Iraq to Shutdown Camp Ashraf

Iraq unanimously resolved to expel MKO

A senior Iraqi lawmaker says the MKO’s being supported by a number of al-Iraqiya bloc members is not so important to be discussed in the Parliament of Iraq, as the national consensus is to expel Mujahedin-e Khalq group from Iraq.

“There is a national consensus in this regard, and there is also an article in the Constitution dedicated to the subject that the Iraqi soil is not a place for aggressors to the neighboring countries,” Iraqi Parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Dr. Humam Hamoudi told Habilian.

Hamoudi went on to say that the terrorist group has “spilt the blood of many Iraqi people, and violated the Iraq’s sovereignty by refusing the entrance of Iraqi security forces (to Camp Ashraf) and involving in a conflict with them.”

“Iraqis have unanimously resolved (to expel MKO) which is approved and supported by the cabinet and Parliament,” he added.

“People have been called to file a lawsuit before international courts in order to force MKO to pay the damages they have imposed on the Iraqis.”

Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Iraqi Parliament described the presence of MKO in the Iraqi soil as a “resolved and finished issue”, because “their continued presence on Iraqi soil is “against the country’s Constitution.”

June 27, 2012 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Dealing with Terrorism Conundrum in Iraq

The only rights to have been violated seem to be those of the terrorist MKO

The blight of terrorism cast on a society is enough to upset people’s life even if they are not direct targets of terrorist perpetrations. But despite the real and direct impact of terrorism on human rights and its devastating consequences on societies, the struggle of terrorist groups to enforce recognition of some rights on legal communities is far greater than that of the victims of terrorism to call for the protection of their rights in any way if they ever have any.

The flagrant violation of regulations by Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO/MEK being overlooked, the Iraqi government and other international concerned auxiliary sides to peacefully settle the conundrum in Iraq has encountered never-ending complaints, demands and even warnings by the ringleaders. Even if the members of MKO were terrorist suspects, the Iraqi government considered their expulsion a preventive measure to protect its territory from individuals considered a security risk to the country and the nation. MKO, however, is not a suspect terrorist group but a globally blacklisted one acting as Saddam’s mercenaries in the era of his despotic rule over Iraq.

Neither exiles nor refugees, MKO is the most unwelcome leftover of Saddam’s tyranny whose expulsion the Iraqi government deems to be tantamount to a strict counter terrorism measure in a violence afflicted country. Since the fall of Saddam, The Iraqi government has been busy hunting down the remnants of his regime, with whom MKO has been undeniably reported to have established close connection. If fact, Camp Asharaf, under the protection of the coalition forces that left the internal control of the camp in the hands of the terrorists themselves, became a safe haven for a number of discontent insurgents and opponents loyal to Saddam or fed by external hands to prevent the advance of order and freedom in the country.

However, there is a widespread speculation that despite being blacklisted a terrorist group; multitudes of its members have been deceived into joining the group advertised as a freedom fighter or the starting platform devoted to provide an easy, successful life in European countries. In reality, most of them are vulnerable individuals of a society and victims of a general naivety that terrorist groups and cults take advantage of them to recruit and enslave. Needless to say that a universal consensus confirms, according to undeniable evidences revealed by the defected members of MKO, the painful and bitter truth that MKO is absolutely a terrorist cult of personality run by the wife-husband Rajavies.

The Iraqi government is actually acting to accomplish two indispensable jobs simultaneously by its decision to expel MKO; to uproot the possible threat of a foreign terrorist group and to unshackle the enslaved insiders of a terrorist cult. It is a universal responsibility to help Iraqi government in the task to fulfill. Whilst the rights of the Iraqi government have to be recognized at the regional level, they have not so far been fully protected on the international plane, to provide for the nation an opportunity of enjoying an unprejudiced, peaceful and secure life, it offers an opportunity to the trammeled insiders of MKO to regain their freedom.

But, alas, the policy of appeasement has emboldened MKO to refuse accomplishment of a justified sine qua non. The only rights to have been violated seem to be those of the terrorist MKO; it freely holds rallies and gatherings in the heart of European countries, as held on June 23 in Villepinte, Paris, confidently accusing the US of shirking to remove its terrorist tag and calling for the protection of its bastion in Iraq. But hardly anything serious has been done yet to protect the violated rights of a nation calling to have their home free of violence and disorder. And hardly any ear has heard the desperate cries of help from within the cult that simply fad out in the propaganda ado of MKO.

By N. Morgan

June 26, 2012 0 comments

UN Concerned about MKO’s Lack of Subordination

The Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General (SRSG) for Iraq, Martin Kobler, expressed concern about the terrorist Mojahedin-Khalq Organization (MKO)’s resistance against UN Concerned about MKO's Lack of Subordination a relocation of its members from its main training base in Camp Ashraf to a transient settlement facility in Camp Liberty around Baghdad.

The relocation to Camp Liberty has been stalled since the arrival of the fifth group of MKO members on 5 May.

"I urge the remaining residents of Camp Ashraf to relocate to Camp Hurriya (Liberty) without delay," SRSG Kobler said. "The relocation process should not be stalled. I am concerned that there will be violence if the relocation doesn’t recommence."

"I also urgently call on States to include residents who are eligible for refugee status in their resettlement quotas and to offer them a path to a more hopeful future outside Iraq," he added.

The MKO is seeking to transfer its members to another country, but no world state, including the US and the European countries, accept to lodge the terrorist group.

The relocation process has come a long way since February 2012. Two thirds of the residents have already moved to Camp Liberty, a temporary transit location near Baghdad prior to resettlement in third countries.

Zionist lobbies are seeking to shelter members of the anti-Iran terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) in Azerbaijan as the US administration is trying to station the terrorists in five neighboring countries of the Islamic Republic.

Authentic reports from sources privy to the MKO disclosed that the US administration is consulting with five of Iran’s neighboring states to persuade them into sheltering the MKO terrorists.

After nearly three decades, Iraq is now expelling the MKO from its soil, while no world country has accepted to shelter the terrorist group.

The US allies in the Middle-East, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Azerbaijan, Qatar and Pakistan, are likely to be the destination of the MKO terrorists, the sources added.

The sources also pointed out that Zionist lobbies are pressuring the US and Baku officials to station MKO terrorists in bases and desolated air fields, and added that the issue was a topic of recent discussions between Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman and Azeri officials.

Zionist lobbies are seeking to create Camp Ashraf-like conditions in Azerbaijan to save MKO from complete dissolution.

The MKO’s main stronghold was a training center called Camp Ashraf in Iraq’s Northern Diyala province, but the post-Saddam Iraq decided to close the camp specially due to the MKO’s massacre of Iraqi Shiites during the Saddam era and its terrorist operations against Iran in the last 33 years. Iraq started expelling the group a few months ago.

The MKO cannot find a shelter outside Iraq, while it is blacklisted by much of the international community, including the United States.

Before an overture by the EU, the MKO was on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations subject to an EU-wide assets freeze. Yet, the MKO puppet leader, Maryam Rajavi, who has residency in France, regularly visited Brussels and despite the ban enjoyed full freedom in Europe.

The MKO is behind a slew of assassinations and bombings inside Iran, a number of EU parliamentarians said in a recent letter in which they slammed a British court decision to remove the MKO from the British terror list. The EU officials also added that the group has no public support within Iran because of their role in helping Saddam Hussein in the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988).

2012-06-24
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9103083484

June 25, 2012 0 comments

UN High Commissioner for Refugees

UNHCR: States consider MKO security threat

A senior UN official says the main reason behind the reluctance of certain countries to give refuge to members of the terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) is that they consider the UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner for Protection Erika Feller them a threat to their national security.

During a recent meeting with Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Labid Abawi at the UN High Commissioner for Refugees office in the Swiss city of Geneva, the UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner for Protection Erika Feller said the UNHCR will make utmost efforts to convince world states to shelter MKO members, the Habilian Association reported on Saturday.

The Habilian Association is an Iranian human rights NGO comprising a group of families that have lost their loved ones in terrorist acts during the early years following Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Iraq’s deputy foreign minister, for his part, reiterated his country’s call for the immediate expulsion of terrorist MKO group from Iraqi soil.

Abawi also pointed to Baghdad’s resolve to close down Camp New Iraq, formerly known as Camp Ashraf which is situated about 120 kilometers (74 miles) west of the border with Iran, stressing that MKO’s presence in Iraq violates the country’s constitution and poses a threat to Iraq’s national security.

The remaining MKO members at Camp Ashraf are refusing to leave the site on the account that no country has so far adhered to the obligations enshrined in the agreement signed in December 2011, the Iraqi diplomat pointed out.

The MKO fled to Iraq in 1986, where it enjoyed the support of Iraq’s executed dictator Saddam Hussein, and set up a camp near the Iranian border.

The group is also known to have cooperated with Saddam in suppressing the 1991 uprisings in southern Iraq and carrying out the massacre of Iraqi Kurds. The group has carried out numerous acts of violence against Iranian civilians and government officials.

June 25, 2012 0 comments

Kobler: Iraq the only negotiator part with UN

Kobler urges Iraq to cooperate to complete the transfer of the remainder residents of Ashraf camp / Liberty /.

The Special Representative of the United Nations in Iraq, Martin Kobler urged Iraqi government to cooperate to complete the transfer of the remaining residents of Camp Ashraf to Freedom Camp / Liberty /.

The United Nations mission in Iraq / UNAMI / Kobler urges Iraq to cooperate to complete the transfer of the remainder residents of Ashraf camp / Liberty /. quoted Kobler as saying in a press release today: "almost six months passed since the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the United Nations mission to help Iraq and the Iraqi government to move the residents of Camp Ashraf to camp freedom peacefully, almost 2,000 residents transported in a peaceful and orderly to the camp of freedom and the remaining residents are 1200 residents only."

He added: "It is important to complete the transfer process in the coming weeks, so we rely on the constructive spirit of all parties," reminding the Iraqi government" its responsibility for the safety and security of the residents and not to resort to non-peaceful means".

