraf have and will continue to facilitate legitimate family visits with no interference by either the MEK or anyone else. These visits are also completely open to ICRC and UN observation. The MEK have been the obstacle to establishing a comfortable facility for such family visits.

AS: The MEK claim that the Government of Iraq has not allowed medical personnel or medical supplies into the camp and that this has resulted in the deaths of some women and that others are dying. They want ICRC and UNHCR intervention. What is your response to this allegation?

MR: These allegations are false and baseless.

AS: The MEK’s supporters have paid millions in legal fees to have the group removed from the UK and European Council terrorism lists. Have any of the group’s western supporters offered to help remove these people to their countries?

MR: The GOI has communicated with ambassadors from the European Union and all other countries we suspect have citizens or persons with some claim to residency in their countries. We have asked them to offer to allow those with status in their countries to return and to consider hosting others who may want to reside in their countries. We have facilitated visits by representatives of these countries to Camp Ashraf. We are hopeful that this level of openness and transparency by the GOI will persuade these countries to allow such returns.

AS: In your view, what can the UK, European and other western governments do to help resettle the MEK?

MR: These governments can agree to allow their citizens and others who have status in their country to return.

AS: The Washington Post quoted MEK member Mohammad Mohaddessin clearly threatening that self-immolations similar to 2003 and other suicide acts would be performed by the residents of Camp Ashraf. What is your response to this?

MR: We have and will continue to treat the residents of Camp Ashraf humanely and in accordance with Iraqi law and international law and conventions. We will not initiate acts of violence against them. We do expect them to cooperate in our efforts to exercise our sovereignty according to the rule of law. Should they choose extremist acts such as self-immolation, it will be their decision which we would regret.

Anne Singleton

April 7, 2009 0 comments

Iraqi Authorities' stance on the MEK

Iraq’s National Security Advisor on MEK

Iraq’s National Security Advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie on Camp Ashraf, Massoud Rajavi and ‘Detoxifying’ MEK Members

LONDON, April 6 /PRNewswire/ — In an interview with Anne Singleton of Iran-Interlink, Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie, Iraq ‘s national security advisor clarified his approach to the Government of Iraq’s decision to remove the Iranian terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK, aka MKO, PMOI) from the country.

Responsibility for Camp Ashraf was handed over to the Government of Iraq by the Coalition Forces in January this year. Since then, Dr. al Rubaie’s plan for the difficult task of dismantling an extremist cult has revealed an enlightened, humanitarian approach which could become a blueprint for tackling similar organisations worldwide.

Dr. al Rubaie explained,”This is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. In normal everyday language we can say that they have been”brainwashed”. He added,”The Government of Iraq does not deal with the MEK as an organization. We deal with the residents as individuals.”

Under observation by the ICRC and the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights, Dr. al Rubaie has focused efforts to protect the individuals inside the camp following allegations that human rights abuses are being perpetrated by MEK leaders against the residents. To this end he said,”We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders.”

In response to the many obstacles thrown up by the MEK to their removal from Camp Ashraf, Dr al Rubaie told Iran-Interlink,”The Iraqi Army unit posted to defend and secure Camp Ashraf has exercised patience and extreme restraint in spite of the staged provocations and demonstrations that Ashraf’s self-appointed leaders have launched in defiance of the legitimate exercise by the Government of Iraq of its sovereignty.””Ashraf is not above the law,”said Dr. al Rubaie.

Asked what can the UK , European and other western governments do to help resettle the MEK, Dr. al Rubaie replied,”These governments can agree to allow their citizens and others who have status in their country to return.”

For the full interview see http://iran-Interlink.org

Contact:

Anne Singleton

+44-1132780503

+44-7876541150

editor@iran-interlink.org

April 7, 2009 0 comments

USA

The US’s position on the disposition of Camp Ashraf

Acting Deputy Department Spokesman – Daily Press Briefing

MR. DUGUID: Gordon, is the United States working with the Iraqis on the Although the United States Government remains engaged on this issue, responsibility for resolving the situation at the camp rests with the Government of Iraq at this time. disposition of the MEK people? It seems like they’re kind of – the Iraqis are rushing to judgment on this sentence and – well, what outcome would you like to see for these people?

MR. DUGUID: As you may be aware, the disposition of Camp Ashraf was given a full transfer to the responsibility of the Iraqis on February the 20th. We continue to monitor the situation to ensure that the residents of Camp Ashraf are treated in accordance with Iraq’s constitution and international obligations. And those are the two key factors that specifically address your question. Although the United States Government remains engaged on this issue, responsibility for resolving the situation at the camp rests with the Government of Iraq at this time.

QUESTION: Do you have a desired outcome from this?

MR. DUGUID: The desired outcome is one that fully fits within Iraq’s laws and their international commitments to the residents of this camp.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2009/03/120983.htm

April 4, 2009 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

Iraqi security adviser discusses MKO

Iraqi security adviser discusses Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (Rajavi cult)

(About 1000 MKO members have US and EU passport and have to go back)

… He says about 1,000 of them have US and European passports and resident About 1000 MKO members have US and EU passport and have to go back permits or political asylum status in the United States and in Europe and they can go there, noting that "900 women are in the camp," and adding that they can return them to Iran, but stressing that "we will not send anyone to Iran against his will." He notes that "we have returned 118 to Iran on their own free will over the past two years."…

Baghdad Al-Iraqiyah Television in Arabic, a government-sponsored television station run by the Iraqi Media Network, at 1901 gmt on 21 March broadcasts a recorded 55-minute interview with Iraqi National Security Adviser Muwaffaq al-Rubay’i by Aziz Rahim in Baghdad; from the "Exclusive Interview" programme.

Rahim asks Al-Rubay’i about his job, which he has been occupying for years. He says the job of the national security adviser is new in many countries, and is new in Iraq as well. He say his job is to "coordinate among the security ministries – Defence, Interior, and National Security Ministries, and other intelligence services," adding that lack of coordination might cause clashes or confusion. He says his office "draws up state policies and strategies in the military, security, and intelligence domains as well as in matters of security in the fields of economy and health as well as in social and international security," noting that it also takes care of "the religious and intellectual security against intrusive ideas such as the takfiri ideas [holding other Muslims to be apostates] or extremist ideas."

Al-Rubay’i says his office draws up ways to help the prime minister, the president, and other officials implement state policies. He adds: "The national security adviser’s office provides analysis for each problem, whether it is related to security, intelligence, military, economic, or health. It offers a diagnosis and an analysis of each problem, presents options for a solution, and recommends certain options." He says it deals with the "general concept" of security rather than details.

He says the adviser’s office helped create the Iraqi Army, noting that in June 2004 there was only a regiment under training at the Baghdad Airport, "but now we have 17 divisions, an Air Force, a Naval Force, counterterrorism forces, and five intelligence services." He adds: "We have defeated our enemies, whether they are from Al-Qa’idah, the militias, the extremists, special terrorist groups, and organized gangs." He says that security achievements in Iraq over the past 5 years have been realized because of the "policies that we thought of and drew up." He says contacts and efforts exerted with the neighbouring countries "based on mutual interests" and on the principle of "you scratch my back and I scratch yours" have been very fruitful.

Asked about the connection between him and the Iraqi National Security Council, he says that the Council is headed by the prime minister and includes the interior minister, the defence minister, the foreign minister, the finance minister, the minister of justice, the head of the intelligence, the chief of the Army staff, and the national security adviser." He says the national security adviser prepares the agenda of the meetings.

(…)

Rahim then asks him about the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization [MKO] issue and about Camp Ashraf and if reports that the government is to close down Camp Ashraf by the end of March are true, he replies that there is no specific date for closing the camp but the Iraqi government has decided to close the camp as soon as possible. He adds: "If the closure is delayed more than a few months, we might transfer the camp to another place. The aim is to transfer it to the west of the country and divide it into more than one camp to make it distant from the Iranian fire, if I may use this expression." He says the aim is to protect the inmates of the camp and keep them outside the range of the Iranian fire, "because as a government we are responsible for protecting them."

Al-Rubay’i says that most of he states in the world, including Iraq, consider Mojahedin-e Khalq a terrorist organization. He adds: "We do not deal with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization and we do not fear the intimidating propaganda machine it is operating in the world and we do not fear their public relations machine and its political campaign against us."

He adds: "We have an international and humanitarian responsibilities, and we have pledged to the world, that we will deal with this issue in a humanitarian and civilized manner. We have decided to close down the camp and deal with the inhabitants of the camp as individuals and not as an organization.

"We believe that there is a group – 15, 20, or 25 – who are the commanders that are controlling others. The vast majority of the camp’s inmate are perhaps brainwashed. They in fact want to return to their country once this pressure is lifted off them. If we remove those who are washing their brains, the vast majority will go home." Asked how this can be done, he replies: "This can be done by isolating them from these commanders, and separating them by any civilized way."

Al-Rubay’i says that there are some 3,418 members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization, and they are very well trained, and adds: "This is an ugly terrorist organization and it perpetrated crimes against the Iraqi people during the intifadah and after the intifadah and after the change of the regime, in addition to its crimes against the Iranian people. They are brainwashed and are very well trained and they are close to the Iranian border. Of course Iran considers this a threat to its national security and it might do something to them. It is our duty to protect them by moving them to another place."

Asked to react to a statement to the newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat by a Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization official called Mohammad Iqbal "that a human disaster is expected because the Iraqi Army is besieging Camp Ashraf and that supplies to its inmates have stopped," he says: "On 1 January 2009, the security responsibility was gradually transferred from the Multinational Forces to the Iraqi forces and the transfer was completed on 20 February. Now the Iraqi Army is responsible for protecting the camp. It is besieging it of course to prevent anyone from entering and also to protect the inmates."

Al-Rubay’i says: "Many inmates want to leave it. Two escaped from the camp and we now have them. One of them said: They sent me away by telling me to go and burn myself up inside the Iraqi Army compound and say that the Iraqi Army set me on fire." Asked why this is not told to the media, he replies: "We do not want to enter into media campaigns and wrangling with this terrorist organization. We are a government. We have international and humanitarian obligations. In any case, these are human beings and they at least must have the rights of human beings but they are not political refugees or humanitarian refugees. They have no status and we inherited this from the previous regime, and now it is becoming an affliction.

"We told them that remaining in Iraq was not an option. Either you go back to Iran or we will give you Iranian passports. The Iranian government is prepared to give them Iranian passports and they can go to any state in the world. Many nations do not need a visa stamped on Iranian passports. They might go to Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia, or to any European country."

He says about 1,000 of them have US and European passports and resident permits or political asylum status in the United States and in Europe and they can go there, noting that "900 women are in the camp," and adding that they can return them to Iran, but stressing that "we will not send anyone to Iran against his will." He notes that "we have returned 118 to Iran on their own free will over the past two years."

He says that the Iraqi government ascertained through the Iraqi Human Rights Ministry and the ICRC that these 118 have not been harmed during the past two years, and "therefore, most of the camp inmates can go to Iran."

He says that four or five days ago, the Iraqi Army outside the camp moved to a building near the camp and wanted to stay in it. He says that the area of the camp is 400 square kilometres of Iraqi territory and the Iraqi Army must enter the camp and protect them, and adds: "The Iraqi Army has been stationed in certain buildings built especially for the Iraqi army." He adds: "The inmates of the camp occupied the buildings, declared a state of civil disobedience, and refused to leave. They are 200. We told them: all right, stay and we will protect you. Anyone who leaves the building will not be allowed to return. We bring them food, water, and medicine and everything they need." He adds: "In fact there is an entire regiment protecting the camp. The US forces are there with the Iraqi forces as observers. If the Iraqi forces commit any violations, the US forces will see that."

Al-Rubay’i admits that the telephone numbers and other information on the identity of any visitors of the camp are being taken down, and adds: "Do the Iraqi security forces not have the right to make an inventory of who are staying in the camp? They gave us a number: 3,418. We asked them about the names but they refused to give us the names, the dates of birth, or any other information." He says the Iraqis want to know if some of them want to return to Iran or to the country form which they arrived.

He says: "They had a terrible arsenal and they handed it all over to the Americans – tanks, armoured vehicles, missiles, rocket launchers, RPG’s, BKC’s, hand grenades, all sorts of things. It was an entire arsenal and it was handed to the Americans with lists. Now we want to search the camp and see if there are arms left or not."

He says the Iraqi Human Rights Ministry prepared a form that the inmates should fill in with personal information. It distributed it to 3,418 persons but only 180 returned the forms filled, noting that their commanders did not allow anyone to fill the form. He says: "They refuse to give general information or fill forms, they refuse to cooperate with the Iraqi security forces. They want to invent a crisis with us."

Concluding, he says that this is an issue of sovereignty, because they are occupying 400 square kilometres of Iraqi territory against Iraq’s will and counter to Iraqi decisions. He adds: "We are a self-respecting government, a sovereign government, and we must impose our control and respect inside the camp."

Al-Iraqiyah TV, Baghdad, in Arabic 1901 gmt 21 Mar 09

BBC Monitoring Middle East, 29 March 2009

March 31, 2009 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts