Huffington Post

Why has France become a safe haven for extremism in Europe?

Casting blame on those responsible for the rise of the Islamic State in various parts of the Middle East and its disconcerting extension into other parts of the world is a futile exercise. The fact that the Islamic State has developed a global sphere of influence and is able to spread instability unimpeded necessitates detailed investigation, but it is important to note that the current state of affairs is the result of the faults, shortcomings, and negligent decision-making of many actors. What matters now is that the Islamic State is making advances on multiple fronts and the international community is barely committed and insufficiently united to be able to tackle its unchecked growth.

In 2017, the Islamic State has been implicated in attacks in Baghdad, Istanbul, Kabul, Westminster, Manchester, Melbourne, Jakarta, Minya, London, and even Tehran, and the perpetrators have mostly been able to avoid consequences after boldly claiming responsibility, except in the cases where they were shot dead by law enforcement officials.

What’s more, some European countries—especially those where the far right is rising, such as France—have become havens for such groups.

The Growth of the Far Right and Islamophobia

The French version of secularism—laïcité—is believed to have come into being in 1871. Part of what makes laïcité unique is the persistence of French authorities in turning their version of “secularism” into a state religion, leaving no room for criticism. Some prominent commentators and journalists, including the University of Houston’s Robert Zaretsky, have argued that French secularism has made the country a fundamentalist republic, which opens the door for such tragedies as the Charlie Hebdo shooting.

But following the establishment of the Third French Republic and state secularism, the country started to sing the hymn of exceptionalism. The concoction of its distinctive version of secularism has also resulted in an exclusionary approach to minorities and faith groups, paving the way for the rise of Islamophobia, xenophobia, and other forms of racial and religious hatred. As a result, it’s not surprising that groups such as the Islamic State have found France a fertile ground to expand their activities. Several scholars have voiced concerns that the French integration model for minorities has hit a disappointing stalemate.

Moreover, France doesn’t seem to be strictly concerned about cracking down on groups which by some standards are “extremist” and alternatively viewed as legitimate opposition groups.

A notorious example of one such group is the militant cult in exile, People’s Mujahedin of Iran, alternatively referred to as PMOI or MKO. Founded in 1965, it boasts of being an alternative to the current political establishment in Iran, or a shadow government. Part of the early days of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, it contributed to the Iranian people’s ideals of freedom, self-determination, and right to decide their future. But as the chaos of the early 1970s subsided, MKO became progressively disenfranchised as its senior figures were denied leadership positions in the new government. The group failed four times to gain seats in parliament, the Assembly of Experts, and Sa’adabad Palace.

Shortly afterward, the group began to resort to violence to achieve its goal of eliminating the government in Tehran quickly and efficiently. MKO was designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the governments of the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, as well as by the European Union. But between 1981 and 1986 and since 2003, MKO has been sheltered in Paris, and the majority of its rallies and demonstrations take place in French cities, attended by thousands of people. There’s no official relationship between France and MKO, but given their ultra-right worldview and their overtly anti-Iranian attitudes, France currently seems to be the safest place to host MKO. The “Republican” administrations of France, who don’t shy away from showing their reluctance to improving bilateral relations with Iran find the Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization a leverage of authority over Tehran and also see no harm in letting the proxy group continue operating in disguise and publicly. Although advocacy for “regime change” in Iran dates back to the early years of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, MKO still sticks to this mentality and France finds it of some value to allow MKO’s existence. However, the most remarkable development is that in January 2009, MKO was delisted as a foreign terrorist organization by the European Union shortly after being delisted by the United Kingdom in 2008. This means although they don’t have official status, they’re not considered a “harmful” or violent group anymore. As things stand now, in the view of the high-ranking EU authorities, MKO is a “dissident” group in exile, whereas in the eyes of millions of Iranians, it’s a cult responsible for the assassination of politicians and mass murders starting in early 1970s until their bombing of the UN compound in Iraq in 2009, prompting UN withdrawal from the country.

The Islamic State, too, has strong ties to France. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2015 released by the Institute For Economics and Peace, around 2,000 French fighters have joined its ranks. France has been a frequent target of major Islamic State attacks since 2014.

France’s Response

Moreover, the French authorities’ failure to cooperate effectively with non-hostile, non-aligned governments has presented a misleading image of the country’s ability to work with those international partners with which it may not have shared interests. When Iranian President Hassan Rouhani paid an official visit to France in February 2016—the first head of Iranian government in 16 years to travel to Paris—Elysée Palace called off a dinner ceremony for the dignitaries of the two governments after Rouhani requested that a halal meal be served at the banquet and alcoholic beverages be taken off the dinner table. The small disagreement overshadowed the media coverage of President Rouhani’s first “charm offensive” in Europe.

One trend is clear: France insists on promoting and upholding its exclusive version of secularism. The inflexibility and ultra-nationalism in the policies of the far-right politicians and parties in France, especially those of the National Front and Marine Le Pen, are reminiscent of the former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s radical religious viewpoints and ultra-nationalism. Ahmadinejad’s actions prompted the immigration of thousands of people of faith, and either intentionally or inadvertently stigmatized the nation’s constitutionally recognized religious minorities.

The French system doesn’t seem to have frameworks that enable harsh and unconditional crackdown on extremists. The Islamic State has found France a safe haven to plan and carry out attacks without facing consequences. The most notable difference lies in the way French criminal law works. It’s a common and well-known trend that French authorities raid restaurants, bookstores and take other actions to disrupt alleged extremists but don’t take serious steps when they urgently need to stifle the rise of extremism, Islamophobia and bust the real terrorist cults that undermine the security and peace of their borders and disrupt international peace and security. I can refer to it as the French double standards on tackling terrorism and violent extremism. Moreover, France has a history of violence in its encounters with the Middle East and North Africa and an exclusionary attitude toward its Muslim population—fueled by the inflammatory, anti-Muslim rhetoric of its leaders. And the Time magazine once asserted that France’s prisons have become a recruiting ground for extremists, which is a viable assertion.

When France wields its state secularism in such a way that faith minorities feel regularly excluded and snubbed, it’s no surprise that extremist cults like the Islamic State feel empowered.

Kourosh Ziabari, Contributor

MA International Multimedia Journalism student, University of Kent, FCO Chevening Scholar Iran 2016/17

December 24, 2017 0 comment

European Union

A Fully United Europe Claims the High Ground in Relations with Iran

In a week when UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini both delivered considered speeches about the Iran nuclear deal, President Donald Trump’s typical shorthand reference to it as a “bad deal” indicates nothing to the world community other than he hasn’t put the effort in to understand how the deal came about and what it actually says. His apparent ‘policy’ is to abandon it and strike a better deal. But there is no indication how that would come about. The 60 day deadline for Congress to vote to reimpose sanctions passed on December 12.

Trump’s foreign policy tweets are now analysed widely by foreign policy wonks as part of a ‘bluff and bluster’ policy of diverting attention away from anything he might have to answer for. Trump’s decision not to certify Iran’s compliance with the agreement in October created uncertainty was not leadership. Instead, a peculiar kind of American weakness is being exposed for all to see.

This has given an opportunity for the European Union to step into the void. The EU is fully united in its support for the nuclear deal. The JCPOA is regarded as a binding commitment, as starting point, on all sides from which to begin to address other outstanding issues.

Those issues include Iran’s missile programme, but also human rights and regional influence.

Currently there is no consensus between the original P5+1 about how to deal with Iran. An unproven allegation by UN ambassador Nikki Haley that Iran supplied ballistic missiles to the Houthis in Yemen might excite the United States and Saudi Arabia but in contrast Russia’s position is that missiles were never part of the JCPOA agreed in July 2016.

While they may have agreed with Europe and America over the nuclear issue, Russia’s military help to Syrian leader Assad alongside Iran puts it at odds with the European and American positions. And China enjoys good trade relations with the EU and Iran and is unlikely to want to disturb this balance for what appear angry ideological rants from America.

The EU, in an effort to bridge and navigate this difficult breach so as to assert the necessary leadership for further negotiations over Iran, has chosen to strike the moral high ground. Essentially, Europeans believe America lacks credibility on human rights because of its support for the death penalty. This applies also to Russia and China. In its dealings with other countries, the EU always raises the issue of human rights asserted Mogherini. The EU leads the world in this respect.

The EU also believes that the nuclear issue is resolved. Iran is complying with its terms and under stringent IAEA inspection Iran will not be able to break out. For this reason, the idea of tearing up an agreement that took twelve years to broker is ludicrous. This would undermine the credibility of the IAEA at a time when it will be needed in future for other nuclear crises, notably North Korea.

The US complaint that other issues – like missiles – were not included is disingenuous. Iran’s starting point for the negotiations was that everything should be on the table. But, when issues such as supplying Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war or human rights abuses were mooted as possible points of discussion, it was the US and Gulf countries which objected.

While the US objects to Iran’s involvement in regional conflicts, it is dishonest for its spokespersons to ignore America’s role in the conflicts of Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Israel. European politicians are more bold and honest. In order to be credible and effective in further dealings with Iran, the European Union countries need to distance themselves from any tolerance or support for terrorist groups like Maryam Rajavi’s Mojahedin Khalq which call for violent regime change against Iran. MEP Ana Gomes highlighted a recent security breach linked to Rajavi’s visit to the EU parliament when MEK agents carried out a planned attack against two of their critics at the parliament.

This new found confidence in Europe is in direct contrast to – and probably a consequence of – the dysfunctional and chaotic policy stances issuing from the Trump administration. Lacking any actual policy toward Iran, Trump’s aim appears simply to be as disruptive as possible. In contrast, the European Union has a clearly stated position and has now signalled its intention to take the lead in diplomatic talks aimed at getting Iran engaged in changes to its human rights behaviour and military strategies.

Massoud Khodabandeh, Huffpost, Massoud Khodabandeh Director at Middle East Strategy Consultants.

December 18, 2017 0 comment

Ann Singleton, Adel and Bahman Azami,Sadollah seifi

Albania

Albania’s Modern Slavery Problem Alienates Europe

A UK report on modern slavery identifies its various manifestations – sexual exploitation, labour exploitation and domestic servitude – concluding that increased awareness results in an increase in detection and reporting. But, with trafficking at the root of much modern slavery it is clearly a worldwide phenomenon, not limited to the west or to any particular country.

Modern Slavery is usually a hidden phenomenon, it goes on behind closed doors and can be hard to detect. Victims are often isolated individuals – domestic servants or cannabis ‘farmers’ – locked away behind closed doors. Nobody knows of their existence because they have been illegally trafficked. Even those more openly kept in brothels for sexual exploitation are unable to escape for fear of reprisals against themselves and their families back home.

But there is another form of slavery hidden in plain sight: political slavery. This is not difficult to detect because the kinds of groups which practice it actively seek publicity and influence over worldwide politics. The exiled Iranian Mojahedin Khalq organisation (MEK aka MKO, NCRI, Rajavi cult) is one such group. It describes itself as a democratic political organisation, the main opposition to the Islamic Republic of Iran. But the life of the members speaks of a very different story.

A year ago, the last of nearly three thousand MEK members were finally expelled from Iraq where they had been operating under the patronage of Saddam Hussein. America paid millions of dollars to the UN and the Albanian government to have the group to settle there. Part of the deal was to establish a de-radicalization programme to return the members to normal life. This did not happen.

Instead, the group closed ranks and over the past year, several high-profile US politicians and former officials opportunistically visited Albania to heap praise on the MEK for its anti-Iran stance. John Bolton, Senator John McCain, among others have unabashedly promoted the group by meeting its leader Maryam Rajavi there.

Of greater concern was that during this same period the families of these MEK members in Albania complained to the UNHCR and the Albanian government about the treatment of their loved ones. They said that many, perhaps the majority of MEK members want to leave the group but have nothing – no money, no place to go, no officially recognised status and no language skills – to help them do so. They are effectively being held in a state of modern slavery.

A report by an Albanian lawyer (acting for MEK members who managed to separate from the group) after meeting with the UNHCR in Tirana reveals that under a secret agreement struck between the Americans, the government of Albania and the MEK leader, the UNHCR supervised the transfer of approximately 3,000 MEK from Iraq to Albania not as refugees but on a ‘humanitarian basis’. In other words, they have no official status in the country.

According to this agreement, all the expenses for the MEK members are to be doled out by the MEK itself. This means that members are totally dependent on the MEK leadership for their subsistence. Those who have expressed their desire to separate from the group, for whatever reason, must continue to obey MEK rules and restrictions, they must accept MEK imposed conditions so that they are given accommodation and food.

As such, they are forced to pay lip service to a belief system they no longer believe in. They are forced to give allegiance to a pseudo-political terrorist entity. Under these conditions, they are modern political slaves, trapped in plain sight in a circle of fear, coercion and isolation.

Bahman Azami, Adel Azami and Sadollah Seyfi talk about their ordeals with Albanian media (Nov. 2017)

The stories of those who do escape are harrowing. (See videos below.) In the MEK, any word of dissent is punished. How? By public humiliation, beatings, solitary confinement and ultimately death. More poignantly, in the MEK contact with your family is a punishable sin against the leader. Your devotion must solely focus on Maryam Rajavi to the exclusion of all others. This is a disturbing addition to the ways and reasons that individuals are enslaved. It is known as cultic abuse because of the involvement of a belief system. The MEK are political pawns whose minds have been hijacked for a cause most of them no longer believe in. Urgent action is needed to rescue them. But at present there is little hope of that. Even Albania’s deputy anti-trafficking coordinator, Dr Elona Gjebrea, who is also the deputy minister of the interior, has bowed down in the Court of Maryam Rajavi.

When counter-terrorism expert Anne Khodabandeh visited Tirana on 5-7 November to investigate the plight of former members, several media interviews she gave were pulled from broadcast due to MEK and Albanian Mafia intimidation when she revealed that the MEK are actively recruiting Albanian youth to their cause.

But a more sinister turn of events is taking place right now. The MEK is moving over 2,500 members to a remote camp in the north of Albania far away from any local communities. This desperate act serves several purposes. One is to recreate the isolation the cult enjoyed in Iraq where coercion and brainwashing were a daily occurrence – the new camp is called ‘Ashraf Three’. Another reason is to prevent families from reaching their loved ones and prevent members from escaping. The other is to empty the old university buildings in Tirana to make way for a new round of political slaves to take up residence. This time, families of Daesh fighters who have fled Iraq and Syria are rumoured to be ready to move to Albania on ‘humanitarian grounds’.

While America turns a blind eye to political slavery, the European Union takes a very different view. Not only have Albania’s efforts to accede to the EU been completely stymied by the MEK’s activities there, the group’s alignment with the Albanian Mafia and the threat of a new wave of political slaves means Albania is now regarded as a security threat on the border of Europe rather than a potential partner country.

IMPAKT 97: Jihad 2.0? What are the Iranian Jihadis (MKO, Rajavi cult) doing in Albania? (part 1)

To download the video file click here

IMPAKT 97: Jihad 2.0? What are the Iranian Jihadis (MKO, Rajavi cult) doing in Albania? (part 2)

To download the video file click here

Massoud Khodabandeh, Contributor ,Director at Middle East Strategy Consultants.

November 22, 2017 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

U.S. Hands Off Iran

I just travelled to Iran where was I was invited to speak at the University of Tehran about human rights and “humanitarian intervention.” I put this term in quotes because I’ve rarely ever seen any intervention that was truly humanitarian or that produced humane results, but more on that later.

Before I traveled to Iran, a number of friends and family members expressed shock that I would go there, feared for my safety and well-being, with some urging me not to go at all. Of course, this is not surprising given the antipathy of the U.S. towards Iran and how that country is portrayed in the mainstream press.

We in the U.S. are constantly told that Iran is our enemy; that it is indeed part of some “axis of evil” that must be sanctioned, fought against and even subject to “regime change.” In terms of the first assertion – that Iran is our enemy – we are usually told that this is so because Iran is allegedly a “state sponsor of terrorism.” This is a quite curious claim given that Iran is a sworn enemy of Isis and Al-Qaida, and indeed was set to help fight Al-Qaida and the Taliban after the 911 attacks until Donald Rumsfeld intervened. Meanwhile, the U.S.’s close ally Saudi Arabia – a country we just sold $110 billion of arms to – has been covertly and overtly supporting Isis and Al-Qaida for years. Recall that fifteen of the nineteen 911 attackers were indeed from Saudi Arabia and that Saudi Arabia aided and abetted some of the 911 attackers.

The claim about Iran sponsoring terrorism is also ironic given the U.S.’s support for the cultish Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) organization which itself wants to topple the Iranian government, despite its unpopularity in Iran, and which was actually designated by the U.S. as a terrorist organization from 1997 to 2012. As the London Guardian notes, the MEK has “claimed responsibility for murdering thousands of Iranians” since 1981 (my friends in Iran put the figure of those killed at 17,000); supported the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Iran in 1979 and the holding of the American hostages; joined Saddam Hussein in fighting Iran during the Iran-Iraq war; and killed at least six Americans during the 1970s. Yet, the MEK, which was holding a conference in Paris while I was in Iran, is now a darling of such U.S. political bigwigs as John Bolton, Newt Gingrich, Joe Lieberman, Howard Dean and Rudy Giuliani.

Another claim that is made about Iran is that it is a despotic, sexist theocracy which is offensive to our Western values and sensibilities (as if those are the gold standard). Again, given that the U.S. is in lock-step with the retrograde, misogynistic monarchy of Saudi Arabia, this claim rings hollow. Moreover, as any visitor to Iran will tell you, Iran is actually a quite modern, Western country where many people speak English. It is also a country where women, though certainly not as liberated as they should be, for the most part wear minimal head coverings, such as colorful silk scarves (which nearly all of the women on my flight from Frankfurt began to put on their heads as we descended toward the Tehran airport); freely drive cars and are found in every sector of public and commercial life.

Most importantly, though, talk about “regime change” begs the question of what the regime will be changed to and how it will be changed. In the case of one of the most notable recent acts of regime change the West has effected – Libya – we see that the West is content to topple a government , doing great damage to the people, civilian infrastructure and ancient antiquities in the process, and leave nothing but chaos in its wake. In my view, the West seems to have the same plans for Syria where it has aimed at toppling the Assad government while claiming to support “moderate rebels” who do not seem to exist. The regime changes in Iraq and Afghanistan have not produced much better results with tens of thousands being killed, the countries being laid to ruin, and at best weak governments resulting from the ashes.

As I walked through the beautiful streets of Tehran and Isfahan, was warmly greeted by the beautiful people of Iran who actually love Americans as I came to find; and witnessed Iran’s wealth of ancient architecture, including functioning Armenian Christian Churches and Jewish synagogues, I couldn’t help but feel pangs of fear and even anger at the thought of but another “humanitarian intervention” which would surely lay waste to many of the people and antiquities I was encountering.

Dan Kovalik, ContributorLabor & Human Rights Lawyer

August 6, 2017 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

MEP Gérard Deprez claims 265 parliamentarians support Rajavi’s MEK. Really?

A week before the Mojahedin Khalq (MEK) holds its annual regime change rally at Villepinte in Paris next Saturday, Belgian MEP Gérard Deprez, Chair of the Friends of a Free Iran in the European Parliament has issued a statement which he claims has been signed by 265 parliamentarians. As well as expressing concern over the role of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the statement also mentions “Rouhani’s minister of justice is a self-confessed murderer who was a member of the Death Committee, ordering the execution of over 30,000 political prisoners in 1988, mostly from the main opposition People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). He concludes his press briefing by stating: “In order to express our solidarity with the Iranian democratic opposition, I will attend the FREE IRAN gathering in Paris on 1 July where I will present the support of 265 members of the European Parliament for this joint declaration…” I wonder how many MEPs would actually sign any statement so obviously meant as a show of support for the MEK.

MEP Gerard Deprez and Maryam Rajavi

To find out, I spoke with the offices of several MEPs who are concerned and actively involved in the issue of human rights in Iran. None of them knew anything about such a statement, but said that with such widespread support it is something they definitely should have been aware of.

Perhaps there is good reason for this. Like many statements and petitions over the years which mention the MEK this looks like fake news. Anyway, it would have been much easier to pass this off as genuine if Deprez had also published the names of the 265 signatories. As parliamentarians, it is doubtful they would feel endangered by publicly announcing their views in this way.

Unless, of course, they had spotted the factual errors and grammatical mistakes typical of documents written by the MEK themselves. The MEK has history. For years the MEK has interfered in this way – claiming huge numbers of supporters among politicians – in national parliaments across Europe, particularly in the UK. It got so ridiculous that several British MPs complained about these fake numbers and it was stopped. Let’s hope the European Parliament will take similar steps.

The MEK are expert at manipulation and misuse of democratic institutions – both the systems themselves – writing self-promoting statements and then faking signatories – and by using intimidation against persons inside the parliament. Corruption is wormed into parliament along with every MEK visit.

The MEK’s agenda is not unknown. The group advocate violent regime change against Iran. What is not so obvious is how they are able to infect parliamentary work with this agenda. This statement is a typical example. Their supporter Gérard Deprez has used his own website to announce the seemingly popular statement. It is then fed through various outlets, from MEK supporters to EUReporter until it takes on the appearance of genuine news. If we dig a little deeper into EUReporter’s Sponsored Posts though we find many paid for articles promoting the MEK. (For those who don’t know, the MEK uses a front, ‘the National Council of Resistance of Iran’ to disguise its activities. It’s just names.)

Still, it’s worth looking a little more carefully at the timing of this statement, a week before a ‘grand gathering in Paris calling for regime change in Iran’. It might have something to do with the usual list of paid speakers who are willing to turn out to such a controversial (advocating violent regime change on French soil) event. Past speakers include John Bolton, Rudi Giuliani and Prince Turki Al Faisal Al Saud . No Iranians. Even the audience, far from being “tens of thousands of Iranian expatriates” is largely made up of non-Iranians offered a cheap trip to Paris on condition of attending the event; refugees, students, even actors. (It’s worth querying Deprez’s veracity as a purveyor of news since he also claims that 100,000 people will fit into Villepinte for the rally.)

By Massoud Khodabandeh,

June 29, 2017 0 comment

France

Under President Macron, France can play a pivotal role in Western relations with Iran

European counter-terror experts warn that as ISIS is pushed into a smaller and smaller theatre of operations in the Middle East, there will certainly be blowback as foreign fighters return to their own countries. In this context, the ISIS terrorist attacks in Tehran expose a much more complex situation which will have lasting repercussions in the West unless it is tackled at source. That includes zero tolerance for any messages promoting violent extremism.

What worries experts is that ISIS almost certainly gained the expertise it used to carry out the attacks in Iran from the exiled Mojahedin Khalq (MEK) organisation. The MEK has a three-decade history of terrorist violence against Iran and continues to cling to an agenda which promotes violent regime change. Whilst the MEK is widely regarded as a defunct force due to the age and health of its fighters, experts warn that although the MEK no longer constitutes a fighting force, the members remain fully radicalised and capable of acting as logistics facilitators and training and planning consultants for any other terrorist group. Certainly, they are all capable of conducting suicide missions.

Since America ensured the MEK were transferred from Iraq to Albania this danger has become more acute. Albania is still struggling to overcome the political and media corruption, drug crime, gun smuggling and people trafficking which will prevent it joining the European Union anytime soon. The presence of 3000 radicalised MEK members in a country known as a route between Europe and Syria for modern terrorist forces is not just controversial, it is dangerous.

Even so, the real danger does not lie in Albania; it is a NATO country dominated by the US and the MEK can and will, therefore, be contained and re-purposed for whatever the US needs them for. The recent visits to the MEK by John Bolton and Senator John McCain are an indication of this agenda.

Maryam Rajavi presents a list of anti-Imperialist MEK martyrs to Senator McCain in Tirana 2017

The real danger lies in France and Western Europe. The MEK has been headquartered for the past thirty-six years in Auvers-sur-Oise just outside Paris. This year, as always, the MEK will use its front name the ‘National Council of Resistance of Iran’ to hire the Villepinte salon outside Paris, pay disproportionate speakers fees to advocates and round up a paid audience to wave flags and dutifully applaud the ‘regime change’ speeches. This annual event is known inside the MEK as a celebration of armed struggle – the raison d’être of the MEK group.

This year the event is being held on July 1, but it was originally timed to celebrate the MEK’s challenge to Ayatollah Khomeini’s leadership on 30th Khordad (June 21, 1981). These dates matter. Analysts now say that the MEK has moved the date of the celebration to distance it from the association with defeat – after the coup d’état failed, senior MEK leaders fled to France with CIA backing and left the rank and file to face mass arrests and executions inside Iran. Instead the new date is closer to what the MEK regards as a major victory in its three decade long terrorist campaign against Iran. On the 7th Tir (June 28, 1981) MEK operatives blew up the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party in Tehran during a meeting of party leaders. Seventy-three leading officials of the Islamic Republic were killed.

The significance of this becomes clear when we link the MEK’s core beliefs to the recent terrorist attacks in Tehran. The message which the MEK event gives to observers is that the pattern of attacks by ISIS in Tehran was glorious and righteous and is a legitimate response to a scenario in which Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism. (For the record, neither the MEK nor Saudi Arabia condemned the attacks.)

This scenario – Iran as the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism – has been promoted ad nauseam by the MEK throughout western political circles. The work of national parliaments as well as the European Parliament have been held hostage to this narrative. Normalisation of relations with Iran following the nuclear agreement have been stymied by the MEK. Indeed, MEK bullying and intimidation in pursuit of this agenda was recently discussed in the European Parliament. The MEPs concluded that Europe cannot properly challenge Iran’s human rights situation as long as a group which promotes regime change and abuses the human rights of its own members artificially imposes itself centre stage of these discussions.

The fact is that over the past year the western political landscape has changed dramatically. Two distinct blocs have emerged: a cohort of anti-Iran countries including the US, UK, Israel and Saudi Arabia on one side blindly pursuing regime change against Iran apparently at all costs, and Europe – minus the UK after Brexit – (and incidentally Russia and China) pursuing rapprochement and trade opportunities.

In this context, the spotlight for action must fall on France, home to the MEK headquarters. We must ask the French government ‘these people belong to the regime change bloc, why do you continue renting your land to them after 36 years? What have the Americans or the MEK done for you that is worth the bad reputation attached to supporting this group? What is the cost benefit of having the MEK in your country? What implications does its continued presence have for your foreign policy and trade relations? How can the Republic continue to allow this group to promote violent extremism and terrorism on French soil?’

In the past, of course, it was pointless asking these questions – even though they were asked as permanent unresolved issues. Removing the MEK from France and other European countries was problematic – expelling them to Iraq was impossible because their human rights could not be guaranteed. But in 2016 the Americans facilitated the MEK’s removal from Iraq to safety in Albania. There is no reason to believe that Europe cannot similarly facilitate the safe removal of the MEK leaders from France and other European countries to Albania. The MEK leader Maryam Rajavi has already spent several weeks in Tirana. There is nothing to prevent her setting up a permanent headquarters there with further help from the Americans.

President Emmanuel Macron’s new centrist movement has won a large majority in the French parliament giving him a strong hand to play. He already revealed himself to be a shrewd and masterful challenger in international relations almost before opening his mouth when he out manoeuvred President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in Brussels in May. Perhaps the time is finally ripe for a new appraisal of what zero tolerance means for France. The MEK’s messages promoting violent regime change should no longer be tolerated.

By Massoud.khodabandeh

June 28, 2017 0 comment

Europe

Debate in the European Parliament ‘What is to be done about the Iranian Mojahedin Khalq (MEK)?’

A meeting in the European Parliament on 30 May discussed the problems associated with the Mojahedin Khalq Organisation (MEK) both inside the Parliament and across Europe and the wider world.

The meeting, which was attended by MEPs, researchers and analysts along with representatives of agencies outside the parliament such as security personnel, was organised by Ana Gomes, SND (Portugal) and seconded by Marietje Schaake, ALDE (Netherlands) and Michael Gahler, Christian Democrats (Germany).

All three have a clear record as outspoken critics of Iran’s human rights record and are concerned about the impact of MEK activity on this issue.

Two expert speakers were invited to address the meeting: Nicola Pedde, Director Institute for Global Studies, Italy and Massoud Khodabandeh, Director Middle East Strategy Consultants, UK.

Since all the participants have seen first-hand that the MEK spends enormous amounts of money for publicity and lobbying, the first issue to be discussed was ‘who funds the MEK and what is their agenda?’ It soon became apparent that the MEPs are fully aware that the MEK has never existed as an independent group and has benefitted over three decades from funding streams from specific circles which are trying to engineer regime change in the Middle East. The question then became whether these sponsors understand that the cost benefit of supporting the MEK is not giving positive returns but in fact has a negative result for them in their regime change agendas.

Further discussion by representatives revealed that the MEK has been shunned by almost every Parliament across Europe.

In spite of this, MEK members can still gain access to the European Parliament because it is an open institution. The problem this presents is the bullying tactics used by the MEK to intimidate MEPs and their staff. Several delegates at the meeting gave first-hand evidence of this. One MEP said that within ten minutes of taking one particular stance he was bombarded by mass emails some of which contained swearing and threats. Delegates agreed that this is incompatible with the fundamental principles of any Parliament in which representatives must be able to speak and act free from any pressure or intimidation.

Nicola Pedde described to delegates his work in the Italian Parliament where MPs are persuaded to sign petitions by bogus human rights campaigners. Pedde said that when he asked, many of the signatories were unaware that the MEK was behind the petition and didn’t realise that various sentences or paragraphs were added afterwards to give support for Maryam Rajavi and her agenda. Pedde said some MPs were even strongly against the MEK and were very angry about being deceived in this way. They had thought they were condemning human rights abuses in Iran, but their names were then misused to depict them as supporters of terrorists in Albania.

The discussion moved on to the problem of accepting the MEK as advocates of human rights for Iran. Ana Gomes said that when Iranian Nobel Human Rights Prize winner Shirin Ebadi visited the European Parliament, she was unequivocal in saying that the MEK do not have the right to be described as human rights activists. Quite the opposite, they are abusers themselves, she said. Massoud Khodabandeh reminded delegates that in a recent interview with AP, Reza Pahlavi – who wants to restore the monarchy to Iran – dismissed the MEK as a cult. In addition, every Iranian opposition group from the Greens to the Nationalists has rejected the MEK as human rights advocates and as a political entity.

More concerning for delegates is that the government of Iran is quick to use the MEK’s advocacy for human rights as a means to dismiss the issue, pointing out that the terrorist group murdered thousands of Iranian citizens and still commits human rights abuse against its own members. Massoud Khodabandeh gave an example from the UK House of Lords in which Haleh Afshar – a prominent Iranian feminist and academic who now sits in the House as Baroness Afshar – hosted a parliamentary debate about human rights in Iran. The challenging discussion, with valuable contributions from several informed members, was completely undermined by one of the MEK’s supporters who asserted that only Maryam Rajavi and her group could bring freedom and human rights to Iran. The government of Iran cannot be expected to even respond to such a debate said Khodabandeh.

Nicola Pedde made an interesting comment when he said that the MEK cannot be considered as a viable force because, as a result of its cultish behaviour, the MEK do not have a second generation. They have effectively killed themselves, he told delegates, because marriage and family are banned for all members.

The third issue to be discussed was the MEK presence in Albania. Delegates heard how the MEK had been forced to leave Iraq and how the Americans arranged for the UN to be able to transfer them to Albania. The government of Iraq was relieved to be rid of three thousand MEK who had been part of Saddam Hussein’s repressive forces, but the problem has now simply been moved to Albania. The Americans promised help to de-radicalise the MEK members. But, as Massoud Khodabandeh pointed out, this did not happen and the group was allowed to re-group as a terrorist cult and treat its members as modern slaves.

Delegates discussed Albania’s candidature to join the European Union in light of this situation and agreed that this is not just incompatible but that having trained terrorists on the doorstep of Europe is already a security threat to Europe. Delegates stressed that European security services need to take this threat seriously from now.

Reports also described the human rights abuses inflicted on MEK members by their own leaders. They are living in conditions of modern slavery because the UNHCR is acting illegally by paying refugee allowances to the organisation instead of to the individual members. This means members are forced into dependency on the group and cannot leave. Members are also prevented from contacting their families or even other former members so they do not have any recourse to external help or support.

As the two speakers gave their expert analysis throughout the meeting, they also offered suggestions for solutions. Khodabandeh urged delegates to put pressure on the Albanian authorities and the UNHCR to resolve the hostage condition of MEK members in Albania.

Pedde said MEPs should be briefed about the danger of supporting human rights through using groups like the MEK.

At the end the meeting was also opened to the audience for discussion. Former MEK members, Ali Akbar Rastgou, Batoul Soltani, Reza Sadeghi and Ghorban Ali Hossein Nejad were able to join the discussion at this time.

In conclusion delegates discussed various solutions which are open to them. It was important, they said, to find ways to tackle these problems because parliament cannot be held hostage to bullies. A package of activities was agreed in order to curtail the MEK’s deceptive and intimidating activities in Parliament. Other solutions to the wider problems were also agreed and will be put in place throughout the rest of the year.

June 3, 2017 0 comment

The cult of Rajavi

Albania’s Anti-Trafficking Coordinator Elona Gjebrea praises Maryam Rajavi for keeping modern slaves in Tirana

As democratic elections go, Albania’s upcoming parliamentary elections are as bad as it gets. Protests and turmoil have characterised the leadup to the June election. The official opposition is continuing a three-month boycott of parliament and is threatening to boycott the election itself. The protest is rooted in accusations of corruption and bias in the government of Prime Minister Edi Rama.

Elona Gjebrea at the March 2017 Mojahedin Khalq rally in Tirana, Albania with Maryam Rajavi

Ongoing and apparently unsolvable problems with the narco-trade and drug cartels, arms smuggling and people trafficking, add fuel to the corruption charges. Politicians from all sides appear unable to either successfully expose these crimes or escape accusations of collusion with them.

One example of the complexity of Albania’s difficulties can be found by examining the activities of Albania’s deputy Anti-Trafficking Coordinator, Dr Elona Gjebrea, who is also the Deputy Minister of the Interior. In March 2017, Gjebrea attended a Conference held by the Welsh Government and the UK Crown Prosecution Service which focused on the problem of Albanian slavery victims in the UK. More victims of modern slavery from Albania end up in the UK than from any other country – 17% of all UK cases. The introduction of the Modern Slavery Act in 2015 in the UK has greatly enabled anti-slavery groups and campaigners in confronting this problem.

In Albania, Elona Gjebrea also has close ties to the United States on the issue of people trafficking and slavery. The US embassy in Tirana, Albania acknowledged the State Department’s annual Trafficking in Persons report in June 2016 by saying, “The United States appreciates the close cooperation with the Government of Albania, civil society and especially National Anti-Trafficking Coordinator Elona Gjebrea on our shared goal of combatting the global phenomenon of Human Trafficking.”

In December 2016, the United States allocated an additional $3m funding to support Albania’s “criminal justice system in the fight against organized crime and corruption”. Deputy Interior Minister Gjebrea welcomed the agreement and the resources.

So far, so good. Albania is apparently taking a strong stance against modern slavery and the US backs these efforts. But there is another side to this story. On January 16, 2017 Gjebrea, along with some other Albanian personalities, attended a clandestine music concert in Tirana hosted by the Iranian exile Mojahedin Khalq organisation (MEK) which is now based in Albania. Gjebrea claimed the Albanian people were in “solidarity with the Mojahedin”. Then, in March, she attended the MEK’s New Year rally with 3,000 of its members and leader Maryam Rajavi. She again heaped praise on the MEK and its leader.

Gjebrea’s open support for the group is shocking for several reasons. Not least because the MEK is a highly controversial group with a violent background. The entire MEK was forcefully transferred from Iraq to Albania by the Americans to satisfy Iraqi demands to rid their country of the final remnants of the Saddam Hussein regime. Even up until 2016 the MEK were linked to insurgents like Al Qaida in Iraq and Daesh. America paid several million dollars to Albania’s government and promised help to de-radicalise the terrorists.

This did not happen. Instead of de-radicalisation, the organisational structure which had operated in Iraq for three decades was allowed to continue in Albania. The 3,000 MEK members were consolidated and isolated behind closed doors and shuttered windows in dedicated apartment blocks. This led to speculation about the future of the group. In rallies, such as the one Gjebrea attended, the MEK continues with its promise of regime change in Iran – which in the past the MEK has pursued through violence and terrorism. When John Bolton or Senator John McCain lobby for the MEK it is clear they are following an anti-Iran political agenda. But does Gjebrea share that agenda toward Iran? Does Albania? Politicians from both government and opposition would benefit from a more informed and thoughtful approach if they are not to antagonise Iran as a potential trading partner for their country.

But the really shocking aspect of Gjebrea’s support for the MEK can only be based either in ignorance or as a result of corruption. It is well known that the MEK operates as a mind control cult. It is organised as a totalitarian system headed by an authoritarian leader who demands total unquestioning obedience from every member at every level. The group operates outside legal, moral or cultural norms. One of the defining characteristics of this cultic state – long exposed by expert analysis of the evidence– is that the members are held in a state of modern slavery. They endure forced labour and forced military service. In a sense, they are modern day Gladiators, fighting not for the ancient Romans but for their modern masters, those who pay for the MEK as mercenaries.

Let us remind ourselves that Elona Gjebrea is Albania’s deputy anti-trafficking coordinator. Her role is to prevent slavery and trafficking. How then does she explain her support for modern slavery in Albania itself? When she praises Maryam Rajavi is she sincerely unaware that the cheering, flag waving, applauding audience are actually slaves who have no choice but to obey Rajavi’s dictates? Is she genuinely unaware that MEK members who have worked for decades without pay are still denied their individual UNHCR refugee allowance in Albania because it is paid directly to the MEK leader? Maryam Rajavi is no other than a slave gang-master.

Maryam Rajavi and her flag waving slaves in Tirana, Albania

Gjebrea is only one of several high-profile personalities who have recently succumbed to the persuasive lure of the MEK. But what huge irony that in her role at the Interior Ministry, she has not only failed to ensure that MEK members are de-radicalised and returned to normal life, she has endorsed and encouraged the continuation of their slavery in her own country. When such a shocking situation so openly exists, it is not hard to see why the parliamentary elections are so fraught with anger and disaffection. For a country so beholden to America for help and support, it is a shame better guidance cannot be proffered to get Albania’s democracy back on track.

Massoud Khodabandeh Director at Middle East Strategy Consultants.

Co-authored by Anne Khodabandeh

May 20, 2017 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq Organization as a terrorist group

The Enemy of My Enemy is NOT Always My Friend

They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

I’m starting to think John McCain may fit that definition.

All due respect to the Senator from Arizona, whose military service during Vietnam was both brave and heroic, but it completely escapes me why he continues to support “rebel” organizations who many times end up being just as dangerous as the despotic regimes.

There was a group in Afghanistan led by a fellow named Osama Bin Laden whom we armed during the cold war. There are rebels in Syria to whom we have given arms. These are just two examples of many instances where the strategy of backing the “enemy of my enemy” blew up in our faces.

McCain recently held a meeting with the head of MKO – a rebel faction opposed to the current Iranian regime – where he sang the group’s praises.

While I understand McCain’s dislike and distrust of the Iranian regime and Assad, MKO may not be quite so innocent, either, as they stand accused of thousands of deaths.

In fact, as recently as 2012, MKO was listed as a terrorist organization by both the United States and the European Union. There are many questions about what they may or may not have done, but there is no question about what they want.

“Today, there is a consensus in the Middle East about the clerical regime’s destructive role and that the religious fascism ruling Iran is the primary source of war, terrorism and crisis in the region,” said Maryam Rajavi, MKO’s leader.

“Regime change is not only indispensable to ending the egregious violations of human rights in Iran but also to establishing peace and tranquility in the region. As long as the clerical regime is in power, it will not abandon the export of terrorism and fundamentalism.”

Regime change. Just like Nicaragua. Or Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Libya. Or countless other nations we made unquestionably worse with our involvement.

Of course, McCain is by no means alone in his insanity.

According to Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh, U.S. intelligence has been working with MKO for quite some time. Bin Laden had worked with U.S. intelligence for quite a while as well, when we were fighting the Soviets and saw him and his group as an asset.

If you aren’t sure how that turned out, go ahead and read about what happened on 9/11.

And that’s really the point here: The “enemy of my enemy is my friend” philosophy simply does not work. We have been slapped in the face with this fact over and over again, but like a battered wife who keeps returning to her abusive husband, we keep thinking that next time will be different.

But as we know all too well by now, this always plays out the same in the end. Today’s ally is tomorrow enemy. Today’s freedom fighters are tomorrow’s terrorists. And vice versa.

You would think we would have learned our lesson by now, but apparently, we still haven’t. I don’t know what it is going to take, but through their constant repeating of the same mistake, I’m pretty sure that if the government were a person, they would be wearing a strait jacket at this point.

Dr. Munr Kazmir, Contributor Doctor, businessman, entrepreneur, and philanthropist

April 22, 2017 0 comment

Mujahedin Khalq; A proxy force

Trump’s MEK version of events won’t secure victory against Iran, lets ISIS off the hook

They say actions speak louder than words. Looking behind the Twitter storm which creates a smoke and mirrors effect to disguise the Trump administration’s true intents, one fact is blindingly clear; for this government, Iranians are first in the firing line.

This, of itself, is not unexpected. On the campaign trail Trump threatened to tear up the nuclear deal with Iran. So it was already clear he’s no fan of Iranians.

His first act as president has been to issue a direct and belligerent challenge to Iran – he included Iran in the Muslim ban and then declared that Iran is “on notice” after Iran test-fired a ballistic missile which it says is defensive. Iran is clearly in the crosshairs for Trump and his team.

And the evidence stacks up. As a barometer for any individual or even government’s aggressive approach to Iran, support for the Mojahedin Khalq (MEK aka Rajavi cult) is as accurate an indicator as any. The group has advocated violent regime change against Iran for three decades. Its supporters are in doubt that this is a rallying cry for a US-led war.

Even before taking office, revelations about potential Trump administration advisers and officials giving support to the terrorist MEK cult caused concern among foreign policy experts. After all, anti-Iran pundits can choose from literally thousands of civil groups and personalities to act as advisors and partners in challenging Iran. The MEK’s dirty past includes the anti-Imperialist inspired murder of six Americans in pre-revolution Iran which it later celebrated in songs and publications. (The family of U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Jack Turner – “We were the first victims of terror before there was ever a war on terror” – is currently seeking redress for his death.) The new president has apparently brushed aside such concerns and has chosen to surround himself with people who have advocated for the MEK.

Col. Jack Turner and Col. Paul Shaffer victims of Mojahedin Khalq terror campaign

By not denouncing the MEK Trump has done several things. One is to signal that he is at war not with Iran but with Iranians. The MEK is hated more profoundly than any of Iran’s current political leaders by Iranians inside and outside the country.

He also signals that his war is not with ISIS but with the country Iran. Donald Trump rose to victory in part on the promise to take on ISIS and defeat the group. Yet ISIS cannot be defeated except by a coalition of forces that includes Iran. The facts on the ground in Syria and Iraq demonstrate unequivocally that ISIS forces in Aleppo and Mosul have been defeated largely due to the involvement of Iran. Trump clearly has no intention of defeating terrorism.

But most importantly, this tolerance, even warmth, shown toward the MEK in American foreign policy circles is a message that can be read from afar and by everyone else in the world: the American war box is virtually empty. Aside from a handful of puny sanctions, bringing the MEK into the equation means that not only does the America not have a stick to wave at Iran, it appears foolish enough, befuddled by ideological zeal perhaps, to tie its fate to the most unlucky and doom-laden group there ever was.

Laughably, parasitically, the MEK has consistently tied its fate to whichever it assumed was the winning side. However, the choice of MEK sponsors no longer looks so astute. Ayatollah Khomeini quickly saw through the MEK’s smarmy overtures to share power and promptly exiled them from Iran. The next step was to ally with Saddam Hussein against Iran during the Iran-Iraq war – a feat of spectacular treachery for which no Iranian will ever forgive them. After Saddam’s fall the MEK believed that the chaos in Iraq which gave rise to the insurrection of Al Qaida in Iraq would somehow carry them forward. The MEK even flirted with support for ISIS and the Syrian Free Army hoping they would find a home in the new Caliphate. Instead, the MEK were evicted from their base and sent into deeper exile in Albania, a country with no axe to grind against Iran. Long term sponsors have included Israel – which tasked MEK operatives with the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists – and the anti-Shia Saudi Arabia. Both countries are bogged down with interminable troubles of their own. And now the MEK are hoping to cosy up with the Trump administration.

The Obama administration kept the MEK at arms’ length and never entertained direct support for the group. When the government of Iraq held the US, along with the UN, responsible for removing the MEK from Iraq to a third country, the then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was forced to agree to remove the MEK from the US terrorism list before any third country would legally be able to accept them on their territory.

Since 2001 Trump’s predecessors have built up strong homeland defences and led counter-terrorism efforts particularly against the threat of ISIS to the US and Europe. It is now likely that this legacy will be squandered by an administration with an overriding hatred of Iran. Instead of understanding the benefit of developing strategic partnerships with countries like Iran and Iraq in the global fight against terrorism, the Trump administration would rather rain down terror on the Iranian people.

But the biggest delusion would be to believe that the MEK could be a reliable or effective partner in any sense. If Donald Trump has any insight into his own modus operandi – the erratic demands and refusal to take criticism – he will have a direct view of how the MEK operates. Aligning America’s foreign policy with the whims of a mind control cult will not secure victory over Iran. Instead, it will diminish America’s standing in the world, and it will certainly not make the world a better or safer place.

Massoud Khodabandeh , Director at Middle East Strategy Consultants.

February 7, 2017 0 comment

Newer Posts

Older Posts