Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Why the MEK is Not Considered a Viable Alternative

The MEK’s history and actions have led many to question its viability as a democratic alternative to the current Iranian regime. A significant factor is the MEK’s past association with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, which has deeply damaged its reputation within Iran. The group’s alliance with Iraq, which included military operations against Iranian forces, is viewed by many Iranians as an act of treason, destroying the MEK’s standing in its homeland.[1] This association is a major reason for the MEK’s unpopularity inside Iran, where it is often seen as a group that sided with Iran’s enemy during a time of national crisis.

According to the article “The Case for Redesignating the MEK: Learning from History” from Israel Hayom, numerous surveys, independent interviews, and media coverage indicate that inside Iran, the MEK is broadly discredited.[1] Many Iranians across generations associate the group with betrayal and violence. The article also states that the people of Iran overwhelmingly do not see the MEK as a viable or legitimate alternative to the current regime.

The MEK’s history of violence and its designation as a terrorist organization by various countries for periods also contribute to the skepticism surrounding its viability. The group was involved in armed conflict and targeted assassinations before the 1979 revolution and after, leading to its inclusion on terrorist lists by the U.S., Canada, EU, UK, and Japan for various periods between 1997 and 2013. While the MEK has since renounced violence, its past actions continue to raise concerns about its commitment to democratic principles.

Furthermore, the MEK has been accused of exhibiting cult-like characteristics, which further undermines its credibility as a democratic force. Critics have described the group as exhibiting traits of a “personality cult,” with reports of authoritarian control, enforced celibacy, and mandatory ideological re-education sessions. These practices are seen as incompatible with the values of a free and democratic society. The RAND Corporation report for the US government stated that the MEK had “many of the typical characteristics of a cult, such as authoritarian control, confiscation of assets, sexual control (including mandatory divorce and celibacy), emotional isolation, forced labour, sleep deprivation, physical abuse and limited exit options,”[2]
The MEK’s internal structure and leadership also raise questions about its democratic credentials. The group’s leadership is centered around Maryam Rajavi, who is the current political leader and public face of the organization. Critics argue that the MEK’s focus on Maryam Rajavi’s “Third Option” and its insular nature do not align with the principles of a pluralistic democracy.

The article “Making Sense of the MEK” from the American Foreign Policy Council highlights the MEK’s plan for provisional rule in a half-year “transitional period” following the fall of Iran’s current government and leading to a democratic and secular Iran.[3] However, the article also notes that the group’s exclusionary nature and the distrust of other Iranian opposition elements raise questions about its ability to build a broad coalition and govern effectively.

In conclusion, the MEK’s past association with Saddam Hussein, its history of violence, its cult-like characteristics, its internal structure, all contribute to the perception that it is not a viable alternative to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Mazda Parsi

Sources:
[1] The Case for Redesignating the MEK: Learning from History. [Israel Hayom]
https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/04/11/the-case-for-redesignating-the-mek-learning-from-history/
[2] The Mujahedin-e Khalq in Iraq, A Policy Conundrum. [RAND]
https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG871.html
[3] Making Sense of the MEK. [American Foreign Policy Council]
https://www.afpc.org/publications/articles/making-sense-of-the-mek

July 12, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Endless MEK’s anger towards New York Times. Why?

After the Israeli attacks on Iran, given the prospect of the so-called regime change in Iran, journalists are exploring the landscape of Iranian opposition groups. Dozens of news media have published articles analyzing the viable alternatives to the Iranian government. The majority of these investigative reports conclude that there is a lack of a unified and credible opposition for Iran.

The New York Times was also one of those news outlets that analyzed the main Iranian dissident groups stating that “Amid Attacks, Iran’s Exiled Opposition Remained Divided”. The article was very similar to that of Newsweek that “As Israel Eyes Regime Change, Iran’s Opposition Is Divisive and Divided.” In these articles, Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and Reza Pahlavi are regarded two of the main opposition groups against the Islamic Republic.

However, the MEK’s propaganda media slammed New York Times considering the article “crafted to undermine the MEK.”
Ali Safavi as a foreign affairs spokesman of the MEK is the one who is charged to write against the NY Times again. This is while what is told by the New York Times about the MEK and even about its adversary Reza Pahlavi was very similar to several other articles that has been recently published on the issue.

MEK’s Anger against NYTimes

The New York Times is generally considered a liberal-leaning newspaper. Investigative journalism is a form of journalism where reporters deeply research and expose information that is often concealed or difficult to access.
The New York Times, as the MEK’s own article states has so far published three investigative reports on the world inside the MEK in 2003, 2011 and 2020.

Although the MEK propaganda denounces these reports, they are still the most referred documents about the group, especially the one that was authored by Elizabeth Rubin in June 2003 after the US invasion to Iraq. Since then, the MEK’s grudge against the New York Times began. Perhaps the biggest media blow to the MEK was dealt by the New York Times.

Rubin titled her first-hand account of visiting Camp Ashraf Iraq, “The Cult of Rajavi.” Rubin described the life at Camp Ashraf as a “fictional world of female worker bees,” asserting the group possessed absolutely no support within Iran.
Through over 2 past decades, “The Cult of Rajavi” of Elizabeth Rubin has been one of the most reliable articles for the journalists and academics because very few journalists could enter Camp Ashraf so far.

Her next article on the MEK was published in July 2011 after the group’s well-paid lobbying campaign was enhanced to remove the group from the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations of the State Department.

In the article titled “An Iranian Cult and its American Friends”, Elizabeth Rubin warned about the sponsorship of the US high-profiles for the MEK as a terrorist cult.

In February 2020, the history repeated itself for the MEK, another NYTimes correspondent, Partrick Kingsley, was allowed to take a tour at Ashraf 3, the MEK’s headquarters in Albania. Although the MEK made efforts to picture the gesture of a democratic group for Kingsley, he found out that something was wrong behind the scenes that the MEK had prepared for him.

He published his investigative report under the title, “Highly Secretive Iranian Rebels Are Holed Up in Albania. They Gave Us a Tour.” Kingsley stated that depending on whom you ask, the People’s Jihadists are Iran’s government-in-waiting or a duplicitous terrorist cult that forbids sexual thoughts. Thus, besides the members inside the camp, the NYTimes reporter interviewed a number of former members of the group to know “What are they doing in Albania?”

Defectors of the MEK –who were interviewed by Rubin and Kingsley “to deeply research and expose information that is often concealed or difficult to access about the MEK”—are considered as agents of the Iranian government by Ali Safavi and so are the NYTimes journalists who added their narratives to their investigative reports.

Kingley’s article was ironically ended with the express of ignorance of Ashraf residents about the whereabouts of the MEK’s disappeared leader, Massoud Rajavi. After publishing the article, Kingsley posted further information on his X account about the secretive cult-like atmosphere at Ashraf 3 where members are not allowed to speak freely.

What does the NYTimes say about the MEK now?

The NYTimes’s recent article on Iranian oppositions, including decentralized activist groups, Reza Pahlavi and Maryam Rajavi, suggests that none of these groups have the capacity to bring regime change in Iran.
In particular, about the MEK, the NYTimes cites from a university professor: “The MEK has next-to-zero popularity in Iran. In my scholarly judgment, the MEK has more supporters in Washington, than in Iran.”
And, that’s it! This was what Ali Safavi calls “intervention” while other journalists and academics state similar opinions about Iranian dissidents. The followings were extracted out of many articles and reports on the very topic:

Jacobin:
While some members of the Iranian diaspora support exiled opposition figures such as Reza Pahlavi or Maryam Rajavi, these individuals lack meaningful support within Iran and are unlikely to serve as viable alternatives to the current regime. In the absence of a unified and credible domestic opposition, alternative strategies for facilitating change must be followed.

Newsweek:
While both Pahlavi and the MeK claim to seek establishment of a secular and democratic Iran, they often criticize one another. The MeK, spawned as a leftist rebel group in 1965, has a legacy of conducting attacks during the reign of Pahlavi’s father before the Islamic Revolution, which the group initially supported.

Elnet.uk:
The NCRI is part of this rebranding, presenting a more politically palatable front for the MEK’s goal of regime change in Iran. Despite rebranding efforts, the MEK remains unpopular within Iran due to its former support for Saddam Hussein and perceived Marxist, extremist elements.

Eurasian Times:
However, in Albania, the MEK is struggling to hold on to its own members, who have begun to defect. No strategic analyst thinks that the MEK has the capacity or support within Iran to overthrow the Islamic Republic.

Abc News:
The NCRI has notable supporters among traditional Iran hawks in the U.S., with figures including former Vice President Mike Pence, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former national security adviser John Bolton and others having spoken at their events in recent years.
The NCRI has called for the establishment of a democratic and secular republic in Iran. The MEK — and by extension the NCRI — were recognized as terrorist organizations by the U.S. until 2012.

The Economic Times:
Apart from Pahlavi’s monarchists, the main opposition faction outside Iran is the People’s Mujahideen Organisation, also known as the MEK or MKO. A revolutionary faction in the 1970s, it lost a power struggle after the shah was toppled.
Many Iranians have not forgiven it for then siding with Iraq during the stalemated war of 1980-88 and rights groups have accused it of abuses at its camps and of cult-like behaviour, both of which it denies.

Jerusalem Post:
While some members of the Iranian diaspora support exiled opposition figures such as Reza Pahlavi or Maryam Rajavi, these individuals lack meaningful support within Iran and are unlikely to serve as viable alternatives to the current regime.
Ali Safavi has no defensible response to the arguments of the journalists about the unpopularity of the MEK among Iranians. He never denies that the MEK pays hefty sums to buy its American supporters. About the ban on marriage in the MEK he refers to an NYTimes article dated to 1996! The only frequent argument used by the MEK propaganda and namely Ali Safavi is that any journalist who criticizes the MEK is an agent of the Iranian government. The journalists of the NY Times are condemned more harshly because they have revealed more steadfast evidence about inside the MEK.

Mazda Parsi

July 9, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The Incredible Disappearing of the Mujahidin al-Khalq

Michael Rubin, an American journalist critical of the Islamic Republic and a staunch opponent of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), believes that Israel’s attacks on Iran and its plan to change for regime change are the causes for the destruction of the MEK.

Although his analysis in his recent article in the Middle East Forum is not without flaws, his view on the nature of the MEK and his criticism on the performance of this treacherous and violent group, is worth to know:

Imagine talking about regime change for decades, hosting posh conferences that cost millions of dollars, paying five- and perhaps even six-figure honoraria to retired politicians, cabinet secretaries, and ministers from across the United States and Western world, all the while claiming that a veiled septuagenarian leader who never won an election and consistently polled with less than 1 percent support was Iran’s future popular leader. Then Israel strikes at Iran to end the Islamic Republic, inflicting the regime’s greatest crisis in forty-six years and… crickets. Pro-forma statements that do little and certainly do not call for meaningful regime change. That describes Iran’s Mujahedin al-Khalq (MEK, MKO).

Perhaps the MEK or its political umbrella, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, is upset. After all, despite their rhetoric of opposition, the MEK cannot erase their history. Their leadership embraced Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini prior to the Islamic Revolution and worked fist-in-glove with him until Khomeini sought to discard them alongside other allies as he consolidated control. The MEK then fled into exile and offered their services to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, both to strike into Iran and to help Saddam’s Republican Guards suppress Iraqi Kurds. This is why ordinary Iranians despise the group.

The MEK has always been problematic

The MEK has always been problematic. It operates like a cult, its children notoriously isolated and absent from schools where they might mix with other students from outside communities. Its American proxy groups’ tax forms make little sense. This is problematic given how the MEK channels honoraria for American politicians. When not enticing American officials to endorse them, the group indoctrinates its members in anti-Americanism.

Still, it has long insisted that it was Iran’s most popular movement. It used that repeated claim as a means to block or besmirch other opposition groups or co-opt initiatives such as the referendum movement that called for a new referendum to allow Iranians to endorse or denounce Islamic Republic as form of government more than 15 years ago. The group’s leaders and officials seem more obsessed with the son of the late shah than they do with bringing down the Islamic Republic.

MEK more talk that substance

Traditionally, the MEK has claimed they so deeply penetrated the regime that they could expose intelligence no other groups could. Essentially, the MEK said they were the real deal, and other Islamic Republic dissidents and oppositionists were more talk than substance. In reality, there were red flags. A quarter-century ago, for example, the MEK put a supposed defector it identified as Ahmad Behbahani in touch with CBS’ 60 Minutes for an interview, in which Behbahani claimed he oversaw Iranian terrorism and said that Iran, not Muammar Qadhafi’s Libya, was responsible for the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The alleged Behbahani made several other spectacular charges. The problem was that Behbahani was a fraud; physically, he could not have been the real suspect because the man the MEK put forward was several inches too short.

Nor was this the only MEK fraud. MEK representatives often would shop fraudulent documents around Washington; as a Pentagon desk officer, I and my colleagues intercepted several. The MEK goal seemed clear: While they claimed opposition, they hoped Bush administration hardliners who sought regime change in Iran would bite only to be subsequently discredited when the fraud was exposed.

That is not to say that the MEK does not break news. They were the first group to expose publicly the then-covert Natanz enrichment facility in 2002, and have since announced various other sites. Especially now, such announcements appear much more likely a mechanism for foreign intelligence services—most likely Israel’s and/or Saudi Arabia’s—to publicize findings without their own fingerprints.

The MEK will be exposed as frauds

With the regime teetering, the MEK is as well. The group opposed Ayatollahs Khomeini and Khamenei not because they opposed the Islamic Republic, but because the MEK wanted to be in charge of the Islamic Republic. As Iranians make their voice heard, the MEK knows they are toast. They will be exposed as frauds, and those supporting them will rightly have their judgment questioned, much like the many American academics who once embraced the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia as progressives, a phenomenon that scholar Guenter Lewy documented.

As the Islamic Republic collapses, the MEK will fade away as well—for three reasons. First, the regime no longer will need then group as its tool. Second, foreign intelligence agencies have dispensed with shadow boxing and are now at blows.

Once again, the MEK has lost its role. Finally, the Iranian people will speak and put the mutated mixture of Islamism and Marxism to bed, for as Iranians move forward, they will seek democracy.

June 22, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Newsweek: MEK cult lack any significant domestic constituency

As Israel claims that its unprovoked attack on Iran is aimed at regime change, analysts wonder which opposition group may be able to take over Iran after the so-called regime change. In this case, the MEK and the Monarchists are the two main oppositions to be analyzed.

Tom O’Connor, Senior Writer of the Newsweek suggests that “as Israel eyes regime change, Iran’s opposition is divisive and divided. He asserts that a number of observers argue that neither Pahlavi nor the MEK hold the necessary influence in Iran to substantially affect the country’s future.

In case of the MEK, he quotes Ali Alfoneh, senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington. Alfoneh told Newsweek, “The NCRI/MEK, which relocated to Iraq and collaborated with the Iraqi Army throughout the war against Iran, has been reduced to a cult-like political sect lacking any significant domestic constituency.”

O’Conner also has interviewed Muhammad Sahimi, professor at the University of Southern California, who has outlined a difficult situation for both MEK and monarchy supporters.

“The MEK has had long-standing relations with Israel, and they too hope that they can come to power, although they are universally despised by Iranians from all walks of life, due to their siding with Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq during its war with Iran,” Sahimi told Newsweek about the MEK. “At the same time, their members are all in their 60s and 70s, and in exile. They are a spent force.”

The author also talked to Sina Toosi, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy. Toosi argued that propping up either Pahlavi or the MEK could ultimately harm efforts for democracy in Iran.

“While these groups will likely seek to use the current crisis to boost their visibility and present themselves as viable alternatives, empowering them would be a grave miscalculation,” Toosi told Newsweek. “It would further discredit any externally backed initiative for political change and would undermine the broader Iranian pro-democracy movement, which overwhelmingly rejects foreign interference and sectarian or authoritarian alternatives.”

“Paradoxically, some of the strongest opposition to U.S. or Israeli interference often comes from grassroots civil society actors and reformist or moderate political currents, not the security establishment,” he added. “Undermining those internal voices—who support democratic change but oppose war and foreign manipulation—could inadvertently strengthen the very forces Israel and the U.S. claim to be opposing.”

June 18, 2025 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The double face of the MEK: between moderate opposition party and terrorist organization

Despite presenting itself as a moderate opposition force in the eyes of Western public opinion, the MEK continues to perpetrate terrorist actions in Iran for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic, as demonstrated by their own official website, in which the attacks are described as heroic acts.

In our previous article, we summarized the history of the Mojahedin-e-Khalq , a political organization whose declared aim is the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran , known by the acronym of MEK or PMOI (from the English People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran ). As we underlined on that occasion, in 1997 the United States included the MEK in the list of terrorist organizations , due to their modus operandi which effectively followed exactly that of a terrorist organization that uses attacks to achieve its goals.

In 2012, however, the United States decided to start using the organization for its own purposes of destabilizing the Islamic Republic and, taking advantage of the military occupation of Iraq, a country in which many MEK militants were located, made tacit agreements with them. Just in September 2012, Washington officially removed the name of the MEK from the list of terrorist organizations , with the organization’s own leadership officially acknowledging its past mistakes, declaring that it would thereafter act solely as a political force of opposition to the Republic Islamic, renouncing the path of attacks.

This cosmetic operation had highly positive implications both for the United States and for the MEK itself. The Washington government, in fact, was able to support Mojahedin-e-Khalq openly with an anti-Iranian function, without having to worry too much about public opinion; indeed, there are quite a few exponents of the most recent administrations who have expressed their support in favor of the MEK on public occasions. For its part, the organization has cleaned up its image internationally , presenting itself as a legitimate moderate opposition force to the Iranian theocracy.

The MEK has attempted in every way to attract the support of Western progressive political groups, who do not look favorably on a regime like that of the Islamic Republic, by leveraging media propaganda that exploits the pretext of human rights and the condition of women to foment anti-Iranian sentiment in public opinion. For this reason, the official political program of the MEK presents points such as the establishment of a democratic republic, religious freedom, gender equality in every sphere of society, the legalization of alcoholic beverages, freedom of speech, association and expression, the right to choose whether or not to wear the veil, all arguments that can find general agreement among Western public opinion. Furthermore, the MEK also proposes a close alliance of Iran with Western countries and the recognition of the State of Israel , which according to numerous sources would support the organization militarily.

This cosmetic operation to clean up its image, however, conceals a much darker reality, which sees the MEK continue to carry out terrorist operations in Iran , causing serious damage and casualties, both military and civilian, in order to achieve its political goals. This dark face of the MEK is clearly kept quiet in front of the Western public, to the point that the organization’s official website ( news.mojahedin.org ) does not report news about terrorist attacks, except in its own Fārsī language version . While in the foreign language versions the MEK presents itself as an opposition political party with a moderate outlook, in Persian all this turns into extremist frenzy .

In the Fārsī language version , the term ” insurrection centers ” (کانون‌های شورشی) frequently appears , which are none other than the terrorist cells that operate in Iran carrying out attacks in public places. These episodes, which continually affect the Iranian military and civilian population, are described as acts of heroism by MEK militants, but are then kept quiet in front of the Western public, which certainly could not accept their governments’ support for a terrorist group which boasts of its bomb attacks.

For example, in July this year the MEK carried out 23 terrorist operations to celebrate the 35th anniversary of what the organization calls Operation Forough Javidan (or “Eternal Light”), an attempted invasion of Iranian Kurdistan in course of the war events between Iran and Iraq. On that occasion, the MEK was defeated, suffering numerous losses, which in the language of the organization are called martyrs. As part of this wave of terrorist attacks, the MEK boasts, for example, of having blown up the barracks of the Revolutionary Guards in Ravansar, the headquarters of the national news agency IRNA in Qazvin and numerous other public buildings across the country, as well as setting fire to images of Iranian revolutionary leaders.

Analyzing the MEK website in Persian, there are numerous episodes of this type that can be found in the year 2023 alone (year 1402 of the Persian calendar). Terrorist episodes are often organized on the occasion of anniversaries considered important in the history of the MEK, such as the aforementioned Operation Forough Javidan, or the establishment of the National Council of Iranian Resistance , an organization and political coalition founded on 20 July 1981 and closely linked to the MEK. In fact, even on the occasion of this anniversary, terrorist attacks against the garrisons of the Revolutionary Guards and other episodes of violence occurred throughout the country.

