Open letter to Italian ex FM
Dear Mr. Terzi,
In your interview with “Il garantista” from 6/17/2015 the “National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)” is described as a “coalition of Iranian organizations, groups and Democrats residing abroad”.
Accurate would be to designate the NCRI as a political arm of the People’s Mojahedin “Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK / MKO / PMOI)”. Although after its foundation in 1981 in addition to Abulhassan Bani Sadr, a former president of the Islamic Republic, also the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (DPKI), followers of Mohammad Mosaddeq founded National Democratic Front and various Stalinist groups joined the NCRI, but in 1982 Bani Sadr already left the NCRI. Like him many other groups not being satisfied with the absolute leadership style of Rajavi and the dominance of the MEK in the NCRI, followed him till the 1984th.
Furthermore, it is said, the NCRI combines “representatives of ethnic and religious minorities, such as Kurds, Baluchis, Jews and Zoroastrians “.
Also in the Iranian parliament, according to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic, there are reserved five seats for representatives of religious minorities. Even Article 13 of the Constitution recognizes Iranian citizens of Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian faith officially as religious minorities, who determine their personal status and religious education even after the corresponding own religious rules. Should we therefore call the Islamic Republic as a prime example of religious freedom and democracy?
What matters is how this apparent openness for minorities and other opinions and ways of life is implemented in reality.
Mr. Terzi, in the interview, you talk about the demand of young Iranians “… for more freedom in the school, in information, in everyday life …” But can such a claim at all to be implemented by an organization that keeps its members under strict supervision in the camps since decades, prohibiting them from access to information and independent media, controlling and directing all social contacts?
You point out, the fight against the Islamic State is “hopeless” when Islamic fundamentalism will further be “fueled by Tehran”. The “Shiite sectarianism” be the “trigger” for the “radicalization of large parts of the Sunni world.”
How can you seriously believe that an organization with such a strong personality cult around its leaders Massoud and Maryam Rajavi and such cultish structures based on a radical indoctrination of its members against all dissenters could make a contribution to the pacification of this regional and religious powder keg? An organization that has always been calling on Iranian people to rise up and overthrow the regime, only to take itself to power as a “transitional government”.
So worthy of support the demand for the inclusion of other refugees from Camp Liberty in Italy may be, you should look carefully whether the organization you designate “…The only solution for the future of Iran…”, can deliver what it promises, or whether the many dropouts and critics, human rights organizations and aid workers as well as nearly all those who have taken a critical look with the MEK apart, are right when they accuse the organizations cultish structures, the leader cult , indoctrination and oppression up to the ill-treatment of members, foreclosure of the world and reality, and a very idiosyncratic understanding of democracy.
You cannot fight the fact that you support an organization with a more radical and more fundamental ideology of fundamentalism and radicalism.
You cannot fight terrorism and bloodshed, by supporting an organization that has been practicing this for many years and still takes the view, “liberation” of Iran can only be possible through a (violent) overthrow of the government.
As nice as moderate and western-democratic the facade of the MEK may seem, viewing behind the facade reveals its true face fast!
AAWA Association e.V.
Dipl. Ing. Ali Akbar Rastgou (Chairman)
 http://othes.univie.ac.at/18784/1/2012-02-29_0948167.pdf , S. 6.