Dear Prime Minister,
The ruling of the UK court of appeal on May 7 indicates that the government has failed to win an appeal against a previous court ruling to keep the terrorist MKO on its proscribed list. However, the ruling has led to an increased tension that may face your country with new challenges. Although your government has insisted that it will ensure that public safety is not endangered by de-proscription of the terrorist MKO, and as the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith reiterated "We will ensure that the safety of the public is not in any way jeopardised by this and tighten legislation if necessary”, it might imply that the government and the judiciary system walk on opposite lines.
We come to understand that you are well aware of the four past decades’ notorious activities of MKO and its future terrorist potentialities when we hear the Home Secretary saying the group has "a long history of terrorism and this is why it was proscribed both in the UK and by other countries around the world”. For sure, such a perception is based on confidential intelligences that for security reasons the public opinion has to be uninformed but are raison d’être for keeping MKO on the list.
In contrast, the court relies only on some partial evidences of the past four years for its judgment. MKO cessation of militarism and terrorism claimed by the group and to which the court refers as an evidence has never been the result of a deliberate choice but forced on it following the coalition forces attack to Iraq as part of fulfilling a mission of uprooting terrorism. There are clear evidences to show that MKO military activities continued right up to the allied invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Even right now they are openly promoting terrorism and threatening their critics in the EU and US.
How is that a globally blacklisted terrorist group decides overnight to abandon all military action and instead to use political will as a means of bringing about freedom and democracy to Iranian people while majority of its fighters are still active in a military camp, many of them held against their will. Furthermore, have you ever received any officially issued statement concerning MKO’s forswearing terrorism?
It is an undeniable fact that MKO remains a terrorist group and will retain its terrorist potentialities even if removed from all countries’ lists. It might only question credibility of claims to combat terrorist threats. MKO’s resort to militarism is not the outcome of a once deliberate decision to abandon it deliberately but innate in its early ideology and methodology of struggle. As once openly asserted by Mehdi Abrishamchi, Maryam Rajavi’s first husband, military infrastructure of the organization stems from its ideology; “We are not the ones to decide the necessity of an organized or aggressive struggle; we are not the ones to decide where to an organized or unorganized struggle leads us. It is not our mentality to decide the necessity of an armed struggle”.
At the time when the terrorist cult of Mojahedin has to be prosecuted for countless instances of terrorist operations against Iranian and Iraqi people, we are shocked to see it is nearly acquitted of its crimes and orders to unleash it of its controlling tag, and somehow, apologized for the injustice done against it by its proscription! It won’t be out of the blue to picture MKO and Maryam Rajavi in particular insisting on an official apology from the UK government, Ministry of Justice and even Her Majesty’s Court.
There are some speculations for the reasons behind the court’s ruling; political reasons, ties of some kind and lack of knowledge about the group’s terrorist nature. No doubt, the escalated tension between Iran and the West plays a role to keep MKO on the scene for instrumental use against Iran. That is the case with a number of the US politicians causing challenges among the country’s administration. It is also the same with some British MPs. It has to be studied to what extent such condemned relations can influence and benefit a country’s national interests and solve internal as well as global problems if the politicians feel a responsibility to have a share.
The stigma of conducting ties with proscribed terrorists is too bad for the advocates of a nation. For any political or maybe personal reasons, ties with the individuals and entities that threaten people’s security is a blameworthy act.
It has to be also pointed out that MKO manipulate sophisticated techniques to establish close friendly ties with politicians who are in dark about the true nature of the organization and fail to have access to accurate evidences on the group’s past history. It is mostly because MKO’s history is a mess of complexity and hardly any outsider can become acquainted with the complexities of its history. Presented evidences on the group’s history in the three past court rulings are good examples to notice.
MKO only believe in a black and white world and whoever walks in the former side is the foe and has to be confronted. If the supposed foe is too powerful to confront, the language of profanity and threat will substitute. MKO’s blasphemous and threatening tone in reaction to the EU Council of Ministers’ decision and other international and humanitarian organizations that disclosed truths on violent nature of the group portend heavy costs that the European states have to sustain. Your country, as a member of European Union, can well prevent unexpected violent moves by MKO agents if well ordered countermeasures are taken and the members are put under close surveillance. Any remiss in close monitoring and investigating of MKO’s activities results in irreparable damages that make statesmen confront great challenges regardless of the heavy price that will be imposed on Western citizens.
Long known as a globally blacklisted terrorist group, MKO is transformed into a destructive cult and a cult of personality as proscribed by the US state Department report in May 2007. In many cases, MKO is referred to as second to al-Qaeda for its globally threatening features and, in spite of being expelled from Iraq, majority of Western countries’ security apparatus are cautious about penetration of its members since they know they would have a hard task to deal with the organization. And your country is not an exception.
The killing of a Brazilian man by armed plainclothes Metropolitan police who shot him as a preventive measure to guarantee the national security is a plain evidence that you are concerned about further possible violent, terrorist operations. It has to be taken into consideration that MKO is a bigger threat since it has merged terrorism with cultism, the latter being the second modern world’s nightmare along the former. Regardless of any court’s ruling, security systems have to be necessarily more watchful of the organization since it will be too late to deal with it after it has struck. A look at Iranian’s contemporary history depicting countless instances of MKO atrocities will be sufficient to remove any subsisting doubts.
Mojahedin.ws – May 17, 2008