Browsing the MEK’s official website, you can also see how these terrorist attacks are not isolated episodes, as there are several every month , and they affect every area of the country. The main targets of these operations are the headquarters of the Revolutionary Guards and other armed forces or the judiciary, and are described in pompous tones in an attempt to glorify the actions of the terrorists, decorated with the title of “heroes”, all accompanied by celebratory videos disseminated through the organization’s Telegram channel . An image therefore very different from the one that is sold to Western public opinion, and of which we want to spread awareness through this article, so that Don’t fall into the trap of supporting a terrorist organization like the MEK again.

By Giulio Chinappi – giuliochinappi.wordpress.com

October 8, 2023 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The double face of the MEK: between a moderate opposition party and a terrorist organization

While presenting itself as a moderate opposition force in the eyes of Western public opinion, the MEK continues to perpetrate terrorist actions in Iran for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic, as evidenced by their own official website, where the attacks are described as heroic acts.

In one of our previous articles, we summarized the history of the Mojahedin-e-Khalq, a political organization whose declared aim is the overthrow of the Islamic Republic of Iran, known by the acronym of MEK or PMOI (from the English People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran). As we underlined in that article, in 1997, the United States included the MEK in the list of terrorist organizations, due to their modus operandi which actually closely resembled that of a terrorist organization that uses attacks to achieve its goals.

However, in 2012, the United States decided to start using the organization for its own purposes of destabilizing the Islamic Republic of Iran and, taking advantage of the military occupation of Iraq, a country where many MEK militants were located, entered into tacit agreements with them. Just in September 2012, Washington officially eliminated the name of the MEK from the list of terrorist organizations, with the same leadership of the organization officially acknowledging its past mistakes, declaring that it would later act solely as a political force in opposition to the Republic Islamic, renouncing the path of attacks.

This operation has had highly positive implications both for the United States and for the MEK itself. The Washington government, in fact, was able to support Mojahedin-e-Khalq openly in an anti-Iranian function, without having to worry too much about public opinion, indeed there are not a few exponents of the most recent administrations who have expressed their support in favour of the MEK in public occasions. For its part, the organization has cleaned up its image internationally, presenting itself as a legitimate force of moderate opposition to the Iranian government.

The MEK has tried in every possible way to attract the support of Western progressive political groups, which do not look kindly on a government like that of the Islamic Republic of Iran, by relying on media propaganda that exploits the pretext of human rights and the condition of women to stir up anti-Iranian sentiment in public opinion. For this reason, the official political program of the MEK presents points such as the establishment of a democratic republic, religious freedom, gender equality in every sphere of society, the legalization of alcoholic beverages, freedom of speech, association and expression, the right to choose whether or not to wear hijab, all arguments that can find general agreement among Western public opinion. Furthermore, the MEK is also proposing a close alliance of Iran with Western countries and the recognition of the State of Israel, which according to many sources, would support the organization militarily.

This facade of image-cleansing, however, hides a much darker reality, one that sees the MEK continue to carry out terrorist operations in Iran, causing serious damage and casualties both military and civilians in order to achieve its political goals. This dark face of the MEK is clearly kept silent in front of the Western public, to the point that the official website of the organization ( news.mojahedin.org ) does not report news about the terrorist attacks, except in its own version in the Persian language . While in the foreign language versions the MEK presents itself as an opposition political party with a moderate outlook, in Persian all this turns into an extremist raving.

In the Persian language version, the term “insurrection centres” (in Persian: Kanounhaye Shoureshi) frequently appears, which are nothing more than terrorist cells operating in Iran carrying out attacks in public places. These operations, which continuously affect the Iranian military and civilian population, are described as acts of heroism by MEK militants, but are then kept silent in front of the Western public, which certainly could not accept the support of their governments towards a terrorist group who brags about their bomb attacks.

For example, in July of this year the MEK carried out 23 terrorist operations to celebrate 35 years of what the organization calls Operation Forough Javidan (or “Eternal Light”), an attempted invasion of Iranian Kurdistan in course of war events between Iran and Iraq. On that operation, the MEK was defeated, suffering numerous losses, which in the language of the organization are called martyrs. As part of this wave of terrorist attacks, the MEK boasts, for example, of blowing up the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps barracks in Ravansar, the headquarters of the national news agency IRNA in Qazvin and numerous other public buildings across the country, as well as setting fire to images of Iranian revolutionary leaders.

Analysing the MEK website in Persian, there are really numerous episodes of this type that can be found in the year 2023 alone (year 1402 of the Persian calendar). Terrorist attacks are often organized on the occasion of anniversaries considered important in the history of the MEK, such as the aforementioned Operation Forough Javidan, or the establishment of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, an organization and political coalition founded on July 20, 1981 and strictly linked to the MEK. Also, on the occasion of this anniversary, in fact, there were terrorist attacks against the garrisons of the Revolution Guards and other episodes of violence throughout the country.

Browsing the official website of the MEK, it can also be seen that these terrorist attacks are not isolated episodes, as there are several of them every month, and they affect every area of ??the country. The main targets of these operations are headquarters of the Revolution Guards and other armed forces or of the Judiciary, and are described in pompous tones in an attempt to glorify the work of the terrorists, adorned with the title of “heroes”, all accompanied by celebratory videos disseminated through the organization’s Telegram channel. An image therefore very different from the one that is sold to Western public opinion, and of which we want to spread awareness through this article, so that don’t fall into the trap of supporting a terrorist organization like the MEK just yet.

By Giulio Chinappi

August 9, 2023 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

What is known about MEK funding in Albania?

Who is behind the financing of the People’s Mujahideen Organization of Iran (MEK) remains a mystery.

The camp of about 3,000 members of this organization in Kamez, Albania, extends over a territory of 38-40 hectares, where about 127 objects are built.

For their deployment in the Ashraf 3 camp, the USA had contributed, which had given 20 million dollars to the UN refugee agency to help the relocation to Albania.

But, after an action by the Albanian Police in this camp on suspicions that its members have committed the criminal offenses of “provocation of war” and “cyber attacks”, the US Department of State emphasized that the US does not finance this organization.

The financiers of this organization are not publicly known, since the MEK does not provide official data. However, its financing has been a point of discussion several times in the world media.

In an article published in 2018, the British newspaper The Guardian wrote that the MEK organization was financed by the former leader of Iraq, Saddam Hussien, “for most of its life in asylum”.

The MEK moved to Iraq in 1986, after its activities in Iran were banned in 1981. The Council on Foreign Relations, based in New York, USA, writes that Hussein had been the main financier of the MEK until the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

“But in recent years, the group claims to rely on the large number of wealthy Iranian expatriates in the United States and Europe, and other people opposed to the clerical regime in Tehran,” a Council on foreign Relations report said..

But the participation of the former intelligence chief of Saudi Arabia, Prince Turki al-Faisal, in a gathering of this group in Paris on July 6, 2016 had prompted criticism from Iran after he had supported the overthrow of the Government of Iran.
An Iranian official, quoted by the state news agency IRNA, had accused Saudi Arabia of sponsoring terrorism.

The professor of the University of the City of New York, Ervand Abrahamian, told The Guardian in 2018 that Saudi Arabia is behind the financing of the MEK.

“The money ultimately comes from Saudi [Arabia]. There is no one else who can subsidize them with this level of funding,” said Abrahamian, a Middle East historian.

But, The Guardian points out that the MEK has always denied that it is financed by Saudi Arabia. Radio Evropa e Lire has contacted the spokesperson of this organization regarding the financing of the MEK in Albania, but has not received a response until the publication of this article.

For various periods from 1997 to 2013, the MEK was listed as a terrorist organization in several countries, such as the USA, EU, and Great Britain.

In 2009, Great Britain removed the MEK from this list. The USA did the same, under the administration of former President Barack Obama, in 2012. At that time, The Guardian reported that a multi-million dollar campaign was made to remove it from this list.

The MEK describes itself as “the largest and longest-lived Iranian opposition group with a five-decade history of fighting for freedom and democracy in Iran.”

But on June 21, the US State Department said it does not consider the MEK to be a “sustainable democratic opposition movement representing the Iranian people” and stressed that the US does not contribute to the funding of the MEK and does not provide any support or training for the members of this organization./rel

Politiko

July 31, 2023 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

The MEK: Controversies and Allegations Surrounding Iranian Opposition Group

In Iranian politics, few groups have sparked as much controversy and animosity as the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and its leader, Maryam Rajavi. With claims of terrorism, human rights abuses, and allegations of collaboration with foreign powers, the MEK and the Rajavis have become a subject of intense scrutiny and contention both within Iran and on the international stage. MEK also began a multiyear, multimillion-dollar lobbying campaign to remove itself from the terrorist list, including possible financial rewards to American political figures like Rudy Giuliani, Newt Gingrich, Howard Dean, MG Paul E. Vallely, John Bolton, and others.

The MEK: An Overview of Controversial Figures

The MEK, founded in the 1960s as a militant leftist organization, played a significant role in the Iranian Revolution. However, its ideology and tactics evolved, leading to its designation as a terrorist group by several countries, including the United States, until 2012. The MEK’s association with violence and its history of attacking both Iranian and Western targets have contributed to widespread condemnation.

The Rajavi Couple: Leaders and Controversial Figures

After the deceased of Masoud Rajavi, the founder of the MEK, his wife, Maryam Rajavi, they presumed a leadership position within the organization. Their hold over the MEK and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), has been criticized and controversial. Critics argue that the Rajavis maintain tight control over the group, stifling dissent and suppressing internal power struggles.

Many former high-ranking US officials – who represent the entire political spectrum – have been paid tens of thousands of dollars to speak in support of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) or MEK. Ironically, these heavy-weight politicians never talk about MEK’s violent and anti-American history, but they refer to them as ‘freedom fighters’ with “values just like us,” as democrats-in-waiting ready to serve as a vanguard of regime change in Iran. Why?
But the MEK, led by Maryam Rajavi, has collected some influential American friends. They played an important role in lobbying the Obama administration to take the MEK off its list of terrorist organizations last year. Now, they are focused on the Camp Liberty massacre. It’s not an issue that can be wished away; it is one that enemies of the nuclear negotiations can exploit.

Allegations of Human Rights Abuses and Terrorist Activities

One of the most contentious aspects of the MEK and the Rajavis’ legacy is the alleged involvement in human rights abuses and acts of terrorism. Former members and critics have accused the MEK of employing cult-like tactics, including forced marriages, isolation, and torture. Additionally, claims of the group’s involvement in assassinations and bombings have persisted, further tarnishing its reputation.

Controversial International Connections and Collaborations

The MEK has garnered attention for its alleged collaborations with foreign entities, particularly the United States. While the U.S. officially removed the MEK from its list of designated terrorist organizations, critics argue that America’s association with it raises concerns about double standards in counterterrorism efforts. Claims of U.S. support for the MEK as a potential replacement for the Iranian government after Islamic Republic’s tenure add fuel to the fire, heightening tensions within Iran.

Public Perception in Iran

The MEK is almost universally denounced by Iranians worldwide and is still regarded as a terrorist group. After aiding the Islamic Revolution in 1979, bloody street battles occurred against Iran’s eventual leadership. As a result, the MEK waged war against Iranians. The group took refuge in Ashraf, Iraq, where they aided Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War. Saddam Hussein employed this special brigade in his deadly operations against Kurds and in repressing the Iraqi Shia.

The MEK and the Rajavis’ controversial legacy continues to divide opinions and generate intense debate. Accusations of terrorism, human rights abuses, and collaboration with foreign powers have contributed to their negative image, particularly within Iran. After Ayatollah Khamenei’s departure, the alleged aspirations of installing the MEK added further complexity to an already contentious situation. As the MEK’s influence and international connections persist, the controversy surrounding the group will likely endure, shaping Iran’s domestic politics and relations with the international community.

Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) is known for its cultish Foreign Terrorist Organizations represent a critical threat to Iran’s indigenous democratic movement. Unlike Iran’s democratic opposition, which advances through nonviolence the principles of democracy and human rights, the MEK is an undemocratic organization that pursues its agenda through violence.

The Western world must realize that this group has almost zero popularity in Iran and stop wasting their money to propagate a cultish group that will never have a chance to be involved in Iranian politics.

Granite Grok – by Amil Imani

July 26, 2023 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Evidence on MEK’s unpopularity

There are numerous facts on the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK)’s unpopularity, not just among ordinary Iranians but rather among Iranian dissidents and opposition figures, and this unpopularity is growing.

For the MEK, this Summer did not begin properly. Their headquarters in Albania called Ashraf 3, was raided by the Albanian State Police. The camp’s residents clashed with forces violently. The Move by the Albanian police came after the French government banned the group’s planned annual gathering in Paris.

The MEK could finally run its multi-million-dollar rally based on a French court order, but it could never play the part of a popular opposition group against the government in Tehran. Several undeniable, clear key points are seen regarding the news, reports and pictures that have been published since the MEK’s gathering, which indicate that the Cult of Rajavi is not considered an opposition group, but it is regarded a fraudulent force that has targeted Western politicians. The followings are some true facts on the MEK’s unpopularity:

Albanian government turned its back against the MEK

The Albanian State Police entered Ashraf 3 under the Albanian judicial order. The Police confiscated more than 200 computers from the MEK’s camp. This shows the government’s determination to end the perilous presence of the MEK in the territory. It seems that the group is seriously under scrutiny by the Albanian authorities. Eventually, The Albanian President, Edi Rama said, “Mujahedin must leave Albania if they want to fight Iran.

https://dld.nejatngo.org/Media/Report/Reporttv-Ashraf-20230620.mp4

to download the video file click here

Forced Hijab

During the “Women, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran, forced hijab of female members of the MEK and particularly their so-called president elect, Maryam Rajavi, not only distanced the group from other opposition groups but also it stimulated their hatred towards the group. Signs of a suppressive and totalitarian system are demonstrated in the uniform clothing of the group members.
An evident presentation of hijab control in the MEK was revealed in a video broadcasted after the Albanian Police raided the group’s camp. A Mujahed woman, named Homa is advised by her peer “sister” to cover her hair -of which a little is shown out of the front part of her headscarf. When Homa does not pay attention, she gets a direct order to cover her hair from a superior “sister”. Finally, Homa who is speaking a rather good English to the Albanian reporters is coerced to cover that small part of her hair.

https://dla.nejatngo.org/Media/Report/MEK-Woman-202306.mp4

Rented Crowd

Rent a crowd is the repeated scandalous image which is often seen in the MEK’s rallies. The frequent undisputable presence of a rented crowd that was once more displayed in the group’s recent gathering in Paris. The crowd includes Muslim Mideasterns who look for shelter in Europe, African refugee seekers, poor students from Eastern Europe and other fooled people who look tired and bored of waving the flags of a country that they might not have any idea about.

Rented Crowd at the MEK’s so called gathering in Paris- July 2023

Other Iranian oppositions

Opposition figures have several times declared their detachment from the Cult of Rajavi clearly. The group’s violent background, its collaboration with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war, its cult-like attitude, undemocratic structure and forced hijab are main reasons for opposition groups to denounce the MEK.

The fact was even considered by the French Police when it banned the MEK’s gathering. According to France 24, there is a fear among European officials that after the 2018 foiled plot, NCRI rallies could themselves be targets of attacks, but in the letter seen by AFP, The French Police chief also warned: “The rally could be the scene of tension between supporters of MEK and other Iranian opposition activists.” The fear of the French Police Chief is quiet reasonable because clashes between the MEK supporters and demonstrators of other Iranian exiled groups frequently take place.

A few days later, Alireza Akhondi the Iranian-Swedish politician, twitted, “It is necessary to convey to world politicians that the People’s Mojahedin Khalq organization does not speak on behalf of the Iranian people.”

Akhondi’s words and numerous other assertions by Iranians inside and outside the country is a proof for the loneliness of Maryam and Massoud Rajavi despite their deep pockets of dollars to expend for buying supporters.

Mazda Parsi

July 22, 2023 0 comments

Mujahedin Khalq as an Opposition Group

Exiled group feels heat as Europe ups Iran contacts

A controversial exiled Iranian opposition group is coming under increased pressure in Europe as it nervously eyes the intensification of European talks with Tehran in search of reviving a deal on the Islamic republic’s nuclear drive.

Supporters of the People’s Mujahedin (MEK) regard it as the sole credible opposition group based outside Iran, although it is held in deep suspicion by many Iranians, including those opposed to the clerical authorities.

The MEK and the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), an umbrella group that essentially acts as its political wing, have accused the West of “appeasement” towards Iran over the troubles that it has faced.

Last week, French authorities cited security concerns for banning a major rally organised by the NCRI on July 1 which the group hoped would gather tens of thousands of people.

On June 20, Albanian authorities launched a raid against a MEK camp that has housed its members for a decade as part of a deal agreed in the wake of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The NCRI said one MEK member was killed, a claim denied by Tirana. It also said Albanian police seized 200 computers.

And in an incident whose circumstances have yet to be fully explained, a bomb was thrown into an office of the NCRI outside Paris earlier this month without causing injuries, according to police and the group.

‘Policy of appeasement’ !

Maryam Rajavi who leads both the MEK and NCRI, told a meeting outside Paris that the incidents were the products of a “policy of appeasement” by the West, alleging they “took place at the request of the Iranian regime”.

The MEK is outlawed by the authorities in Iran, which accuses the group of carrying out a violent campaign of attacks in the early 1980s.

It had for decades worked to oust the shah and initially backed the 1979 revolution. But it rapidly fell out with the new authorities and backed Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war, meaning its members had to be moved after the US-led 2003 invasion.

It still claims to have a network inside Iran and boasts of exposing the existence of Iran’s then-secret nuclear programme in 2002, which led to confrontation with the West.

It has high-profile Western supporters, including former US national security advisor John Bolton and ex-vice president Mike Pence.

But detractors regard the group as a cult and argue it does not represent the Iranians who poured into the streets from September last year in a new protest movement.

This could make it vulnerable as Europe seeks to keep contacts alive with Iran in search of a revival of the 2015 nuclear deal, an accord the MEK bitterly opposed.

French President Emmanuel Macron and Iranian counterpart Ebrahim Raisi held telephone talks on June 10 while EU foreign policy number two Enrique Mora met his Iranian counterpart last week in Doha.

Paris is meanwhile keeping a close eye on the fate of four French nationals held by Iran, regarded as hostages by rights activists.

Iran last month released a Belgian aid worker in exchange for a Iranian diplomat convicted by Belgium over a plot to attack a 2018 NCRI rally outside Paris.

– ‘Raises questions’ –

Jason Brodsky, policy director at US-based group United Against Nuclear Iran, said the juxtaposition of events “certainly raises questions”.

“The Islamic Republic has long complained about MEK’s presence in Western countries, so I would not be surprised if its officials raised the issue in their conversations with Western counterparts,” he said.

If MEK’s status in Europe was up for discussion, it would represent a “paradigm shift” as Europe and the US had always wanted the talks on the nuclear crisis to be limited to that issue, he noted.

“This is certainly a dynamic to watch,” he said.

The MEK has never had smooth ride in the West: it was expelled from France in the mid-1980s as Paris sought to improve relations with the new Islamic rulers. It was only in 2012 that the US removed MEK from its list of terror groups after years of lobbying.

There is also genuine fear among European officials that after the 2018 foiled plot, NCRI rallies could themselves be targets of attacks.

There is a “current and real risk” of such an attack, said Paris police chief Laurent Nunez as he informed the July 1 rally’s sponsors of the ban.

But in the letter seen by AFP, he also warned: “The rally could be the scene of tension between supporters of MEK and other Iranian opposition activists who have been engaged in a struggle for influence since the beginning of the protest movement in Iran.”

The Iranian government has been particularly riled in recent weeks by activities claimed by the MEK, which have included hacking into the computer system of Raisi’s administration.

But Tehran has meanwhile reacted with glee to the increased pressure against the MEK.

“Because of their terrorist nature, the MEK will always be a threat to the security of their hosts,” said Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani.

Stuart WILLIAMS – AP

June 28, 2023 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts