Home » Articles » Page 326

Articles

The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

The US Achilles’ heel in War on Terrorism

The analyses concerning the US-Iran upcoming negotiations in Iraq in an attempt to find solutions to stabilize the country unanimously conclude that expulsion of Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) from Iraq and a demand to stop the US’s protection of the group will be on the table. The idea conjures at a time when Americans insist to accuse Iran of advocating Iraqi insurgents and escalating disorder in Iraq and believe that a total uproot of terrorism is the decisive solution to end disorder in Iraq. Regardless of Iranians’ rejecting of giving any aid to insurgents, to be optimistic, a decisive decision about MKO in itself helps to restore peace and order to Iraq.

Indeed, the US has to shift its paradoxically dual position in dealing with MKO which has nothing to do with the two sides’ supposed interests. If the US has concluded that Iraq’s problems can partly be solved on condition the terrorism is uprooted, then, before anything, what Americans can best do is to take a clear position in dealing with a terrorist group that occupies a long-existing position on the State Department’s terror list as well as other European countries.

The US protection of MKO at the present implies that the US follows a double-standard policy in confronting terrorism. It is hard to believe that MKO are encompassed within Camp Ashraf and play ineffective role in Iraqi domestic tensions. Although the group’s stay in Iraq is tried to be justified according to international conventions, its approach in position takings against the Iraqi government and provoking the dissident insurgents are in no way a permitted right. The US has to assert that MKO, besides other pressing insurgents, take the best advantage of the persisting disorder in Iraq. Advertising to be political refugees, MKO‘s nearly two-decade past history of residence in Iraq and its close collaboration with Saddam and Ba’ath Party well indicate that it is not a legal demand incorporated in the framework of international conventions.

Nonobservance to drag MKO’s activities in Iraq into the process, including collaboration to suppress insurgencies against Saddam, has emboldened the group to demand rights even far beyond the political asylum. Even more, the US control and protection has further granted MKO a dear opportunity to impede restoration of order to Iraq and to undermine establishment of collective confidence in any negotiation. It does not necessarily mean that MKO is of any weight to influence the regional relations, but indeed it is the US Achilles’ heel in its declared war on terrorism, that is to say, MKO in Iraq symbolize the protected terrorism.

Surrounded by much ambiguous an atmosphere as how to deal with the issue of MKO, the upcoming talks between the US-Iran will decisively resolve a comprehensive agreement on war against terrorism in Iraq specifically and in the region in general. Supposing that Iran never touches the issue of MKO in its talks, no doubt, any decision concerning restoration of tranquility and peace in Iraq will inevitably decides the presence of MKO in Iraq.

May 26, 2004

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The Ideology of the MEK

The Ideological Revolution, the Mojahedin Cult’s Devised System of Values

 It has long been asserted that Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) has restructured the status of a cult. Interestingly, in contrast to terrorist allegations that it attempts to deny, MKO prefers to take no position against or for the cult allegations. In many cases, as it were a mission to accomplish, the paid critics try to challenge the allegations arguing that the term “cult” is a product of split in religions which has nothing to do with political groups. However, a review of admissions by the ex-members concerning the ideological revolution inside MKO reveals that the group can closely be identified with other existing cults, all of whom share the same features that classify them as cults.

At the present, the world is concerned about the threat of the destructive cults and many concerned organizations and bodies have initiated a campaign to reveal the menace and threats of cults and develop a public awareness. No doubt, not only the religious sects but also other active social and political groups and factions take advantage of cult-molds to convince their insiders to move on the path they lead them on. The features are the same; the difference lies in the aims and the attractively drawn perspectives. Recent researches reveal that although partisans of a certain political group strongly reject to be referred to as subjects of a cult, they are indeed involved in cult practices and activities.

In MKO, similar to other cults, the partisans are under the influence that only those who adhere to the group’s ideology are on the right path. But to accept the cult’s proposed ideology, the insiders’ old system of beliefs has to be fragmented to be replaced with the revolutionary one. It is the prerequisite for the total obedience of the leader. Dennis Tourish expounding on the issue states that:

Cults exercise an extraordinary influence over the lives of their followers. Cherished belief systems are scrapped. Many cult leaders espouse high-sounding ideals. For all that, their primary goal is obedience. A toxic internal atmosphere is created, in which dissent fights a losing battle against conformity. [1]

Thus, the cherished belief systems have to be scrapped first. The annihilation of the insiders’ accepted system of values happens through a sudden shock. Consequently, the minds of the insiders stop any resistance and lose their power of defense and they are prepared to be indoctrinated by subversive cult ideologies. Bijan Niyabati, a member of MKO’s National Council of Resistance, defines MKO’s internal ideological revolution as a new cherished system of values that replace those long publicly idolized in the world outside through a shock:

A successive interpolation of new elements of value into the old system of values is possible only through upsetting the equilibrium of old value system that occurs only by the means of a sudden shock. [2]

The process, he believes, is accomplished through either assuming a political power or an organizational hegemony.

However, although to disrupt the predominant value equilibrium in an individual in order to be substituted by new value equilibrium proves not to be unmanageable, it is a long, hard task to be accomplished either through assuming an authoritative political power (as well as controlling economy and the media) or a stricken shock. To disrupt the subsisting equilibrium and to prepare an individual to be reconciled with the new milieu, it is evident that only a shock and nothing else can possibly be productive. [3]

MKO’s internal ideological revolution proposes a new, totalistic vision of values that completely challenges the long-lasting, dominant religious and cultural values. Although MKO believes that the ideological revolution has to be first interiorized before being externalized, the leaders are well aware that it is no more than another cause to embrace so as to justify their acts of indecency.

MKO’s ideological revolution would never be passed onto the world outside because it is purely an ideological dogma dominating the Mojahedin cult to have total control over the insiders. That is natural not to face MKO’s protesting against the accusations of being a cult, since in this new, sacred system of value, the organization is held together by charismatic relationships that demands total commitment to the Rajavis at the top.

 

Notes:

 

[1]. Dennis Tourish & Tim Wohlforth: On the edge; political cults right and left, 16.

[2]. Niyabati, Bijan: A different look at Mojahedin’s internal revolution, 35.

[3]. Ibid, 26.

 

Mojahedin.ws – May 21, 2007

 

 

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Iran

Hardliners, hard options

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei sanctioned the meeting set for May 28 between Iran and the United States in Baghdad over the security of Iraq "to relieve the pain of the Iraqi people, to support the government and to reinforce security in Iraq".

The administration of US President George W Bush also cites the reason for the meeting as exclusively about security in Iraq. White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe told reporters, "The president authorized this channel because we must take every step possible to stabilize Iraq and reduce the risk to our troops even as our military continues to act against hostile Iranian-backed activity in Iraq."

The emphasis from both sides that Iraq and only Iraq will be discussed is evidence of their deep mutual mistrust and enmity. Keeping each other at arm’s length, each side is skirting carefully around the elephant in the room, that is, the deeply divisive issues that have poisoned Iran-US relations for nearly three decades. Clearly neither side would have agreed to meet unless forced by necessity. But has that necessity forced the beginning of a new phase in relations, or should we accept that the talks will start and end with Iraq?

So intractable are the divisions that many are already predicting devastating fallout just from the talks on Iraq. This is because President Mahmud Ahmadinejad flaunts Iran’s support for Hezbollah and Hamas in the face of US fury; the United States is accused by Iran of providing support for seedy terrorist groups – Jondolah in the south of Iran, Pejak in Kurdistan and the Mujahideen Khalq Organization (MKO), which the US protects in the unlikely circumstances of Iraq.

"The talks may backfire if Iraq’s Sunnis and the region’s Arab states perceive that the US is conceding Iraq to Iran’s sphere of influence," said Mustafa al-Ani of the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center. "It’s going to be civil war, and not just an Iraqi civil war – a regional civil war."

The show of teeth and claws just before the start of serious dialogue may seem surprising but it is arguable that this is what has made the meeting possible at all.

Democracy – especially in the Middle East – does not come about through democrats lecturing the antagonistic heads of state and other parties. The histories of such countries as Sudan, Algeria and Turkey show that while democrats are the ones who advocate "dialogue, negotiation and treaties", it is only when the most extremely opposed forces sit down to talk that true negotiations toward disengagement can be achieved. India and Pakistan and Northern Ireland are examples of such political disengagement through – albeit protracted – dialogue.

In these cases, democracy is born painfully from desperation in which every other alternative has been tried by both sides and has failed. Such failure inevitably wakes up the warring parties to the conclusion that the slogan "winner takes all" can also be interpreted as "all or nothing", and that if they are not the winner they will get nothing. Even worse, both sides – in this case the hardliners in Iran and the neo-conservatives in the US – may conclude that because of external factors – in this case Iraq – both sides will lose everything and there will be no winner.

To avoid losing everything, both sides have no alternative but to reach out to the other from the precipice of looming disaster in a bid to find a compromise solution: a summit, an agreement, a deal, or even a preliminary ceasefire – anything to stop the collapse of both sides.

Neither Iran nor the United States can be considered to have had a change of heart. But having tried and failed for 30 years, every other possible scenario and theory except to recognize each other and engage in dialogue, both sides have been forced to give negotiation and dialogue a limited chance. Both sides want this to be as limited as possible and finish as soon as possible. Both sides perhaps see in it a short-term opportunity to save their rapidly sinking ships and buy time to prepare for a new game of "winner takes all".

Curiously, so open is the antagonism on both sides that many question whether there is a deliberate effort to gift the other side with political ammunition.

In Iran, a recent crackdown on journalists, female activists and students as well as the imposition of political hardliners into society under the pretext of a "dress code for women" are being openly legitimized by the fact that the US Congress has approved a further US$75 million for America’s "democracy fund". This is to be spent on "supporting civil society, democracy and human rights in Iran" with new offices in London, Frankfurt and Dubai.

Emadaldin Baghi, human-rights activist and winner of the Civil Courage Prize in 2004, wrote last week to human-rights organizations from inside Iran complaining about the US budget. He pointed out, "The allocation of yearly funds has led to the Iranian government’s widespread concern and suspicion towards civil-society organizations and human-rights activists, clearly exacerbating in a significant way pressures on them and the number of arrests."

Similarly, US constraints imposed on Iranian financial institutions and trade recently could not have been possible if the Iranian regime had not openly threatened the West, at least verbally, at every opportunity possible.

But for Iranian opposition groups, particularly those inside Iran, history has arrived at a crossroads. For 30 years the platform for "peace and dialogue" has been in the hands of reformists – or moderates – inside Iran and exiled opposition groups. In this they have been supported by Western liberals, human-rights organizations and anti-war campaigners, who have in turn vigorously argued against the use of confrontation, sanctions and military solutions.

However, certainly as far as Iran is concerned, the reformists of the Mohammad Khatami era faced stiff resistance from hardliners and would no doubt have reached total deadlock had they chosen to push any harder to begin direct dialogue between Iran and the US. Instead, it has been necessary for the most ideologically antagonistic elements of both the Iranian regime and the US administration to sit down at the table and negotiate. In this way, perhaps it is only under the "fanatic" leadership of Ahmadinejad that such talks could have come about. After all, what is the point of negotiation if the parties who agree with each other are present without the presence of the hostile parties?

Whether next week’s meeting will lead to future rapprochement remains to be seen but the steps that are being taken both by Iran and the US are certainly irreversible, and the impact on the variety of opposition groups and factions inside and outside Iran will be as profound as it is inevitable.

At such turning points it is most likely to be the advocates of democracy themselves who are absent from the negotiating table. And in many examples once a thaw in relations begins, an ensuing crackdown on the democrats creates the focus for a joint initiative by both the parties now accepting to give and take.

A wave of political change can easily sweep aside the very same people who have been struggling for years for democracy, freedom and peace. They can find themselves in denial. The phrase "a snake will never give birth to a dove" is too comforting and familiar for them. Losing their slogans to the antagonistic heads meeting around the negotiation table can push them to staunchly resist the change that is now unfolding before their eyes but without their participation.

The liberal press and moderate voices in both countries that predict failure simply because of the internecine nature of the enmity also read as an expression of alarm. Iranian website Roozonline reported on May 17, "Some students demonstrated against the meeting in various cities claiming that while the US has ratified a budget for interference in Iran, the two sides should not have meetings."

As the gap between Iran and the US closes, Iranian opposition groups will feel the pinch more than anyone else. While opposition groups that have support from among the Iranian people have nothing to fear from this rapprochement, those that have lost their contact with the people and have relied totally on exploiting the West’s grievances with Iran are clearly going to face a seriously uphill battle.

The MKO, which lost popular support by working under the Saddam Hussein regime during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, has tried to tuck itself under the protective umbrella of US neo-conservatives since the fall of Saddam, but is already facing the possibility of being "spent" as a bargaining chip over Iraq.

In the latest review of the list of terrorist organizations, the US State Department upgraded the MKO to a "terrorist cult". The MKO’s representative in Iraq, Abbass Darvari, condemned the talks.

In contrast, Iranian lawyer and human-rights activist Shirin Ebadi – winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2003 – has maintained links with the Iranian people under extreme conditions inside Iran. She told the Washington Post that she "personally welcomes the talks".

"These negotiations must not be limited to foreign ministers of the two countries or even the presidents," she said. "The key point is the need for exchange between civil society in Iran and the United States."

Ebadi is capable of playing the regime on its own field.

——–

Massoud Khodabandeh is a former member of the Mujahideen-e Khalq, and mainly served in the organization’s intelligence/security department. Khodabandeh left the Mujahideen in 1996 and currently lives in the north of England, where he works as a security consultant. He has been active in Iranian opposition politics for more than 25 years. He works closely with the Centre de Recherche sur la Terrorisme in Paris as an expert on Iran

By Massoud Khodabandeh, Asia Times, May 21, 2007

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IE22Ak02.html

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Desperation Prevails in Rajavi’s Cult

According to incoming reports, the gang of Rajavi and its leaders in Paris are facing a new major challenge.

The fact is that the stupid remnants of Rajavi had promised their desperate members, tired of relying on foreign powers, that they "would push the US to clash Iran in Iraq" and that "a new resolution would be passed against Iran" that will worsen Iran’s situation in the international scene.

However, since the previous resolutions have proved to be futile and with Iran-US’s scheduled talks, desperate members in political section of the group have cautioned that measures of Rajavi cult are useless. They are no more obeying, which is essential for the cult to control its members.

This wave started first among sympathizers and supporters of MKO in France and UK after Maliki’s government was elected in Iraq despite all MKO propaganda.

At that time, remnants of Rajavi promised their members that American’s wouldn’t allow Shiites to come to power but this, and all other, promises of the group came up to be false.

Following this, Mehdi Abrishamchi was appointed to control members in political section but his harsh behavior has worsened the situation.

However, in lower levels, they’re still promising the members that a new resolution on Thursday would be a blow for Iran; this has enraged disappointed members.

The atmosphere of desperation and disappointment prevails in Camp Ashraf and even commanders despite all slogans by MKO leaders.

In this situation, along with the efforts of Rajavi’s gang to survive, all the energy of the group has been allocated to this recent crisis and it has been ordered (by Rajavi) that it shouldn’t get to the media; commander in Camp Ashraf have been tasked with ending the process of defections.

Irandidban, May 22, 2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

MKO Admits Iran’s Nuclear Achievements

After Iran announced that it had achieved industrial level of uranium enrichment despite all pressures and sanctions, elements of Rajavi’s gang tried to deny the facts and they suddenly stopped their so-called revelations on Iran’s nuclear program.

At that time, Irandidban said that the MKO has been stripped of its ability to maneuver on Iran’s nuclear program and that they have become silent fearing that Iranian nuclear project may be taken into account seriously.

It seems that MKO leaders have forgotten their previous gestures (denying Iran’s advances) and believe that they should exaggerate Iran’s achievements to get to their goals.

MKO, which earlier denied Iran’s ability to have even the nuclear technology, has been forced now to admit the realities they don’t like.

MKO leaders have always been criticized for mixing their so-called political analyses with their dreams and feeding them to their restricted forces.

This is an undeniable characteristic of MKO leaders, and Rajavi himself in particular, but this is not the whole deviation by the gang of Rajavi. The fact is that he is a liar who deals with realities with censorship and sarcasm.

That is why the MKO has lagged behind in political issues.

Denying the facts of Iran’s advances and its political, social and scientific achievements is part of this illness, which results in censorship and restricting the members in Camp Ashraf.

Irandidban – 2007/05/19

 

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Terrorist groups and the MEK

More Evidence on Rajavi cult – Qaeda Ties

The terrorist organization of Mojahedin-e Khalq, with long history of denying its own acts and plots, responded to the comments and revelations of Mr. Hadi Farhan Abdullah al-Aameri, the head of Iraqi Parliament’s Security Commission, by projection and denying the facts; Mr. Aameri had revealed MKO’s ties with Al-Qaeda.

He had stressed that the MKO was involved in violent acts in Dyalah province.

However, the gang of Rajavi, failed to benefit from such acts, claimed that American Generals can testify that MKO has nothing to do with this.

Meanwhile, additional intelligence have been reported, including those broadcast by Kurdistan TV, which quoted Al-Sharq alawsat:

“Mountains of Hamrin have turned to safe haven and training base for armed terrorists of Al-Qaeda. Following the security plan in Baghdad and mobilization of tribes in Anbar province to push out Al-Qaeda militants, members of this terrorist organization left the place to Hamrin Mountains. Armed members of Al-Qaeda have established 7 bases in Hamrin to train new terrorists.”

What can be clearly seen of MKO’s involvement in this issue is that Hamrin was for long time a place for MKO’s terrorist training and practices; now they coordinate with Al-Qaeda by establishing terrorist bases.

Such relations with Al-Qaeda justify in part the philosophy of abducting and killing of two MKO members by the Gestapo of this group; they abducted and killed two of their own members in order to take position against those who may accuse the group of terrorism!

The Gestapo of Ashraf has already accused tens of Iraqi officials and figures of being involved in abducting the two members and Mr. Aameri is the last one to be accused after he revealed MKO’s ties with Al-Qaeda.

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
France

MKO’s Days in France Might Be Counted

Taking a clear political stand in support of Ségolène Royal, MKO looked with dismay a resounding win by Right Wing UMP candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. It does not necessarily mean that Ms. Royal intended to sacrifice the people’s interests and political concerns to meet the demands of a proscribed group long leeching onto France.

Of the diplomatic controversies that have clouded French-Iranian relations, which Nicolas Sarkozy has on his political agenda to improve, was the issue of MKO. Darius Kadivar, a freelance journalist, in an article released in persianmirror makes a short reference to the issue and is of the opinion that the days of MKO in France may well be counted with Sarkozy who is anti-communist.

Another issue of controversy between Iran and France has been the Armed Opposition Organization of the Peoples Mujahedin Khalge known as the MKO which is labeled as a terrorist organization by the EU and the US. The Para Military organization founded by Massoud Rajavi and led by its self elected wife Maryam Rajavi combines Marxist and Islamist ideologies and has made headlines for the spectacular fanatical actions of its members such as self immolation to protest against the arrests of its leaders. It claims to have given up military actions against the Islamic Regime and seeks respectability amongst European deputies and personalities such as Bernard Lavillier, and controversial excommunicated Bishop Jacques Gaillot. It has however found amongst its staunchest ally the former First Lady Danielle Mitterand, who has often been at odds with her own husband the late French President François Mitterand who favored political ties with Iran whilst selling Arms to both Iran and Iraq during their 8 year war. The days of this organization in France may well be counted with Sarkozy who is anti-communist, with pro-American sympathies and claims to combat terrorism and support Human Rights.

19/05/2007 –  Mojahedin.ws

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
USA

The US and a Decision to Show Good-Will

According to released reports approved by officials from the two nations, the U.S. and Iran will hold rare meetings within the next few weeks in Baghdad to discuss the dominant disorder and insurgency in Iraq, "The purpose is to try to make sure that the Iranians play a productive role in Iraq," said Gordon Johndroe, a National Security Council spokesman. "This is not about the United States and Iran. This is about Iraq."

But there is a big question mark here. Among the many questions imposed by Iranian side concerning Iraq would be the US forces’ supporting of a terrorist group blacklisted by its own State Department. If the both countries are indeed concerned about the troubled situation in Iraq, first they should deal with the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq or the Mojahedin cult that has long threatened the security of certain Iraqi regions.

The Iranian side might at least require the US officials to respect the facts they have released on MKO in the State Department’s 30 April report on the designated terrorist organizations. It is a good opportunity for the US to show its good-will and that the actions speak louder than the words.

14/05/2007

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
The MEK Expulsion from Iraq

Mojahedin-e Khalq Must Be Expelled

Iraq’s Sunni Accord Front and Mojahedin-e Khalq organization have many things in common. They’re both acting against the interests of their people and their countries. They’re both connected to foreigners in a way or other. Both of them pursue programs that will lead to the destruction of their countries and the deaths of their people. However, what puts them next to each other is”hypocricy”.

If we heard earlier that Iranians call Mojahedin”hypocrites”, we would be surprised; but now that we see Accord Front in Iraq and witness its propagandistic and political activities, we understand why they’re this much similar. Coordination between two hypocrite groups (Iranian MKO and Iraqi Accord Front) is natural and indeed one can say that such relationship should exist between them because they have same principles and same targets.

Comments and criticisms by the MKO are not new. A remnant of the former Iraqi regime, MKO is being subjected to expulsion from Iraq and that’s why it has started criticizing. We ask the government to arrest the criminals of this organization who were involved in killing Iraqi people when Saddam Hussein was in power. They still support Arab murderers and terrorists and even some of them take a direct part in terrorist operations against Iraqi people.

…

Ties and relations between Accord Front and MKO and their visit to Belgium underline the fact that these two groups should leave Iraq since they’re motivating sectarian feelings among Iraqis. 

MKO has a lobby in Europe and so it could find a ground for spreading negative views in Europe and continuing its activities there. …

Zahir Shantaf/Sotaliraq 

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Mujahedin Khalq 's Function

Planned MKO violence linked to damning US Terror Report

A series of irreversible setbacks in recent months has apparently sealed the fate of the Mojahedin-e Khalq’s (MKO, aka Rajavi cult) in political circles.

On December 12, 2006 Judgement of the Court of First Instance of the European Court of Justice in case T-228/02 was announced. By pouring money into top legal teams, the MKO had been convinced of a favourable outcome. But British Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett clarified the European position; new legislation has ensured that all the MKO’s assets remained frozen and its proscription as a terrorist entity remained unchanged. The Court did, however, rule that the EC give the reasons for its proscription to the MKO.

The MKO reaction to this setback was to pretend it wasn’t true and to disseminate its own version of the Court ruling. Rajavi sent two MEPs to Camp Ashraf in Iraq to celebrate with the captive combatants ‘the removal of the MKO from the terrorist list’. Rajavi told his followers they would soon be re-armed to resume training in earnest to pursue their twenty-five year quest to overthrow the Iranian regime in its entirety through the National Liberation Army (the front name used for Mojahedin military activity).

The MKO also had its members in Europe, North America and Australia set up any publicity stunt possible, from pickets to petitions to say the Court must abide by its own ruling and remove the MKO from the EU terrorist list – as though the Court was defying the law which itself had just ruled upon.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1619

The European judgement was rapidly followed by an equally damning US Supreme Court ruling on MKO fundraising. Then the Iraqi government announced its determination to close (actually to reclaim as Iraqi territory) Camp Ashraf, and have the foreign terrorist MKO expelled from the country.

Links:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=1498

At the end of April 2007, the US State Department published its review of terrorist entities. The report marks the MKO out as a dangerous cult with operatives, trained by the former Iraqi regime in bomb making and weapons use, still at-large.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2309

Now, the final nail in the MKO’s political coffin has surely been the election of Nicolas Sarkozy as France’s President. France is home to the MKO’s western HQ and residence of co-leader Maryam Rajavi. As Interior Minister in 2003, Sarkozy gave the go-ahead to Judge Brugiere to raid the MKO headquarters in Auvers-sur-Oise during which 160 members were arrested and evidence of planning and financing terrorist activity uncovered. Evidence which is referenced by the State Department report.

Link:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/index.php?mod=view&id=2092

Identified as both a terrorist organisation and as a cult, how are the Rajavis responding to this series of devastating setbacks? Can the group stage a comeback?

The MKO has already closed some websites, stopped live discussion on their TV and refuse to give any reaction to the US report. However, if we take the MKO’s reaction to the EU Court ruling as typical, it is certain we have not heard the last from them. We also know from the reaction to Maryam Rajavi’s arrest in 2003 when she ordered self-immolations to force the French judiciary to release her on bail, that this group will not go quietly.

Significantly, the MKO’s own analysis places blame for the group’s difficulties on its critics. Of these critics, the most troublesome have been ex-members of the organisation who have been outspoken in their exposure of the organisation’s cult activity and its close ties with the Saddam Hussein regime. With ex-members constantly giving the lie to the Mojahedin’s seductive claims to democracy, feminism and popular regime change, it is not surprising that the MKO leaders see these people as the biggest obstacle to their ambitions.

Massoud Rajavi’s plan fourteen years ago was for his wife – whom he nominated president elect – to carry this seductive message to western politicians and media and for her to find western sponsors to allow him to continue the quest he began under the patronage of Saddam Hussein – to somehow engineer the violent overthrow the Iranian regime and to install the Rajavi regime in its place.

It would be easy to assume from this that Rajavi’s efforts to keep Camp Ashraf intact is based on its military capacity. However, with the continuation of the FTO label, if Rajavi agreed to the removal of the Camp and its members, this would allow him to forge ahead with the claim that the MKO has renounced violence. But the Camp has much greater significance to the Rajavis as their ideological training ground. The camp provides the conditions of isolation and de facto imprisonment which are necessary to the imposition of cult mind control and psychological coercion on the members. Without these conditions, members would be free to have contact with their families, and to make value judgements using external points of reference which would certainly result in mass exodus from the organisation.

Rajavi will keep his people in Camp Ashraf at any price. He has employed people to lobby the Defence Ministries of European countries on his behalf. In the UK a minor academic, who has a track record of support for the Rajavis, has been tasked to make overtures to the Ministry of Defence in order to create a bridge for senior MKO members to pressure the department (the threat of mass suicide in Camp Ashraf is just one of those ‘pressures’). The only purpose for such contact would be to beg for the preservation of Camp Ashraf or provision of a similar discreet base in a third country, possibly Jordan.

While this is ongoing, the situation in Rajavi’s western bases is hardly less desperate. With Sarkozy’s election, Maryam Rajavi’s trial on terrorism charges will likely go ahead sooner rather than later. The Rajavis will need diversionary tactics such as the self-immolations staged while she was held in custody in 2003.

To mark the anniversary of her arrest on June 17 the MKO is planning to announce that five million French citizens have signed a petition to have the MKO removed from the terror list. However, this will only work if the ex-members are not able to expose these funny numbers. The aim is to keep them quiet for as long as possible to allow the MKO propaganda machine to work unhindered.

Reliable sources have revealed to Iran-Interlink that the Rajavis have already set in motion a new wave of attacks by Mojahedin cult members, particularly in the UK, aimed to intimidate and silence the ex-members and other critics whom they blame for this situation (the Rajavis never believe their own activities to be at fault). The attacks typically begin with distribution of slanderous colour brochures in the places of residence and work followed by indirect harassment and intimidation. The next step is to send members to physically intimidate the target. Criminal damage and physical harm have been reported previously in several cases, including a Catholic priest who was attacked while coming to the aid of one such ex-member.

The information given to Iran-Interlink ties in with previous attempts by the MKO to undermine the ex-members’ efforts. For years the Rajavis have tried to discredit them with the accusation that they are working for the Iranian Intelligence Ministry. Inside the Mojahedin the ‘crime’ of working for the regime carries with it an automatic death penalty. Whenever this accusation is made the Rajavis are giving tacit permission to MKO members to execute the target.

While this kind of low-level intimidation has become standard for this terrorist group (as with many others), the conditions which it faces now should alert western governments to act quickly to prevent any escalation into violence, even death.

The main consideration with the Mojahedin is that it is a cult. When Maryam Rajavi goes to trial the Mojahedin will, without doubt, respond with a series of orchestrated protests including more self-immolations. But, with their backs now against the wall the Rajavis may have no option but to order more forceful expression to avoid submitting to the course of justice. As a destructive cult, there is no doubt that the MKO will resort to violence in response to outer threat. The MKO will follow the predicted path of all cults and kill its own members as well as killing external threats. This may begin with self-immolations and targeted assassination of its critics. It may even affect a wider circle, including members of the public. Whatever violence ensues, the perpetrators of these acts will be as much the victims of the Rajavis as the targets are.

Iran-Interlink,

PO Box 148

Leeds LS16 5YJ

+44 113 278 0503

http://www.iran-interlink.org

info@iran-interlink.org

Iran Interlink Brief  – Iran Interlink, May 2007

 

0 comment
FacebookTwitterPinterestWhatsappTelegramSkypeEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts