The desire for a military invasion against Iran and destroying the country has turned to a terrible nightmare haunting the MeK all the time. The ongoing crisis in the Middle East particularly in Iran’s neighboring countries
Once using violence on the Iranian streets to topple the Islamic Republic, the MeK is now looking for allies in the region. MeK’s efforts in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen suggests that they are hoping to break the axis of resistance and bring the war to the Iranian frontlines. It shows that the MeK knows no enemy except the Islamic Republic of Iran and their enmity with other states and groups is because of their animosity with Iran. Simply put, they are against the Islamic Republic’s strategy. A strategy which is accepted by the US and European powers. After 3 decades they found out that force is not the solution and thus they sat at the negotiation table.
Using a mixture of stupidity and imagination for analyzing political issues, the MeK leadership resorts to militarism to gain power, or rather, to help release its organization from a deadlock.
Hence, the MeK leadership views the regional developments as in Syria and Yemen not as they really are, but as he wishes them to be. In their calculations, the international players are the winner and Iran will be the loser.
Their foolish understanding is that Iran’s regional power is connected to Assad’s fate. Iran wanted to keep Assad in power 5 years ago when its regional and international enemies intended to topple Assad in less than a month. Having flexed their muscles, they saw fit to negotiate with Iran. The MeK leadership’s assumption that the Islamic Republic consented Assad’s removal (if there is such a consent) again suggests the mixture of stupidity and imagination of their analyzing political issues. That is why they are misrepresenting the regional developments and define them as they wish.
For example, in an article published on the MeK website titled Prospects for Syria and its Loser and Winner an unidentified author asserts:
“addressing a press conference in his recent official visit to Pakistan, Hassan Rouhani said, “negotiations are a basis to achieve a solution and a transitional period in order to determine the future of Syria.” His remarks were so eye catching as the Iranian regime has always been backing Syria’s murderous dictator. As the Syrian opposition and regional countries as well as the western parties emphasized, the transition period means removal of Bashar Assad from power. Thus Hassan Rouhani’s remarks are a step towards going through the motions of the region.”
Finally, the author concludes that, “the confession shows the starting point of an inevitable ending to the Islamic Republic’s strategy.” However, the author censors Rouhani’s remarks during a phone conversation with his Russian counterpart.
President Rouhani reiterated that more cooperation and coordination between Tehran and Moscow contributes to peace and stability in Syria.
He also maintained that ceasefire is necessary to be preserved simultaneously with keeping talks between oppositions.
The Syrian nation is the only authority to decide over the destiny of Syria, highlighted Rouhani in his dialogue with Mr. Putin while insisting upon the principle approaches of the Islamic Republic of Iran toward the crisis in Syria.
During the same dialogue, President Putin of Russia pledged his country’s commitment to peaceful resolution of the Syrian crisis and reiterated that the Russian Federation shares the same approach to the issue.
He also underlined the need for the practice of full control over the Syrian borders to prevent the re-arming of terrorists or dispatch of financial and logistical aid to them,” he added.
The conversation clearly shows that who has provided the Syrian oppositionists with the opportunity of negotiation and what the political future of Syria will be. But the MeK leadership still hopes that the Saudi Arabia gains the victory in the battle.