USA

US Denies Visiting Allegedly Missing Iranians

The U.S. Embassy in Iraq says it has no information on the whereabouts of seven Iranian dissidents allegedly missing following a deadly shooting on their compound north of Baghdad this month.

The parent organization of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq dissident group says it has information that an American delegation has met the seven people held by Iraqi forces near Baghdad airport.

U.S. Embassy spokesman Rodney Ford told The Associated Press by email Sunday that the claim of an American visit is "categorically untrue." He says no one from the U.S. government has seen or visited those said to be missing.

Iraq on Friday denied that it is holding the seven former residents of Camp Ashraf said to be missing. A disputed shooting on the compound Sept. 1 left 52 MEK members dead.

September 23, 2013 0 comments

USA

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk visits Camp Hurriya

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Brett McGurk visited Camp Hurriya in Baghdad, September 16, accompanied by Gyorgy Busztin, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). DAS McGurk met with senior representatives from the Mujahedine-e-Khalq (MEK), as well as officials from the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). He expressed his condolences to the survivors of the recent Camp Ashraf attack and emphasized the priority of the U.S. Government to ensure the safety and security of the residents of Camp Hurriya. He praised the efforts of UNAMI, and Mr. Busztin personally, to ensure the safe and secure relocation of the survivors from Camp Ashraf to Camp Hurriya last week.

He also discussed issues related to the safe, permanent, and secure relocation of the camp’s residents outside of Iraq, and affirmed the U.S. policy to take active measures in support of such relocation to third countries as soon as possible. DAS McGurk encouraged the residents to cooperate fully with the UNHCR process to facilitate their safe and permanent relocation outside of Iraq. Finally, he thanked UNAMI and UNHCR for their tireless efforts in Iraq and ensured the ongoing cooperation and support for their efforts by the United States.

American Embassy, Baghdad

September 21, 2013 0 comments

USA

US welcomes relocation of remaining Ashraf residents

Relocation of Remaining Individuals from Camp Ashraf to Camp Hurriya in Iraq

Press Statement

Jen Psaki US welcomes relocation of remaining Ashraf residents

Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

September 11, 2013

The United States welcomes today’s safe arrival at Camp Hurriya of the remaining 42 individuals from the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) who had been residing at Camp Ashraf. These individuals were survivors of the horrific attack that took place on September 1 at Camp Ashraf, and we appreciate their cooperation with the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) in this relocation effort. We also appreciate the assistance of the Government of Iraq in facilitating this relocation.

The United States reiterates its condemnation of the September 1 attack and insists that the perpetrators of that barbarous act be brought to justice. We also continue to be deeply concerned about the seven individuals who remain missing from the attack and urge that all steps be taken to locate these individuals.

UNAMI made extraordinary efforts to implement a plan to safely and peacefully move the remaining residents at Camp Ashraf, and we appreciate and support those efforts. We urge all parties to continue to implement all remaining obligations of that plan. In particular, we call on the Government of Iraq to move expeditiously to enhance security structures within Camp Hurriya. It is the responsibility of the Government of Iraq to take all possible measures to ensure the safety and security of the residents at Camp Hurriya in accordance with the December 25, 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between UNAMI and the Government of Iraq.

We further call on the Government of Iraq to ensure the safekeeping of the property that remains at Camp Ashraf, as agreed pursuant to the UNAMI relocation plan. We also call upon the members and leaders of the MEK to actively participate in the UNHCR-led resettlement process. The United States stands firmly behind UNAMI efforts to resolve this matter and to act with urgency to find locations for the safe, secure, and permanent relocation of Camp Hurriya residents outside Iraq.

September 14, 2013 0 comments

USA

U.S. Condemns Attack at Camp Ashraf in Iraq

Press Statement

Marie Harf

Deputy Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

September 1, 2013

The United States strongly condemns the terrible events that took place at Camp Ashraf today, which according to various reports resulted in the deaths of and injuries to numerous camp residents. Our condolences go out to the families of the victims and those who were injured in today’s violence.

We are deeply concerned about these reports and are in regular contact with the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI), as well as Government of Iraq officials. We support UNAMI’s efforts to conduct its own assessment of the situation and call on the Government of Iraq to fully support those efforts.

We further call on Iraqi authorities to act with urgency to immediately ensure medical assistance to the wounded and to secure the camp against any further violence or harm to the residents. We underscore the responsibility of the Government of Iraq and all relevant stakeholders to ensure the safety and security of residents at both Camp Ashraf and Camp Hurriyah, and we affirm the call by UNAMI for a full and independent investigation into this terrible and tragic event. Those found to be responsible must be held fully accountable.

September 3, 2013 0 comments

USA

Engaging with Iran’s New President

The confirmation of Hassan Rouhani as Iran’s sixth president on August 4 will provide an opportunity for renewed engagement between Western governments and the Islamic Republic. Furthermore, the background and character of Rouhani raises pertinent questions regarding the type of engagement that his election calls for.

Educated at both the hawza ‘ilmiya in Qom and Glasgow Caledonian University, Rouhani has had a blend of classical Islamic tutelage and worldly engagement. His background is quite conventional. Many religious scholars in Iran often pursue secular educations simultaneously with their religious studies. The notion that Iran’s politicians are either radicals or moderates is based on the incorrect assumption that there is no middle-way in Iranian politics. This assumption guides the equally misplaced notion that either Rouhani’s worldview is narrowed by a ‘conservative’ religious establishment, or that his secular education and his calls for increased civil-liberties make him more ‘liberal’.

Without categorizing Rouhani politically, the West needs to engage with his government based on its actions. In 2001, then US President George W Bush listed Iran as part of an ‘axis of evil’. Paradoxically, this was shortly after the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) took part in a joint operation with US forces in Afghanistan against the Taliban. The episode illustrates how large-scale gestures can go ignored and only with hindsight be fully recognized as significant. Similarly, former Iranian presidents Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (1989-97) and Mohammad Khatami (1997-2005) both found themselves isolated internationally at crucial points of their tenures. Only later – and during the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005-13) – were they reputed in the West as relatively moderate leaders.

What gestures could Rouhani realistically make in the short-term? He could offer to share more information on Al-Qaeda operatives that are detained in the country – an area where there is already a solid foundation for enhanced cooperation. ‘Secularizing’ the Supreme Leader’s fatwa against nuclear weapons proliferation and possession in ordinary legislation would also be significant. In return,

The policy of engaging Iran today consists of alleviating some sanctions in the event that Iran concedes completely on the nuclear issue, or increasing economic and political pressure. Maintaining the current course would allow Rouhani very little room to manoeuvre. If the US and EU engage with the next government on the premise that Rouhani will tolerate this status-quo, or will proactively seek to challenge the Supreme Leader’s authority, then the opportunity for engagement will be lost. Enthusiasm for Iran’s new government must therefore be tempered by a realistic assessment of the nature of political change in Iran: where Rouhani might attempt to build trust and how the West can respond. This is important for it might be some time before another ‘Rouhani’ emerges.

Rouhani’s background as a cleric and as the Supreme Leader’s confidant should not be misread as obstacles to change. Western governments should instead take full advantage of these facts: they now deal with a leader who understands their perspectives and is well placed to assure Ayatollah Khamenei that a nuclear deal is in the Islamic Republic’s best interest. Political change in Iran has always been a gradual project of negotiation and renegotiation under the ruling Islamic framework, and this applies to identifying ‘national security’ priorities. Change will happen in Iran, including in its conduct of diplomacy, but not necessarily in the linear fashion some expect.

For the first time in the history of the Islamic Republic, foreign officials – including heads of states – were invited as guests to the inauguration of the president. It might be that initial small steps – and the recognition that both sides will be taking them – will lead to a more comprehensive settlement between Iran and the West.

Friday 2 August 2013

by Sasan Aghlani, Research Assistant, International Security, chathamhouse.org

August 15, 2013 0 comments

USA

An Open Letter to President Obama and Secretary Kerry

An Open Letter to President Obama and Secretary Kerry: The Contradictory Foreign Policy Of The United States

President Barack Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20500

The Honorable John Kerry

United States Secretary of State

2201 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20520

Subject: An Open Letter; The Contradictory Foreign Policy of the United States after President Truman

Dear President Obama and Secretary Kerry:

I write to you as a staunch supporter of the President during his entire tenure. Although I was a Republican until earlier this year, I campaigned for the President in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington DC and contributed to the campaign the maximum allowed financial support by borrowing the money. I am still paying my loan acquired in 2007. Likewise, I actively supported re-election of the President for a second term.

This letter is intended to communicate several serious concerns shared by me, many of my family members, and several friends who are Iranian-Americans and Americans, and vote as Democrats, Independent, and Republicans. Most of my family and friends persistently have supported the President at the levels similar to me.

Recently, an Iranian Terrorist organization (Mojahedin-e-Khagh or MEK), extremely despised by Iranians, held a Conference in Paris on June 22nd in Villepinte, a suburb of Paris. The conference notable for its list of attendees included several so-claimed “defenders of democracy and freedom” such as now the infamous Mayor of San Diego, former Mayor of New York Rudi Giuliani, and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and former US Permanent Representative to the United Nations John Bolton. Most speakers apparently received substantial fees for travel and/or speaking at the Conference.

A friend of mine sent to me a 30-minute video tape (available on youtube), showing the speakers and short segments of the lectures. The subjects of these lectures were not related to the sanctions against Iran! They were linked to so-called President-Elect, Maryam Rajavi (born in Tehran on December 4, 1953) who heads the MEK group (also known by various other acronyms such as the NCRI) which was recently delisted from the Foreign Terrorist Organization.

What mystifies me the most is the presence of an esteemed Kennedy family member Patrick Kennedy at the Conference? One would expect an “experienced politician“ to seek assistance from the State Department and FBI about a visit to Paris and the wisdom of presenting a lecture to a group dubbed as a “Cult” by the well-respected Human Rights Watch and until recently, branded as terrorists by our government.

Certainly, the CIA knows the history of murders committed by MEK against the citizens of Iran and America. For example, MEK worked with Saddam’s military to aid him in pinpointing civilian (yes – civilian) targets allowing for Iraqis to dose Iran with chemical weapons (in artillery and missiles)!

Inarguably, political activity is part and parcel of a healthy democracy such as what we have in the United States; however, surely it is the duty of every American to avoid actions that would lead America to war again and again. I must ask these American “amplifiers of brutality” if they truly consider themselves patriots. Frankly, I consider them turncoats. Is the Conflict of Interest concept passe or unsuitable for former government officials? Please make the judgment! I hope both the State and the Justice Departments are looking into this situation.

I am sure you realize the challenges you face in negotiating with Iranian leadership to settle deep-rooted outstanding disputes in a peaceful manner. These discussions are vital in bringing a lasting peace and durable tranquility to several counties in Middle East. Granted the Americans may exercise their freedoms of speech and travel. Yet, the American “loudspeakers” at the MEK organized and funded gathering have certainly disregarded vital interests of the United States by their war-mongering lectures and by accepting free trips and hefty speaker’s imbursements from this terrorist group. Surely, acting against America’s national interest warrants investigation and retribution.

This country cannot embark on serious diplomacy and dialogue with the rulers in Iran when such “prominent members” support a human rights violator and a terrorist organization that until September 2012 was considered a terrorist group (MEK was delisted in September 2012) by the United States. Importantly, such reckless actions by the US government, coupled with new sanctions passed in the House, effectively help the Supreme Leader to convince Iranians that America does not intend to bring the long-lasting disputes to a reasonable conclusion in a peaceful manner. Aside from the Iranian regime, the highly intelligent people of Iran will undoubtedly infer that the delisting of MEK was accomplished to allow America to use MEK as a puppet, to attack Iran, similar to Saddam. Certainly, this type of diplomacy reduces or eliminates any chance of peace.

Let us be reasonable. How can America fight and eliminate terrorism in this country or abroad by maintaining two sets of standards? Think about it. Is this not outright duplicity? Traitors and terrorists are always turncoats and assassins irrespective of their boss! Wherevers the outlaws go they bring miseries.

The lessons of times past are prized but evidently unlearned. One thing is patent. We cannot free Middle East, particularly my Jewish and Palestinian sisters and brothers, from war and destitution unless we craft a fresh foreign policy based on mutual respects, honest admirations for human rights, and a genuine interest in seeking peace.

I this respect, I recall the aspiration and prized words of a Founding Father, John Adams, to exemplify the principles of a sound policy both internally and abroad. He stated America must accept “the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own. She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings . . . Whenever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers are. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own . . . “Clearly, this “divine concept” has not been followed by the majority of American politicians, particularly after President Truman.

We wish you success in coming to solid agreement with the regime in Iran. Doing so will ultimately lead to a free Iran. The brave people of my birth land have civilization of 17,000 years. Importantly, they have repeatedly civilized barbarians. As I wrote to the President on October 16, 2011, only Iranians know how to ultimately deal with their tormentors.

Blessings.

Respectfully,

Akbar Montaser

Professor of Chemistry (1981-2012)

Department of Chemistry

The George Washington University

Washington, DC 20052

Amestp@aol.com

From The noble 13th century Persian Sufi poet Rumi:

“I go to a synagogue, church, and mosque, and I see the same spirit and the same altar”.

Akbar Montaser, Payvan

August 14, 2013 0 comments

USA

Far from Iran election, former guerrillas lobby Washington

WASHINGTON – For decades, an Iranian dissident group has seemed to be on the wrong side of history. Suppressed by both the Shah of Iran and then the ayatollahs who deposed him in 1979, its supporters have faced prison, death and exile, and were shunned in the United States as members of a cult-like terrorist organization.
The Mujahadin-e-Khalq (MEK) former guerrilla movement began to shake off its painful past last year when the State Department took it off the official U.S. list of terrorist organizations. The European Union made a similar decision in 2009 after a prolonged court battle.
But as Iran elects a new president on Friday, the MEK has no discernible role in politics at home, where it is mistrusted – even by government critics – for having been allied with Iraq’s Saddam Hussein during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war.
Yet Iran’s clerical rulers remain obsessed with a perceived threat from the group, frequently warning Western governments against any giving the MEK shelter or support, diplomats say.
Unable to operate openly in Iran, the MEK is instead waging some of its battles in Washington. It opened an attractive new office in April just a five-minute walk from the White House.
Long active as an advocacy group in the United States and Europe, the MEK is now formalizing its campaign to pressure the Obama administration to maintain a hard line – including in multilateral nuclear talks – with the Islamic Republic, which it hopes will one day crumble.
Now that it is no longer on the U.S. blacklist, the MEK can hire registered lobbyists and raise funds on its own, rather than rely on wealthy Iranian-American sympathizers.
Democratic former Senator Robert Torricelli signed up as a lobbyist earlier this year for the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the Paris-based political arm of the MEK.
"They (the MEK) deserve to have a voice in Washington, to be heard, and to (show) what the Iranian people are actually looking for in the future of Iran: a non-nuclear Iran, a government that is based on democratic values," said Soona Samsami, the U.S. representative of the NCRI.
Once one of Capitol Hill’s biggest fund raisers, Torricelli pulled out of the race for a second Senate term in 2002 amid an ethics scandal.
His lobby registration form says he will be "meeting with U.S. government and congressional officials, and advising on general strategy."
Other notable backers of the MEK include former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell and ex-CIA director James Woolsey.
A TOUGH SELL
Even though it has renounced violence, the MEK is a tough sell in the United States, which for many years has blamed it for the killing of six Americans in Iran in the 1970s.
A 2009 study by the RAND Corporation think tank depicted the MEK as a cult-like movement run with military-style discipline, gender separation and "near-religious devotion" to its Paris-based leaders – a description the MEK denies.
"I can’t believe the U.S. government is going to be particularly excited about working with them … because in the U.S. government, I would hope there would be people who would understand that this is not where the political future of Iran lies," said Patrick Clawson, director of research at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Some U.S. policymakers are mistrustful of Middle East exile groups following Washington’s reliance on Iraqi expatriates who pushed America toward war in Iraq in 2003.
Calls from MEK representatives for "regime change" in Iran remind some of Ahmad Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress, which helped convince the administration of former President George W. Bush that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
"They’ll deny it, but I think it’s pretty simple: their goal is to keep pushing the politics in America to lead to an invasion, some kind of major unsettlement of Iran, that they can sweep into as a new government," said Jeremiah Goulka, author of the RAND study.
Some in the U.S. government also share that suspicion – but the MEK resents comparisons to Iraqi exiles of 10 years ago.
"We’ve never been in favor of a war. We’ve never tried to push things towards that direction," said Alireza Jafarzadeh, the deputy U.S. representative of the NCRI. The MEK is "not the U.S. creature that Chalabi was," he said.
Attempts to make over the MEK’s image have been boosted by a report from a former senior State Department official who questions whether the group really committed the killings of six Americans in Iran in the 1970s that are often blamed on it.
The killings, during a guerrilla campaign against the U.S.-backed Shah, were actually the work of a faction that later broke away from MEK, said Lincoln Bloomfield, whose report has just been published as a book by the University of Baltimore.
"Not a single person you could name in the MEK had any knowledge of it or had anything to do with it," he said.
The study grew out of a 2011 memo Bloomfield wrote as a consultant for a law firm that lobbied to remove MEK from the terrorism list on behalf of the Iranian-American Community of Northern California. The author said he had no financial interest in the book, and proceeds are going to the university.
The MEK still has some 3,000 members in Iraq, many of whom were invited by Saddam in the 1980s. The group fell out of favor after his 2003 downfall and current Iraqi officials have applied pressure for them to leave.
After clashes with Iraqi security forces in 2011 in which 34 people were killed, the residents were moved last year as part of a plan in which the United Nations intends to process them for refugee status in other countries.
But progress has been slow, and their temporary home at a former U.S. military compound in Baghdad known as Camp Liberty came under fire in February when eight people were killed in a rocket attack by unknown assailants.
U.S. officials have tentatively identified a handful of Camp Liberty residents who may be allowed to move to the United States. But they would be expected to renounce their membership in MEK, the officials told Reuters.
Forty-four residents of the camp have left over the last month for Albania, which has offered to take up to 210 of them.
Susan Cornwell (Editing by Alistair Bell and Jackie Frank)

June 16, 2013 0 comments

USA

Congress Debates MEK with Obama Officials

Congress Debates War, Sanctions, Diplomacy and Mojahedin Khalq with Top Obama Officials

MEK

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) conveyed his support for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) a group, which is widely opposed by Iranians and viewed by human rights organizations as a cult. The group has been actively lobbying the House to pressure the administration to move MEK members back to the group’s paramilitary base at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Late last year, as part of what was widely viewed as a deal with the State Department to get the group removed from the U.S. list of foreign terrorist organizations, the MEK agreed to leave the base and relocate to Camp Liberty, also in Iraq, where they would then work with the UN to repatriate members in third countries. In a heated exchange with Rep. Rohrabacher, who called for the U.S. to support the MEK, Amb. Sherman expressed her concern that the people at Camp Liberty were being exploited by the MEK’s leadership. “There are opportunities for the people of Camp Liberty to resettle. There have been offers made by countries like Albania to take many of them,” she said. “And to be very frank Congressman, the leadership of the MEK, both in Camp Liberty and in Paris, have kept the people of Camp Liberty from knowing what their options are. And I so care about their lives, and the threat to their lives in the camp, that I hope the leadership of the MEK will allow them to know their options.”

This follows on the heels of testimony from Secretary of State John Kerry in April indicating that MEK members in Camp Liberty had ceased participating in interviews with officials to determine where best to relocate them. Human Rights Watch and other organizations have documented human rights abuses inflicted by MEK leadership against members who questioned their authority or sought to leave the camps

(…)

May 18, 2013 0 comments

USA

U.S. asks leaders of MEK to give unfettered access to UNHR monitors

14 Camp Hurriya Residents Depart for Albania

Press Statement

Jen Psaki

Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

May 16, 2013

On May 15 the first 14 Camp Hurriya residents departed Iraq for permanent relocation in Albania.

The United States expresses its appreciation to the Government of Albania for its generous humanitarian gesture to accept 210 former Camp Hurriya residents. Albania has been a strong partner of the United States in bringing peace and stability to Iraq.

The United States urges the Mujahedin-e Khalq leadership to cooperate fully with the UNHCR relocation process and to facilitate access by United Nations monitors to Camp Hurriya residents. The relocation of Camp Hurriya residents outside of Iraq is vital to their safety and security. It is the responsibility of the MEK leadership to facilitate for the residents of Camp Hurriya free and unfettered access to UN human rights monitors.

The United States reiterates its strong support for the efforts of UNHCR, the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI), and the Special Representative of the Secretary General Martin Kobler. We continue to emphasize that the camp and its residents must be secured in accordance with the December 25, 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between the United Nations and the Government of Iraq, and urge all involved parties to work together effectively on this.

PRN: 2013/0573

May 18, 2013 0 comments

USA

U.S. pushes MKO to accept Albanian asylum offer

The Obama administration said Monday that an Iranian dissident group must immediately accept an offer of asylum from Albania for some its members being housed at a camp in Iraq.

Albania has agreed to take in 210 members of the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MeK), a dissident group that seeks to overthrow Iran’s theocratic regime.

The MeK has rejected the offer.

The U.S. wants the MeK leadership to “accept the government of Albania’s humanitarian offer immediately, and urges the residents of Camp [Liberty] to resume participation in resettlement interviews to ensure that individuals avail themselves of safe and secure relocation opportunities outside Iraq,” said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland.

The dissidents are housed at Camp Liberty, a temporary location near Baghdad’s international airport.

“We further urge the MeK leadership to place the highest priority on the safety and security of the former residents of [Camp] Ashraf through full and unconditional cooperation with the resettlement process,” Mrs. Nuland said.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees has been interviewing Camp Liberty residents to determine their eligibility for refugee status.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki wants the Iranians out of his country.

The Iraqi government is “working closely with the U.N. and the international community to find a permanent place for the residents of the Camp Hurriya outside Iraq,” an Iraqi official said on background.

The Obama administration welcomed the Albanian offer, which it described as “generous,” and thanked Albanian Prime Minister Sali Berisha “for the humanitarian gesture to provide a safe haven” for the Iranians, said Mrs. Nuland.

“We believe the permanent resettlement of former Ashraf residents outside Iraq is the only sustainable solution and remain committed to assisting [U.N. Assistance Mission in Iraq, U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees] and the government of Iraq in this endeavor,” she said.

Saddam Hussein gave the MeK refuge in Iraq in the 1980s. The dissidents established a paramilitary base, Camp Ashraf, north of Baghdad. After the Iraqi strongman was overthrown in a U.S. invasion in 2003, U.S. military forces disarmed the dissidents, who had renounced violence in 2001.

Meanwhile, Martin Kobler, the special representative of the U.N. secretary-general in Iraq, met Deputy Secretary of State William Burns at the State Department on Monday morning.

Mrs. Nuland said the U.S. “strongly supports” Mr. Kobler, the UNHCR and UNAMI.

The Clinton administration designated the MeK as a foreign terrorist group in 1997 while it sought to open negotiations with Iran. The designation had proved to be an obstacle to finding other countries willing to give asylum to the Iranians.

The Obama administration took the MeK off the terrorism list in September.

Camp Ashraf’s 3,100 residents were transferred to Camp Liberty under a deal brokered by the U.N. in December.

Ashish Kumar Sen,

March 26, 2013 0 comments

Newer Posts

Older Posts