… Iranian families who have been picketing in front of the military base Ashraf – home to the Mojahedin Khalq organisation in Diyala province – for the last 4 months, asked Christopher Hill, the US ambassador in Baghdad, for his help in negotiating with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation (aka Rajavi cult, MEK, MKO, PMOI, NCRI) to give visiting rights to the detainees in Camp Ashraf …
Al adala, Baghdad, May 29, 2010
… Iranian families who have been picketing in front of the military base Ashraf – home to the Mojahedin Khalq organisation in Diyala province – for the last 4 months, asked Christopher Hill, the US ambassador in Baghdad, for his help in negotiating with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation (aka Rajavi cult, MEK, MKO, PMOI, NCRI) to give visiting rights to the detainees in Camp Ashraf …
BAGHDAD – Iranian families, who travelled from Iran and other countries four months ago to sit in front of the headquarters of the Iranian Mojahedin-e Khalq in Diyala province (Camp Ashraf), called on the United States Ambassador in Iraq, Christopher Hill, to intervene and put pressure on the organization’s leaders to end their suffering and allow them to meet with their children, who have been detained within the camp since the 1980s.
In an Open Letter, a copy of which was also distributed to our agency in Iraq, the families demanded the U.S. ambassador in Iraq help with intervention and dialogue with leaders and officials of the [Mojahedin] organization, to allow the families free access to their children outside the walls of the camp in the same way that the three U.S. mothers were able to travel to Iran recently and meet their three children (Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal) who are detained there.
The body of the message addressing Mr Hill said, “Your government successfully arranged for the mothers of U.S. detainees in Iran to visit their children on compassionate grounds… But, if America can negotiate this with Iran, we certainly expect that you can negotiate with this small terrorist group so that its members can meet freely with their families. if America can negotiate this with Iran, we certainly expect that you can negotiate with this small terrorist group so that its members can meet freely with their families.”
The families expressed the hope that the involvement of Ambassador Hill and the U.S. government with leaders of the organization, would create a serious and positive end to their suffering and enable them to meet their children, detainees at Camp Ashraf.
Iraq Beituna Agency – translated by Iran Interilnk
Report of Secretary-General to Security Council May 2010
Link to the full report
Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to paragraph 6 of resolution 1883 (2009)
I. Introduction
1. In paragraph 6 of resolution 1883 (2009), the Security Council requested the Secretary-General to report to the Council on a quarterly basis on the fulfillment of the responsibilities of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). The present report is the third submitted pursuant to that resolution.
2. The report provides an update on United Nations activities in Iraq since the last report (S/2010/76), dated 8 February 2010, with a focus on the steps taken to implement resolution 1883 (2009). It presents a summary of key political developments during the period under review, as well as regional and international events concerning Iraq. The report provides an update on the activities of my Special Representative for Iraq, as well as operational and security matters.
II. Summary of key political and security developments in Iraq
A. National elections
3. The reporting period witnessed the holding of general elections for the Council of Representatives on 7 March 2010. UNAMI provided support to the Independent High Electoral Commission and the Government of Iraq throughout …
(…)
52. In March, there were allegations from the Governor of Ninewa that detainees from that governorate were held in a prison facility in Baghdad, outside the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice, and were subjected to abuse and torture without due process. I note that the Government of Iraq has closed the facility. As with other cases in the past, the United Nations urges that these allegations be investigated and those responsible brought to justice.
53. UNAMI continues to monitor the situation in Camp Ashraf in Diyala Governorate. In recent months, Iraqi security forces have not made any further attempt to relocate members of the Peoples Mujahedin of Iran resident in the camp. Although no significant outbreaks of violence have occurred during the reporting period, distrust and tensions between both sides remained, with limited cooperation
regarding access to services and supplies in the camp.
54. UNAMI, while reiterating the right of the Government of Iraq to exercise its authority over Camp Ashraf and the obligation of the camp’s residents to fully respect the law and the authority of the Government of Iraq, has continued to advocate for the residents’ unhindered access to goods and services of a humanitarian nature, as well as for their right to be protected from arbitrary mass displacement or forced repatriation against their will in violation of the universally accepted principle of non- refoulement. UNAMI remains committed to assisting both
parties find an acceptable resolution to this problem.
Security, operational and logistic issues
Security
55. Hostile groups continued to demonstrate their determination ….
(…)
Iranian families called on U.S. officials in Baghdad to broker visitation rights to Iranian dissidents encamped in their Diyala province enclave.
Members of the dissident People’s Mujahedin of Iran are lodged in their Camp Ashraf enclave in Diyala province.
The PMOI opposes the clerical regime in Iran. Washington lists the group as a terrorist organization for its violent methods of opposition, though the group surrendered its weapons in 2003.
Iranian family members of Camp Ashraf residents called on U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill to award them the same rights that U.S. family members have with American hikers detained in Iran since July.
Family members of the hikers are expected Wednesday in Tehran.
The PMOI family members say their relatives are held captive in Camp Ashraf, adding if Washington can broker an agreement with Iran, similar arrangements are possible with the PMOI.
"If America can negotiate this with Iran, we certainly expect that you can negotiate with this small terrorist group so that its members can meet freely with their families," the families said.
The PMOI is included in the Iranian opposition movement the National Council of Resistance to Iran, a French-based group that considers itself the Iranian Parliament in exile. It denies the cult and terrorist categorization, claiming its policy is based on peaceful dissent.
Families of MEK Victims in Camp Ashraf, Iraq Want Same Visiting Rights as U.S. Detainee Families in Iran
A group of Iranian families today asked the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Christopher Hill, for his help in negotiating with the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organisation (aka Rajavi cult, MEK, MKO, PMOI, NCRI) to give visiting rights to the detainees in Camp Ashraf in Diyala province.
The parents of captives in Camp Ashraf were responding to news that the mothers of three young Americans detained in Iran, Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal, are on their way to visit their children in prison there.
They said, "We are so happy for these families that negotiations with Iran have resulted in allowing these visits on compassionate grounds. Everyone in the world knows the strength of the bond between parent and child. We hope they will achieve their wishes in Iran."
For nearly four months the families have been encamped outside the camp which houses members of the Mojahedin-e Khalq terrorist cult. The cult leaders refuse to allow ordinary members to have any contact with the outside world and will not negotiate with external bodies. Some members have been trapped inside the camp for over twenty years.
Although the Government of Iraq is responsible for the camp, officials say their hands are tied because the MEK have powerful backers in Washington, even though it is on the U.S.’s own terrorism list. The families told Mr. Hill, "We witnessed ourselves that American soldiers intervened on behalf of the MEK leaders when Iraqi soldiers tried to help us get inside the camp."
Urging Mr. Hill to intervene on their behalf with the leaders of the MEK the families said, "Your government successfully arranged for the mothers of U.S. detainees in Iran to visit their children on compassionate grounds… But, if America can negotiate this with Iran, we certainly expect that you can negotiate with this small terrorist group so that its members can meet freely with their families."
* * *
Open Letter to the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Mr Christopher R. Hill
Dear Ambassador,
We are Iranian families who have travelled to Iraq to find relatives enslaved by the Mojahedin-e Khalq organisation (aka Rajavi cult, MEK, MKO, PMOI, NCRI) in Camp Ashraf. We families have been encamped outside the gates of Camp Ashraf for nearly four months now, and still not been helped enough to meet with our relatives.
We now have news that the mothers of three young Americans, Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal, detained in Iran are flying over there to visit them in prison.
We are so happy for these families that negotiations with Iran have resulted in allowing these visits on compassionate grounds. Everyone in the world knows the strength of the bond between parent and child. We hope they will achieve their wishes in Iran. We share the same anguish as these three mothers, with the difference that our children have been held captive in Camp Ashraf for over twenty years, not by the Iraqi government but by the very leaders of the group they are with. And conditions inside Camp Ashraf are worse than any prison; our children are not allowed to telephone or even to write to their families, they have been enslaved.
Up until 2003 we could not approach the camp where our children live because the Mojahedin-e Khalq were armed. We became hopeful when U.S. Forces disarmed the group and rounded them up into one place. At last there was hope of visiting. But the U.S. Army failed to get the group to surrender, even though it is on the U.S.’s own terrorism list as well as being a foreign terrorist group in Iraq. Even when we travelled to Iraq to find our children, the U.S. Army did not help us. Those few members who were lucky enough to meet their families always had MKO minders with them to prevent them from escaping.
When the Government of Iraq took control of the camp in January 2009 we again had hope that we could visit our children. But the MEK leaders refuse to cooperate and have not only kept the gate locked but threatened us with violence if we don’t leave. Now the Iraqi government is doing what it can to help us, but for almost four months we are still stuck at the entrance gate without news.
Over these four months we have talked to everyone we can; UNAMI, the Red Cross, human rights groups, Diyala tribal leaders, Iraqi and foreign press, Iraqi government officials and the military personnel responsible for the camp. In private we have been told over and over again that the Iraqi government cannot do more to help us because the Mojahedin-e Khalq has powerful backing in America (where it is on the U.S. terrorism list). We witnessed ourselves that American soldiers intervened on behalf of the MEK leaders when Iraqi soldiers tried to help us get inside the camp.
Now we are finally convinced that no one but America has control over this group – and even then we see that the tail is wagging the dog.
Your government successfully arranged for the mothers of U.S. detainees in Iran to visit their children on compassionate grounds and we wish them every joy that such a meeting must bring. But, if America can negotiate this with Iran, we certainly expect that you can negotiate with this small terrorist group so that its members can meet freely with their families.
We ask you as a matter of urgency, as Ambassador of the USA to Iraq, to use the considerable influence that you have to force the Mojahedin-e Khalq in Camp Ashraf to allow, on compassionate grounds, for our children to meet freely with us
The families of MEK members in Camp Ashraf, Iraq
A book on Mujahedin-e- khalq; from fighters of resistance movement to "Misled Martyrs".
The writer starts the book by the above mentioned statement where she describes the heart-rending scene of an MEK sympathizer committing self-immolation to protest the arrest of Maryam Rajavi in Paris. The suicide lost her life. The reader now keeps on reading because questions 
do not leave his curious mind. What motivation; what kind of hatred makes Neda commit such an act of protest? Why doesn’t Mujahedin khalq Organization prohibit such acts? How come that a Canadian educated woman turns into such a "misled martyr"?
There are a few books published on this very topic: Mujahedin Khalq. Ms. Jurith Nourink as an expert on middle East who is correspondent of a famous Dutch newspaper "Trouw", explores MEK’s cult-like attitudes in her book ,"Misled Martyrs".
The author follows the experiences of a defector of MEK named "Yaser Ezzati", describing his bitter life, she goes over the forty-year history of Mujahedin as an armed organization that blends its revolutionary version of Shiites with parts of Marxism ideology such as classless society. Ms. Nourink believes that the organization has gradually turned into a cult since Massoud and Maryam Rajavi got married. The influential leader of the cult, Massoud Rajavi seeks absolute power which, according to British historian Dalberg Acton, is the origin of absolute corruption. Any mean to achieve power, finds a saint nature which justifies MEK’s collaboration with the enemy of Iran’s national interests and territory, Saddam Hussein, and suppression of Kurdish uprising against Saddam during the Gulf War 1991. The quotes made by former members of MEK, confirms the fact that members of the cult obey Massoud Rajavi so blindly and worship him as an idol. Haydiger says:"asking question is the sign of piety of thought" but in MEK, questioning and criticizing are considered as taboos.
Nourink explains that thinking and asking is exclusive concession for a few high ranking members of the organization. Following the ideological revolution in the organization, the members were forced to divorce their spouses and then they were unwillingly separated from their children since Rajavi does not tolerate any obstacle between himself and his devotees. The only central idea and joining point in the group is their animosity towards Iranian regime and their sense of revenge.
The book describes the feeling of those who once thought they were fighting for the benefit of a free cultivated Iran but when they faced the cult-like tendencies of the organization, its close relations with Saddam Hussein and torture and imprisonment in the camps, they felt suppressed and disappointed so they left the group. Nourink portrays the grieves and pains of their suffering sole. These misled individuals thought that criticizing their leader signifies their disloyalty toward "saint ideals" of the organization, although they were quarrelling with their conscience and knew that their part was fake or destructive, they kept silent for years. They paid a high price for those years of being manipulated, isolated, extremist and depressed slaves of Rajavi.
A defector of the cult says:" they injected hatred and rancor in our sole all the time. We were not able to make a decision." Another defector sees himself so misled that calls "Eternal Light" operation as "Eternal Lie". The organization might have been damaged mostly by the side of these very people rather than Islamic Republic.
The author of the book refers to various books on psychological pathology and the origins of the cults. She finds all fundamental elements of a cult in MKO. Rajavi had all the time been studying psychological books in order to spread his absolute rule on the members’ minds, according to one of her sources. If Rajavi did not succeed to master a member’s mind, then he/she would be labeled as the regime’s spy who would consequently go under threat, torture, pressure and imprisonment.
Nourink uses her artistic talent to develop the characters of her book, describing their true emotions so tactfully, although she is not always neutral as a journalist should be.
Sometimes she looks like a human rights activist but sometimes she doesn’t offer a persuasive analysis. For instance, she believes that in 1991 when Saddam was threatened by Kurdish uprisings, MKO guaranteed his survival otherwise he would have fallen on the same year.
Nourink assumes the memoirs and experiences of defectors as historical facts, she is not able to take an impartial position of a journalist. She does not enter the organization to talk with MKO’s central committee and its present loyal members so that her sources would not be restricted to a few defectors.
Nourink might have authored one of the most comprehensive books on MKO, after Irvand Abrahamian’s book " The Iranian Mojahedin ". At the end of the book she wonders why American neo-cons who are aware of MKO’s hostility towards America and know that MKO assassinated several American military forces and citizens at Shah’s era and had a supportive part in hostage taking of American embassy in Tehran and also it is labeled as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by DOS, do not try to remove the group from Iraqi territory. Why do they still view MKO as an option to pressure or to overthrow the Iranian regime? Can really such a terrorist cultist organization be the messenger of democracy or the defendant of human rights in Iran?
By: Payam Rahaee , Translated by Nejat Society
A senior Turkish foreign ministry official underlined his country’s resolve to fight terrorism, and strongly condemned the crimes committed by the anti-Iran terrorist group, the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO), against humanity. 
"Turkey has seriously confronted the MKO terrorists during the last few years and does not allow them to make any move, and it also condemns their crimes which should be viewed as crimes against humanity," Turkish Deputy Foreign Minster Hakki Akil said in a meeting with the members of the Iranian Edalat (Justice) Society (families of the victims of terrorism).
Akil also called for the establishment of direct ties and joint exhibitions as well as cooperation between the two countries’ NGOs as part of a joint campaign against terrorism and terrorist groups.
He highlighted Ankara’s sensitivity to the issue of terrorism, and added, "The Turkish nation and government believe that no rationale can justify terrorism, and terrorism in any place of the world and by any group is condemned (by Turkey)."
The official further underscored that his country would spare no effort to fight terrorism and terrorist groups.
The MKO targeted Iranian government officials and civilians in Iran and abroad in the early 1980s. The group also attempted an unsuccessful invasion of Iran in the last days of the Iraq-Iran war in 1988.
The MKO is behind a slew of assassinations and bombings inside Iran, a number of EU parliamentarians said in a 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).
Many of the MKO members abandoned the terrorist organization while most of those still remaining in the camp are said to be willing to quit but are under pressure and torture not to do so.
A May 2005 Human Rights Watch report accused the MKO of running prison camps in Iraq and committing human rights violations.
According to the Human Rights Watch report, the outlawed group puts defectors under torture and jail terms.
The group started assassination of the citizens and officials after the Islamic Revolution in Iran in a bid to take control of the newly established Islamic Republic. It killed several of Iran’s new leaders in the early years after the Revolution, including the then President Mohammad Ali Rajayee, Prime Minister Mohammad Javad Bahonar and Judiciary Chief Mohammad Hossein Beheshti who were killed in bomb attacks by MKO members in 1981.
The group fled to Iraq in 1986, where it was protected by Saddam Hussein and where it helped the Iraqi dictator suppress Shiite and Kurd uprisings in the country.
The terrorist group joined Saddam’s army during the Iraqi imposed war on Iran (1980-1988) and helped Saddam and killed thousands of Iranian civilians and soldiers during the US-backed Iraqi imposed war on Iran.
The MKO was put on the US terror list in 1997 by the then President, Bill Clinton, but since the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, the group has been strongly backed by the Washington Neocons, who also argue for the MKO to be taken off the US terror list.
There are a number of Iranian dissidents in Camp Ashraf. The number mounts to 3000 people of whom 70 percent are in their fifties. Lately the Iraqi government has changed the name of the camp to Camp of New Iraq. 
Following their clashes with intelligence, political forces, these dissidents have entered a phase allegedly called”Organizational Stability”. Do they still want to continue their presence in the Camp; although most of Iraqi authorities oppose their presence in Iraqi territory? Is there any Arabic country willing to accept them? Such as Egypt which has cut the ties with Iran for thirty years now. Will Iranian authorities forgive them or grant them amnesty if they return to Iran? Will American forces accept to support the group as a pressure lever against Iran in their debate on Iran’s nuclear activities?
The only achievement the group gained in the last twenty years was its removal from EU’s terrorist list which caused Iranian’s anger.
An Iranian official in an interview with Asahrq Alawsat ,said:”Mujahedin Khalq is no more a danger for Iran and a threat to Islamic Revolution since they are besieged and have no hope for their future.”
For the time being, MEK claim that they are under the pressure by Iranian Intelligence Ministry and Iranian intelligence agents have come to Camp under the cover of the families of Ashraf residents! MEK sends letters to international human rights bodies. On the other hand, the men, women and youth waiting at Ashraf gates for several weeks, say: We are here only to visit our children .we don’t want to make them return, they are free to choose their fate but we want to know about their health, to know whether they are living or dead!
Some of these women come to Camp Ashraf from different Iranian cities and no one responds them about the fate of their husbands, fathers, sons or daughters.
Mr. Mohammd Bagher Momen Zade, former member of MEK told our reporter in Shiraz (a city in 1000 Km south of Tehran):”the families want to get some news about their children or relatives whom they have not seen for thirty years.”Some of those who came to Iraq”have been helped by a branch of Nejat Society“he added.
The daughter of one of Ashraf residents’ states:”the trip to Ashraf was so stressful and worrying. Every night I see my father in my dream, he seems to call for me. I have no idea if he is still alive or he is dead.”A woman is with her, she carries a photo of his son,”Hussein”. A man called Yousefi also has the photo of his two sons Ali and Barat, but they all look disappointed and depressed behind Ashraf gates.
They shout”Allah U Akbar”[God is the greatest]; Ya Hussein”[Hussein is the third Shiites’ leader] some of the elderly fall down due to extreme tiredness. The girl is making another effort to open the gates and reach her father.”If they open the gates and we enter, we don’t know where to go. Iraqi soldiers accompany us, showing us the buildings but no Iranian is seen in the camp”she says.
Mohammd Bagher Momen Zadeh, lived in Ashraf for a lot of years. He attended some terrorist operations. He worked as a reporter between leaders and members. When he disobeyed the orders, he was sent in to prison and Iraqi judiciary sentenced him to six years of imprisonment because of his illegal arrival to Iraq. And then the Iranian authorities condemned him to ten years of imprisonment in Evin Prison under the charge of commitment of terrorist operation in Tehran and Shiraz…
“I was thirteen when I joined MEK. I attended two terrorist operations so I was sentenced to ten years of imprisonment in Evin. When I got back to Camp Ashraf I saw a lot of big changes in the organization. After a year I told them that I was not able to continue and I wanted to leave Iraq and that was why I got into trouble. I was in solidarity confinement for seven months. Together with me, about eighty other members protested against their stay in the Camp,”he says. Momen zade recalls his days in Ashraf:”Camp Ashraf had tuned into a horrifying castle where marriage was forbidden. there were weekly brainwashing sessions in which we had to confess everything that our minds were busy about. For example a comrade would come and confess that he was thinking about his family his mother or sister …, I think it was a new Islam. A lot of changes had occurred in the organization.”
Momen Zadeh describes that he is a graduated of Electronic University and now he is a cameraman who films wedding parties in Shiraz.”MKO delivered me and eighty other members to Iraqi Intelligence Ministry where I was under torture, beating and investigation for six months.
“The Iraqi court accused me of aggression upon Iraq borders and then I was sentenced to six years of imprisonment in Abu Qoraib, 24 hours before American invasion to Iraq, Iraqi and Iranian governments exchanged a number of their war prisoners including some of MKO members and me.
“My return to Iran and my freedom took me only one week. The Iranian authorities defined some conditions for me such as not opposing the Islamic Republic, not committing terror operations and not joining MKO anymore.”
A former high ranking member of MKO told Ashraq Alawsat in Tehran:”they do not have arms. They are only trying to maintain their organization and its doctrine and obedience to its orders which is the most important to them. They think if Camp Ashraf is closed MKO will collapse.”
Momen zadeh believes that the future of Camp Ashraf directly depends on the region’s situation and the relations between Iran and Iraq and the interests of Iraqi government and also the negotiations on Iranian nuclear activities (…)
Today, Momen Zadeh lives with his memoirs of the terrorist operations he committed :”I exploded a car in Shiraz and I thought that I would be sentenced to death but at the time I was only thirteen. I had carried out my seniors’ order.”(…)
Momen Zadeh sees himself an independent individual now. Asharq Alawsat asked him:”Are you still opponent to Islamic Republic? Or do you agree with them?”
“I am a member of Nejat Society right now.”He answered”this society is an NGO, it is neither a governmental organization, nor opposing the regime.
“I live in Iran as a normal citizen. I have an Iranian passport and I am able to travel to any country I want. I am a victim of terrorism. My job at Nejat Society is the arrangement of visits between families and their children in Camp Ashraf. They just want to get to know about their children to know whether they are living or dead.”
“There are eighty families in Shiraz and all around Iran there are 3000 families whose children are still in Camp Ashraf.”Momen Zadeh explained,”Since 2003, about one thousand members have left Camp Ashraf.”
Some of Iranian independent experts who are opponents to Islamic Republic believe that Tehran authorities are behind most of those kinds of societies of which their objective is to impress Ashraf residents psychologically.
An Iranian journalist says:”I think that it is at Iran’s interest that MKO maintains near Iranian borders since Iranian Intelligence is simply able to reach them and it is also for American benefit to protect Camp Ashraf in order to have an arm to threaten Iran and on the other hand it is beneficial for Iraqi political rivals to enjoy Camp Ashraf which is a part of negotiations in Iran- Iraq relations.”
Most of Ashraf residents are living in poor condition. I think you cannot find a similar fate to that of MKO in the whole history. They have no certain future. A dissident, who participated in anti- election demonstrations, says:”those who return to Iran have to sign letters of amnesty and obey IRI’s constitution. Some of the returnees are also supported by Iranian authorities and are used for efforts to persuade other members to return. They have granted amnesty to those MEK members who haven’t committed assassinations.”
Despite the old animosity between MEK and Western states that consider it a leftist organization and label it as a terrorist organization, American forces have treated Ashraf residents as refugees since 2004 until last year when the control of Ashraf was handed over to Iraqi government. After some time they were removed from EU’s terrorist list and were considered as an opposition force against Iran. Mujahedin Khalq Organization accuses Iranian regime of sending its elements, under the cover of families, to Camp Ashraf and using them as a lever for psychological pressure on Ashraf residents. The psychological warfare is carried out by calling residents’ names through loud speakers, knocking at gates and chanting slogans including”Dawn with MEK”.
Mujahedin also accuse some Iraqi parties of facilitating the work for Iranian Intelligence agents! They claim that Iraqi Police puts pressure on Ashraf residents. Mujahedin view themselves as”Iranian refugees”that no one is allowed to submit them to Iranian regime.
MKO leaders are trying to mobilize public opinion in Europe and America in order to achieve their ideals. They asked the UN to support Ashraf residents immediately.
By Asharq Alawsat – Translated by Nejat Society
The insistence of the Mojahedin-e Khalq of Iran (MEK), which has been based in Camp Ashraf since the 1980s, on staying in Iraq against the wishes of the Government of Iraq and its people has made it an expensive matter. 
What casts a black cloud over this organization is the recollection of the Iraqi people. This group, which was hosted by the former regime and its head, the dictator Saddam Hussein during his war with Iran, was used to implement the recommendations of the leaders of the former Iraqi army and the intelligence services. The intelligence of the MEK was used to carry out acts of espionage inside Iranian cities and in Iraqi territory, which according to military experts, often helped the warlords in the planning and execution of military operations in the field. After Saddam and his regime, other governments began to sponsor the Mojahedin, and even today the international community has provided the group with various civilian and military facilities and given them many possibilities, the most important of which is Camp Ashraf. They allow the organization’s leadership and to recruit its members to Iraq in various ways – brainwashing, false promises, kidnapping … and etc.
The MKO has obeyed the needs of the former regime in following its aggressive policy of war with Iran, and also performed killing and destruction against the people of Iraq and Iran, as well as the liquidation and assassination of opponents, which separated them in Europe and America. This was the result of the possibilities furnished by the former regime.
Many questions remain in the minds of the Iraqis and Iraqi public opinion now, after the end of the Iran-Iraq war which claimed the lives of millions of people, followed by uprisings among Iraqis in 1991, in which the MKO played the major role in helping Saddam’s forces (the Republican Guard) and Saddam’s security in suppressing the uprising and causing the deaths of thousands of Iraqis in northern Iraq and to the south. After all these tragic events of the past, and now that the Iraqi people have won their freedom after the fall of the dictator, what is the point of having the MKO in Iraq? What are the reasons for insisting on remaining at Camp Ashraf?
The main question is; what is the benefit for the organization to stay in Iraq now, without the presence of the former regime which protected them? The numerous statements made by the leaders and officials of the Mojahedin Organization directed across the world are a show of power and capability of the Organization in defiance of the Government of Iraq in particular, and the international community in general. The claims of the organization’s leadership, under the title of ‘the security risks facing the Organization and its members’, about the activities of the Iraqi forces and the Committee for Camp Ashraf, after the Iraqi government took responsibility for the camp, are nothing but excuses and lies.
For example, the MKO is using not only its own websites but also undeclared spokespeople like Mahdi Akbaii, to claim that the Iraqi government, after taking over responsibility for the camp [in January 2009], is blocking access to food, fuel and medical to Camp Ashraf in an attempt to kill all the members of the organization.
Studies, reports and research by various organizations and agencies, as well as the confessions of the many separated members of the Mojahedin (Batool Soltani, the youngest Farzin, Davoud Heidari, Ali Khaki, Hamid Reza Soleimani, Farhad Quanlo, Mahmoud Sepahe Humayun Khzadi, Ramadan Saeedi. . etc) reveal the reasons for the group’s determination to stay in Iraq. Camp Ashraf provides a distant, isolated place, which serves to allow it to control the minds of its members. The group also needs troops and a military camp inside the Iraqi border, near Iranian territory in order to implement its hostile plans against Iran. In addition, Camp Ashraf is a show of force and power in Iraq.
But these reasons are not enough for the organization to so desperately try to remain in Camp Ashraf. There is another key reason; the search for another dictator, and an alternative sponsor to allow it to achieve its aims. The search for a replacement for the remnants of the Saddam regime of course led the organisation’s leadership to the coalition countries occupying Iraq as the first alternative. So the idea was that the United States and the U.S.’s allies would fill the void left by the former regime. This was anticipated by the decision of the coalition forces to agree a ceasefire with the forces of the Mojahedin Organization in Iraq and for it to hand over all its weapons and military equipment to U.S. forces and accept the decisions of the U.S. leadership and agree to end any combat and military activity against any local or external party (Studies of the National Institute for Research on National Defense U.S. RAND). This, first and foremost, deceived the leaders of the organization (Maryam Rajavi) because the idea was not met with a positive reception internationally when she asked the United States and the West to work to create a suitable environment and enable the Mojahedin to launch a military attack on Iran, supported by United States forces stationed in Iraq, to take advantage of the differences and poor relations between America and Iran since the seventies.
So the fact remains that the main motivation for the survival of the Mojahedin of Iran in Camp Ashraf, at this stage is that the organization’s leaders only hope is for the return of the ousted regime in Iraq. Or, until they find an alternative for this present situation which will allow it to achieve the plans and aggressive ambitions of the organization against Iran and the creation of a crisis which would spark a new war between Iraq and Iran. This then, is what the organization seeks through its association with elements associated with the Baath party and the former regime in Iraq or terrorist movements and organizations linked to Al Qaeda and others who want to worsen the situation in Iraq and its people. The Mojahedin does its best to support and strengthen these elements in Iraq. This shows that the Mojahedin organization does not want Iraq safer from terrorism, free from intrigue and chaos, and does not want stability for the government and the Iraqi people and does not want a democratic system in Iraq. Because, if this comes about, they will have no future in Iraq. So, they are seeking, in time, to achieve two important plans at the same time. The first is to hold on to Camp Ashraf as a symbol of strength and competence. Then, as alleged, they are following the quest to bring back a fascist dictatorship which will take power in Iraq. This is why the Mojahedin of Iran has taken to embracing all political opponents of the Iraqi government and embracing the extremists and the remnant elements associated with the Baath party and the former regime.
At the same time, the Iraqi government knew very well that Camp Ashraf had changed to provide a safe haven for these groups in the first years after the fall of the former regime. What the Mojahedin organization and its leadership want, is a return to the previous conditions, meaning; conditions before the coalition forces invaded Iraq. So they hope to damage the existing good relations based on mutual respect between the two neighbors, Iraq and Iran in the interest of the Mojahedin. The public policy pursued by the organization’s leadership is currently working using bribery and intrigue to bring about the deterioration of relations between the two countries. The group hopes to weaken democracy in Iraq, and create hostility toward the opening up of Iraqi foreign policy to building international relations and strong and peaceful coexistence with neighboring countries. In this way, the Mojahedin hopes to destroy Iraq’s good relations.
So, the Iranian Organization tries to remain in Camp Ashraf under any pretext in order to be at hand to interfere in the internal affairs of Iraq. But the group’s justification for its presence on Iraqi soil, using international laws does not apply at all according to observers and experts in international law. It attempts to plant the seeds of dissent and intrigue for the return of the previous conditions, and to work on the lack of stability in Iraq, because otherwise, stability is fatal to its goals.
The Iraqi government acting on proof that the Mujahideen Khalq Organization was interfering in Iraqi affairs and attempting to bring back dictatorship, took steps to destroy the hopes the Mojahedin of Iran for achieving its goals in Iraq. The Government of Iraq ordered the closure of Camp Ashraf and directed the Mojahedin to leave Iraq through Ministerial resolution No. (214), on 17/06/2008, which calls for two main objectives: first, that these organizations and others that adopt terrorist ideology, have no place in Iraqi territory, so that Iraq can achieve security, stability and prosperity and, secondly, it is the will of the Iraqis to have their full sovereignty, freedom and independence at home, especially after the inglorious history of these groups against the Iraqi people.
D. Amir al-Khalidi, Almutamar Newspaper, Baghdad