He continued "The Iraqi government is the only negotiator part with the UN mission about the residents of Camp Ashraf, Camp Liberty, according to the memorandum of understanding, we will continue to emphasize the respect of the principle of non-Forced relocation and that will not deport any of the people involuntarily to his homeland".

He noted that "it is necessary for the international community to accelerate its efforts to resettle the population outside Iraq urgently," stressing that "the United Nations will remain a partner in the process of peaceful and voluntary transfer and this is not negotiable."

Ninanews.com

June 24, 2012 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq Organization

What is the MKO dreaming of?

After the relocation of about 2000 people of camp Ashraf to the new Temporary Transit Location (Camp Liberty /Hurriya) the relocation process has been seemingly ceased by the MKO. The What the MKO is dreaming of? leaders of the group do not cooperate with Iraqi government , the UN and the US State Department any more.

The group leaders –apparently mad with the attorney for the US State Department who said that the US army has never been able to inspect Camp Ashraf to make sure it was disarmed — issued a statement and “invited” the State Department to inspect the camp.[1]

Besides, the MKO took a strong stance against the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative in Iraq, Martin Kobler. As usual, the group accused him of serving Islamic Republic of Iran and the government of Nouri al-Maliki.[2]

In its turn the US State Department issued a statement on June18, urging “immediate cooperation of Mujahidin Khalq with the Iraqi Government and UN”. The statement reads that the DOS remains concerned about the situation at camp Ashraf. Victoria Nuland, the spokesperson of the DOS, about the MKO’s recent “invitation for inspection”, said:”Constructive offers must be met with constructive spirit, and not with refusals or preconditions to engage in Dialogue.”She calls the group’s new pretext to stay in Ashraf as “an unnecessary distraction”.[3]

Why such reluctance again by the side of the MKO?

While the State Department believes that the Camp residents and their leadership – both in Iraq and in Paris – should recognize this path as a safe and humane resolution to this situation, the MKO leaders seem to oppose the complete closure of Ashraf and eventually their expulsion from Iraq. And, while the US Secretary of State has said that the camp closure is “a key factor in determining whether the organization remains invested in its violent past” [3] the MKO shows no sign of cooperation in order to comply with Iraqi government’s legal right — that is to sweep foreign forces off its territory.

Since the last convoy of Ashraf residents on May 5th there has been no convoy, according to senior US administration officials who attended a Special Briefing on June18, 2012. “Since that time, the MEK has curtailed its contacts both with the Iraqi Government but even with the UN, refusing to meet with Ambassador Martin Kobler, the head of the UN mission in Iraq.”[4]

The official believes that two probable reasons may have led the MKO to slow down its cooperation with the UN and the Iraq Government. “…there are two issues that have occurred to us. One, the MEK may have over-interpreted Iraqi politics and the possibility of a no-confidence vote against Prime Minister Maliki. That vote appears to be receding,.” he said.” A second reason is it may be an MEK over-interpretation and misunderstanding of the recent D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling with respect to delisting.”[5]

However, the other official clarifies that the court has not told Secretary Clinton to delist the group and its leaders are “quite plainly, wrong”. the official concludes,” So it is time for the MEK to recognize that Ashraf is not going to remain an MEK base in Iraq.”[6]

What does the MKO propaganda do to fulfill the dream?

A delegation of Iraqi senior officials traveled to Europe to mobilize support for Camp Ashraf evacuation and secure transfer of the residents to Camp Liberty [TTL]. The delegation attended the meeting of the Relationship with Iraq Committee at the European Parliament. [7]
Iraqi Foreign Minister Undersecretary, Labid Abbawi proposed a statement about the meeting.”The meeting focused on the efforts made by the Iraqi Government in order to secure the transfer of Camp Ashraf residents to Camp Liberty in a peaceful manner and in accordance with international standards and in respect to human rights and international humanitarian law,” the statement said.[8]

Meanwhile the MKO’s propaganda arm, National Council of Resistance broadcasts the same event in a completely opposite way, claiming that the delegation is charged “to justify inhumane and suppressive behavior towards residents of Ashraf and Liberty.”[9]

The US administration official denounces the group’s propaganda by saying “We support the government considering people for refugee or otherwise bringing them in. Now, the United States is prepared to do its part. We take this obligation seriously. [10]

The MKO propaganda is all the time complaining of the “terrible “conditions of life at TTL. American officials, on the other hand, say that they follow condition at camp liberty in detail: ” We follow conditions at Camp Liberty in detail. We receive daily reports from the United Nations. We have an exact notion of the daily water supply. We know that it is – that each resident now receives about 200 liters per person per day of water. We follow the issues – we follow issues of electricity generation, problems with air conditioners, problems with sewage, that sort of thing. Medical treatment is available. The residents who need it are escorted to Baghdad hospitals. They’re allowed back. They’re given treatment. We follow this in great detail. “[11]

About complexities of MKO leaders’ approach towards the relocation issue, a US senior Official said,” We do not understand why, for example, they consider it in their interest to refuse contact with Martin Kobler, the head of the UN mission in Iraq, who, more than any other person, has – is responsible for the relative success of these relocations so far.” Of-course the official seems to find the answer- which is originated in the cult-like substance of the MKO. “They seem to be concerned with their organizational integrity”, he says.[12]

In order to maintain their integrity, the MKO resort to any probable pretext. The current political situation of Iraq appears to be a very little hope for the group to stay in its Iraqi headquarters Camp Ashraf where the forces are totally isolated from the world, obedient to their leaders. In response to a question posed by National Journal correspondent about the MKO’s possible strategy for the time being, the official said,” there is some evidence, and we – I would say that as an informed speculation, we believe the MEK may indeed calculate that a change of government in Iraq could rebound to their advantage, and they may be able – and they might be able to stay.

They do have some support among the Sunni politicians, but we believe that they are gravely mistaken to think that any Iraq – conceivable Iraqi government would, in fact, allow them to remain as a paramilitary organization in Iraq. We think that their time in Iraq is over.” [13]

By Mazda Parsi

References:
[1]The MKO Website. Nejat bloggers are either former MKO members or have a family member who is currently held in Camp Ashraf. They have suffered deeply because of Massoud Rajavi’s crimes. While the Nejat Bloggers recognize that citing sources of information is essential ,we, as a society feel so strongly against the MKO that we have agreed to not include the group’s websites or links in our articles because we consider it as kind of publicity for the cult.
[2]ibid
[3] US State Department, State Department urges immediate full cooperation of MEK, June18,2012
[4] US State Department, Press Release, Senior Administration officials on Camp Ashraf,June19,2012
[5]ibid
[6]ibid
[7] allIraqnews.com, FM Undersecretary participates in European Parliament session, June 2o, 2012
[8]ibid
[9] The MKO Website. Nejat bloggers are either former MKO members or have a family member who is currently held in Camp Ashraf. They have suffered deeply because of Massoud Rajavi’s crimes. While the Nejat Bloggers recognize that citing sources of information is essential ,we, as a society feel so strongly against the MKO that we have agreed to not include the group’s websites or links in our articles because we consider it as kind of publicity for the cult.
[10] US State Department, Press Release, Senior Administration officials on Camp Ashraf, June19, 2012
[11]ibid
[12]ibid
[13]ibid

June 21, 2012 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

A Negative Response to Terrorists’ Incessant Preconditions

The State Department is warning MKO not to bargain over the humanitarian issue of relocation

No doubt, terrorism is a common problem and all measures have to be undertaken to lower the level of its threat with a focus on preventive measures. But to see a terrorist group setting precondition for the continuation of its cooperation in a process to fulfill another unconventionally reached agreement with it is a new phenomenon. It appears that even all parties engaged in the process of relocating MKO’s members from its military camp, Camp Ashraf, to the Temporary Transit Location TTL near Baghdad have grabbed the truth that the group is contriving a serious battle against them. That is because so far all efforts to peacefully resolve the standoff are being rebuffed by MKO’s strict set of conditions to resume a negotiation to comply with the already agreed transfer process.

All the parties involved are unanimous that the issue of relocation of the residents in Camp Ashraf is a purely humanitarian issue that should be made as easy and peaceful as possible to accomplish, notwithstanding MKO is blacklisted a FTO. In December 2011, Ambassador Daniel Fried, Special Advisor for Camp Ashraf for the State Department, made the cause clear and promised to monitor the process of the transfer: “Embassy Baghdad will visit former Camp Liberty on a frequent basis to provide robust observation. The US seeks a safe, secure, humane resolution. Our interest is humanitarian”. But MKO is grabbing at the issue as an opportunity to force the State Department to remove it from its terrorist blacklist.

The process has reached a stalemate since MKO stopped convoys of Camp Ashraf residents to TTL after the relocation of the fifth group in early May. Since then, it has minimized its contact with the Iraqi government and other involved parties and has focused on widespread propaganda warfare to impose its set six preconditions to resume the transfer. Amongst these publicly-declared conditions is a call for the State Department to inspect Camp Ashraf, “U.S. will inspect Camp Ashraf as soon as possible”, a task the US has announced to carry out following the complete evacuation of Camp Ashraf in a two month-long span. The result will be instrumental in convincing the State Department to review MKO’s re-designation.

Apparently fed up with MKO’s procrastination and enraged by its sets of preconditions, particularly the one calling for the inspection of Camp Ashraf, Victoria Nuland, the Department Spokesperson, in a statement released on June 18 urged MKO “to resume full cooperation immediately with the Iraqi Government and United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI)”. The statement adds, “Constructive offers must be met with a constructive spirit, and not with refusals or preconditions to engage in dialogue. Recent publicly-declared conditions for cooperation, including calls for the Department to inspect Camp Ashraf as a precondition for further relocations to Camp Hurriya, are an unnecessary distraction.”

MKO considers the court ruling giving the State Department four months to announce its final decision over the group’s terrorist tag as a gained victory to have the upper hand in any dealing. The illusion fostered mostly when some European high-profile personalities congratulated the halfway, unpromising court ruling, as a decisively issued ruling. However, an American official believes that “the group’s leaders may have overinterpreted the U.S. court ruling as a guarantee that it would escape the terrorist list”. In fact, the State Department is delivering a message to MKO forewarning that it is gravely mistaken to strike any bargain with the Iraqi government and the US over the humanitarian issue of the residents; it is warned that it has no other option but to follow through on plans to resume the process of relocation as planned.

June 21, 2012 0 comments

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

No Hope for MKO in Internal Political Conflicts

MKO is mistaken that a change of government in Iraq could rebound to its advantage

The Iraqi government is absolutely conclusive to close the military bastion of the ousted Saddam’s mercenaries, Mojahedin Khalq Organization MKO, and expel its members altogether from its soil by July 20, the beginning of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. The preliminary phase to carry the job through is to relocate them, under United Nations and Iraqi government auspices, to a transit camp near Baghdad airport to undergo refugee process processed and be eventually re-settled to countries in Europe and other countries that will receive them. Some 2,000 MEK members have been transferred from Camp Ashraf since the process began, but none have moved since May 5. Although the chief impediment to have halted relocation is reported to be implausible excuses invented by MKO, frequent change of demands and asking too much, but there are other possibilities as well.

Following the reports of the possibility of a no-confidence vote against Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, MKO might have concluded that a change of government in Iraq could rebound to its advantage. As a result, the group halted its cooperation in the relocation process waiting to witness a possible collapse of Maliki’s government. However, so far all those who thought Maliki would be subject to a no-confidence vote have been disappointed.

Whatever will be the outcome of the political conflict in Iraq is an internal issue. But one thing is for certain that MKO is gravely mistaken to think that any Iraqi government, be it Maliki’s or another’s, will allow it to remain on Iraqi soil. Decisiveness to expel the group is a national demand and a constitutional decision rather than personal. The Iraq’s constitution prohibits presence of any terrorist organization on its soil (Article 7 of the constitution). The Iraqi government recognizes MKO as a terrorist organization, as it is on the US terror list and some other countries.

June 21, 2012 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

U.S. Official: MEK are plainly wrong

Iranian dissident group warned delisting from US terror not guaranteed

The United States warned an Iranian dissident group that it may have "over-interpreted" recent events, and should not presume its removal from the U.S. terror list is guaranteed.

The Obama administration has told Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) an orderly departure from its base Camp Ashraf inside Iraq will be a central condition to any decision regarding the group’s removal from the list.

From Camp Ashraf, the residents travel by convoy under United Nations and Iraqi government auspices to a former U.S. base in Iraq where they can be processed and eventually re-settled to countries in Europe and elsewhere.

Some 2,000 MEK members have left Camp Ashraf since the process began, but none have moved since May 5. Some 1,200 to 1,400 still remain at Camp Ashraf.

"Constructive offers must be met with a constructive spirit, and not with refusals or preconditions to engage in dialogue," State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said in a written statement. "Recent publicly declared conditions for cooperation, including calls for the Department to inspect Camp Ashraf as a precondition for further relocations to Camp Hurriya, are an unnecessary distraction."

Nuland also called on the Iraqi government to "intensify its efforts to fulfill its commitment to provide for the safety, security, and humanitarian treatment" of Camp Ashraf residents.

MEK has waged a widespread, well-publicized campaign for enforcement of a 2010 ruling by a federal court ordering the State Department to review the group’s status on the terror list.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals court ordered Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to make a decision by October 1, or the court would issue a so-called writ of mandamus to set aside the designation. The State Department has said it will comply with the ruling.

On a conference call with reporters Monday, a senior administration official said MEK may have "over-interpreted" the court ruling, and may believe that Clinton has no choice now but to de-list the group. The official said that belief would be "quite plainly, wrong."

Clinton "retains complete discretion on this matter," the official said. "The court has told her to deliver a decision one way or the other. They have not told her to de-list."

The administration says it is incumbent for MEK to realize that Camp Ashraf’s existence is coming to a rapid close.

"The Iraqi government is committed to closing it," the official said on the call with reporters, "and any plan to wait out the government in the hope that something will change it – change its mind – is really quite dangerous."

The Iraqi government has said it would like to see Camp Ashraf closed by July 20, the beginning of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

A second senior administration official on the same call said that MEK may also have "over-interpreted" Iraqi politics and the possibility of a no-confidence vote against Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as a reason to cease cooperating in the eventual closure of Camp Ashraf.

"We believe the MEK may indeed calculate that a change of government in Iraq could rebound to their advantage, and they may be able – and they might be able to stay," the second official told reporters. MEK are "gravely mistaken" to think any Iraqi government "would, in fact, allow them to remain as a paramilitary organization in Iraq," the official said. "We think that their time in Iraq is over."

The official said the push for a no-confidence vote on Maliki appears to be receding.

MEK was placed on the terror list in 1997 because of the deaths of Americans during attacks in the 1970s against the U.S.-backed shah of Iran.

The U.S. says MEK engaged for years in terrorist activities in Iran, launched from bases in Iraq, including assassinations of high-level Iranian officials and attacks in Iran with heavy weaponry. The group was granted refuge in Iraq by Saddam Hussein during and after the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.

MEK supports the overthrow of the Iranian regime.

The terrorist designation prohibits Americans from providing material support to the organization, but a number of high-profile former U.S. officials have taken up the cause of the MEK and called for it to be de-listed. Some of them have received speaking fees for that support.

The Treasury Department currently is issuing subpoenas to some speakers bureaus for information on the source of those funds.

By Jamie Crawford

June 20, 2012 0 comments

MEK Camp Ashraf

US Senior Administration Officials On Camp Ashraf

Press Release: US State Department
Background Briefing: Senior Administration Officials On Camp Ashraf
Special Briefing US Senior Administration Officials On Camp Ashraf
Senior Administration Officials
Via Teleconference
Washington, DC
June 18, 2012

MODERATOR: Thank you for joining us this morning. This morning we have a call on background. Joining us today are [Senior Administration Official One] and [Senior Administration Official Two]. Because this call is on background, from here on out we’ll refer to our speakers as Senior Administration Official One and Senior Administration Official Two.
So having said that, I will go ahead and turn it over to Senior Administration Official Number One. Go ahead, sir.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Good morning. Thanks for joining us. The State Department just issued a statement about Camp Ashraf expressing concern about the situation there. The statement urges the residents of Ashraf to resume full cooperation with the UN and the Iraqi Government. The statement also urges the Iraqi Government to intensify its efforts to fulfill its commitments to provide for the safety, security, and humanitarian treatment of the residents.
The reason for issuing the statement is that after a period of successful convoys moving from Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty, where almost two-thirds of the residents of Camp Ashraf have been moved on conditions of safety, this process has slowed down. The last convoy was May 5th. There has been no convoy since.
Since that time, the MEK has curtailed its contacts both with the Iraqi Government but even with the UN, refusing to meet with Ambassador Martin Kobler, the head of the UN mission in Iraq. The Iraqi Government has made clear that it wants Ashraf to be closed by Ramadan, which is July 20th. And we wanted – we, the United States wanted to make clear that we continue to support a peaceful and humane resolution of this – of the problem of Camp Ashraf, and we wanted to put both sides on notice that we are concerned by the prolonged stalemate.
Ambassador Kobler of the UN issued a statement about a week ago expressing his concern and pointing out that we have avoided violence until now (inaudible) since there has been no major violence since April of 2011, and it’s important to continue the relocation process to avoid violence altogether.
We cannot speak with certainty about the reasons for the MEK’s slowdown in its cooperation, but there are two issues that have occurred to us. One, the MEK may have over-interpreted Iraqi politics and the possibility of a no-confidence vote against Prime Minister Maliki. That vote appears to be receding. A second reason is it may be an MEK over-interpretation and misunderstanding of the recent D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling with respect to delisting. And my colleague, Senior Administration Number Two, will address that issue.
But we want – in the beginning of this process when the United States backed the UN-Iraqi Memorandum of Understanding to relocate the residents of Camp Ashraf, I promised and [Senior Administration Official Two] promised to keep you all informed, and we are doing so.
A final bit of information: The Iraqi – an Iraqi senior delegation of people directly involved in the movement of residents from Ashraf to Liberty is traveling to Europe this week to explain what they are doing and to urge European countries to accept residents of Camp Liberty as refugees. The United States supports this delegation. We support the governments considering people for refugee or otherwise bringing them in. Now, the United States is prepared to do its part. We take this obligation seriously.
Now, let me stop there and turn it over to my colleague for additional comments.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: All right. Well, thanks for joining us this morning. I really just have one issue to address in this context, which Senior Official One alluded to, and that is the possibility that the MEK has over-interpreted the action of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Specifically, the court did not order the Secretary of State to revoke the MEK designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. It appears that MEK leaders believe that the Secretary has no choice now but to delist them and that is, quite plainly, wrong.
As the Secretary has made clear, the MEK’s cooperation in the successful and peaceful closure of Camp Ashraf will be a key factor in her decision regarding the MEK’s FTO status. She retains complete discretion on this matter. The court has told her to deliver a decision one way or the other. They have not told her to delist.
So it is time for the MEK to recognize that Ashraf is not going to remain an MEK base in Iraq. The Iraqi Government is committed to closing it, and any plan to wait out the government in the hope that something will change it – change its mind – is really quite dangerous. So it is time that the MEK got with the plan here and continued the move from Ashraf to Camp Hurriya. We support that orientation. We think it’s essential, and the MEK should recognize where its interests lie in this regard.
And now I guess we’ll take your questions.

MODERATOR: Operator, if we can go ahead and get our first question.

OPERATOR: Thank you. And for those listening on the phone at this time, if you would like to ask an audio question, please press *1 on your touchtone phone and please record your name and media affiliation clearly when prompted. Once again, *1 on your touchtone phone and please record your name and media affiliation clearly when prompted. One moment as we wait for our first questions.
And our first question comes from the line of Jo Bidell with AFP. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I understand the court of district appeals gave Secretary Clinton four months in which to make her decision. Could you just tell us on the timing of that visit, does that take us to the back end of July? And do you think that the Secretary will comply with this?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: No. It takes us to October 1st.

QUESTION: Oh, to the (inaudible).

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: And the Secretary has made clear that she will obey the court’s order in this regard.

QUESTION: Thank you.

OPERATOR: And our next question comes from the line of Guy Taylor with The Washington Times. Your line is open, sir.

QUESTION: Hi. Thank you. Regarding the senior Iraqi delegation that is going to Europe to urge European countries to accept residents of Camp Liberty as refugees and the U.S. obligation to facilitate that or play a role in it, I’m wondering if these individuals are part of a group that remains on the terrorist designation list, how they could be accepted as refugees in European countries. Could you please explain that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: The U.S. maintains the MEK on its list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. European countries do not, and the European countries have made clear that our designation is not a legal barrier for them. Whether or not it is a political barrier or an optical barrier is something you’ll have to ask them, but it is not a legal barrier. Moreover, the United States has already made it clear that, for our own part, we are prepared within our law to look at referrals from the UNHCR, the High Commissioner for Refugees, of individuals who may be eligible to bring into the United States one way or another; that is, despite the fact of the listing. This is a legal option, and we are also pursuing it. In other words, we’re not asking Europeans to do something we are in principle unwilling to do ourselves.

OPERATOR: And once again for those on the phone, if you would like to ask an audio question at this time, please press *1 on your touchtone phone and please record your name and affiliation clearly when prompted.
Our next question comes from the line of Joby Warrick with The Washington Post. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi. Thanks for doing this. Do you have a sense at this point about how many people are still in Ashraf that remain to be brought over? And then how many are – have already made the move? And also if there’s any – if you’re monitoring complaints they have on the ground about conditions – any specific problems that are causing concern for the MEK?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: There are just under 2,000 former Camp Ashraf residents in Camp Hurriya. That is somewhat under two-thirds – we’re not sure of the exact number of people that Camp Ashraf, but it is within the 1,200 to 1,400 range. So somewhere well over half – somewhat shy of two-thirds of the people have already moved.
We follow conditions at Camp Liberty in detail. We receive daily reports from the United Nations. We have an exact notion of the daily water supply. We know that it is – that each resident now receives about 200 liters per person per day of water. We follow the issues – we follow issues of electricity generation, problems with air conditioners, problems with sewage, that sort of thing. Medical treatment is available. The residents who need it are escorted to Baghdad hospitals. They’re allowed back. They’re given treatment. We follow this in great detail.
That said, it is our view that the Iraqi Government could do even more to address some of these issues. In recent weeks, there has been some progress in getting the Government of Iraq and the residents to agree on a way forward to improve humanitarian conditions. We think that if the MEK – if the residents engaged – reengaged fully with Ambassador Kobler, this process would continue – would be – would go faster and easier.
But do follow this – we do follow conditions at Camp Liberty in great detail.

OPERATOR: And once again, if you would like to ask an audio question, please press *1 on your touchtone phone and please record your name and affiliation clearly when prompted. One moment as we wait for our next questions. And we do have another joining. One moment. We do have two – three joining now. One moment.
And our next question comes from the line of James Kitfield with the National Journal. Your line is open, sir.

QUESTION: Thank you, guys, for doing this. Could you give me an idea of what you sense the MEK’s strategy is here? You talked about them maybe over-interpreting the no-confidence vote in Maliki. Say Maliki was – did face a no-confidence vote. Are they allied with the Kurds or with the Sunnis in some way that they think that they would be allowed under some conditions to remain at Ashraf and sort of keep the status quo?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, I don’t want to speak authoritatively about MEK thinking, because we simply don’t – we’re not sure we understand it. But there is some evidence, and we – I would say that as an informed speculation, we believe the MEK may indeed calculate that a change of government in Iraq could rebound to their advantage, and they may be able – and they might be able to stay.
They do have some support among the Sunni politicians, but we believe that they are gravely mistaken to think that any Iraq – conceivable Iraqi government would, in fact, allow them to remain as a paramilitary organization in Iraq. We think that their time in Iraq is over. And we – instead of arguing over conditions of convoys, we ought to be putting our full efforts behind getting them out of Iraq and safely resettled, which is why we welcome the Iraqi delegation going to Europe. That’s where our focus should be.
But this is – we can speculate as to their thinking, but we’re not sure we understand it. We think it is – we think, though, if they are overconfident, they are making a serious, serious mistake.

OPERATOR: And our next question comes from the line of Rosalind Jordan with Al Jazeera English Television.
Your line is open, ma’am.

QUESTION: Hi. Thanks for the call. I had a similar question to that of James Kitfield. What’s their endgame? Why are they doing this? Does it hurt their credibility to be doing something such as this?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, it certainly does nothing to help their credibility. European governments are considering taking residents of Camp Liberty as refugees, and some non-European governments as well. And we have argued till we’re blue in the face to the MEK leadership that their interests and their safety would be – would increase if they were seen as fully cooperating. We do not understand why, for example, they consider it in their interest to refuse contact with Martin Kobler, the head of the UN mission in Iraq, who, more than any other person, has – is responsible for the relative success of these relocations so far.
They seem to be concerned with their organizational integrity, and we think they need to concentrate on getting out of Iraq safely. But again, we’re not – I’m not speaking with authority about their motives. All we can do is try to figure out what they’re thinking, judging by their actions and their rhetoric.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: I would just add to that that with regard to the court case, they seem to believe that they have won a decisive victory and have failed to read the actual decision, and it appears that they think that delisting is now imminent. And we continue to try to impress upon them that there is no such automaticity, and that we would like to see them continue to move to Hurriya and to dissolve this remaining singular paramilitary camp in Iraq.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: On February 29th, Secretary Clinton said before Congress that leaving – cooperating in the closure of Camp Ashraf would be a key factor in her eventual decision about the FTO status. So as Senior Administration Official Number Two said, that is what we look for.

QUESTION: Thank you.

OPERATOR: And once again, if you’d like to ask an audio question, please press *1 and please record your media affiliation clearly when prompted. Our next question comes from the line of Jo Biddle with the AFP.
Your line is open again, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thank you very much for taking a follow-up question. I note that the UN Envoy Martin Kobler said earlier this month – last week, in fact – that he’s concerned about violence breaking out if the relocation doesn’t go ahead as planned. Could you talk to that, please? Is this a fear that the United States has? And also, could you give us a sense of what the breakdown is among those refugees? Are there men and women among them as well? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: There is a history of violence in relations between the Government of Iraq and the MEK. There was a terrible incident in April of 2011 in which a number of residents of Ashraf were killed. Violence in Iraq is something that happens. So Ambassador Kobler was absolutely right to express his concern about what happens if this process does not move forward. The process is like a bicycle. It moves – if it moves, it is more stable; if it does not move, it is less so.
With respect to refugees, well, about one-third of the residents of Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty are women. The UNHCR has teams on the ground and is devoting great energy to processing people for refugee status. They have processed many hundreds of people, and it – their progress gives us the basis to work with our international partners to see which governments can accept these people who are coming out of the UNHCR process with refugee status.
So there is – has been significant progress made. If you go back to December and think about the fears expressed at that time about mass violence, horrific incidents of people disappearing, none of that is taking place. The convoys have all been secure and safe. We need to continue this process, get Camp Ashraf closed, and focus on relocating people.

QUESTION: Thank you.

OPERATOR: And our next question comes from the line of Guy Taylor with The Washington Times. Sir, your line is open again.

QUESTION: No. Hi. Thank you. With regard to the Treasury Department’s subpoenaing of records pertaining to speaking fees paid to former senior U.S. officials who have spoken out on behalf of the MEK, among them James Woolsey, the former CIA director, along with a long list of others, do you have any information about whether those individuals are considered to be providing material support to a group designated as a terrorist organization?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Absolutely no comment on this business.

QUESTION: Well, in other words, I mean, in your opinion, is it illegal to, say, accept money for speaking out on behalf of a group designated as a terrorist organization by the United States?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah. We’re not making any – expressing any legal opinion, any legal judgments, or in any way commenting on this matter, not at all. Sorry.

OPERATOR: And our next question comes from the line of Christina Wilkie with The Huffington Post. Your line is open, ma’am.

QUESTION: Thank you. If – I know part of the legal decision was that the Secretary would make a decision within four months, and if not, that the – then the U.S. Court – that the Washington court would be – would have some kind of a legal authority, it appeared, to delist the MEK themselves. Would you mind talking about – I understand that the Secretary doesn’t plan this – for this to be an outcome, but if it were to for any reason, what – I don’t understand the legal authority that the court would have to delist a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: Well, I think we’re going to have to refer you to the Justice Department or our own lawyers on that, because this is terra incognita for us. There has never been a case of a court ordering a delisting. We don’t expect it to happen in this case either. But as a legal matter, the – I assume courts have the right to do that. But again, I’m not a – I’m not the legal advisor, and I think Harold Koh might have something to say about that.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: The Department has said that the United States will respect the decision of the court; that is, that the Secretary will make a decision within four months of the court ruling. That’s what we anticipate will happen. As to the authority under which the court did this and the legal way to describe the mandamus petition, I – both Administration – both Senior Administration Officials are not qualified to give legal opinions, and the last thing we want to do is mislead or misinterpret something.

OPERATOR: And at this time, we have no other questions in the queue.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Well, all right, then. That’s good. Look, thanks, everybody, much appreciate the time and interest, and this is in the nature of an interim update. We are concerned about the situation, but it can – we can still have a decent outcome if the parties involved do what they need to do.

MODERATOR: Thank you all, and have a good day.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you all. Bye.

June 20, 2012 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts