Following the AIPAC meeting, Senator John Kerry, a Democrat, said that Washington is not in a 'regime change mode'.
"Our efforts must be reciprocated by the other side: Just as we abandon calls for regime change in Tehran and recognize a legitimate Iranian role in the region, Iran's leaders must moderate their behavior and that of their proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas," said Kerry, who currently chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Irrelevant to any position taken, observers are aware that this is a government which has been happy to host the head of Jondolla terrorist group on a "Voice of America" programme in which Jondolla was presented as a democratic alternative to the Iranian government.
This is a government whose CIA is holding regular meetings in Soleimaniyeh to create and develop FTOs to target Iranian people.
This is a government which has established offices in London, Dubai and Frankfurt under the Patriot Act in order to recruit people who travel to Iran to meddle in the internal affairs of the country.
This is a government with a long and continuing history of support for Saddamists in Iraq in the hope that they can be paid to foment and maintain hostilities against Iran.
By far the most blatant example of this is that from 2003 until now the US has desperately tried to keep together what is left of the Mojahedin-e Khalq at Ashraf terrorist camp (the MKO is on the US’s own list of terrorist entities) against the wishes of the Government and people of Iraq and against the human rights of the people inside the camp. The US has shown clear resistance in front of the Government of Iraq and the families of victims of this terrorist cult to the process of dismantling and disbanding it. The US has 25 soldiers stationed at the camp, plus five US citizens inside it. They have prevented families from freely visiting their relatives at the camp, they have interfered in the Iraqi process of dealing with individuals and imposing law and order in the camp and have interfered in the process of human rights organisations getting in and helping people individually.
Once the US stops these activities then it can claim it is not in ‘regime change mode’. If Senator Kerry or Nicholas Burns or any other ‘we have changed now it’s your turn’ pundits in the US have any doubt about the veracity of these activities or if they believe they are not perceived – particularly by Iraqis – as a continuation of ‘regime change policy’, then please feel free to contact me and I can appraise them further to this information.
According to the London based Al Sharq Al Aawsat newspaper, concerning the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, Noori Almaliki the Iraqi prime minister said: we have been participating with the British and coalition forces during these times and the British forces have successfully brought to an end their military mission.
…
Concerning the Mojahedin Khalq presence in Iraq he said: Under no circumstances would their presence in Iraq be acceptable. Irrespective of some speculation that this may be due to pressure from Iranians or non Iranians, I should emphasise clearly that even if Iran asks us to keep them in Iraq, we will not allow this. This is a terrorist organisation present in various lists of terrorist entities across the globe which of course concerns many, including Iran, the United Nations and other countries.
From our point of view, this is an organisation which has committed many crimes against the people of Iraq, being Kurds, Shiites or Sunnis, hand-in-hand with the last regime (Saddam Hussein) and even right now they are meddling in the internal affairs of our country and there are allegations of their active involvement in the present insurgencies in Iraq. Therefore we cannot allow their presence in the new Iraq. According to the constitution of Iraq, the country will not be used as a base for any terrorist organisation and no one is allowed to use our soil to act against other countries.
Maliki added: I clearly emphasise to the members of this group that although we will not hand them over to Iran, they should not for a moment think that Iraq can be a base for them.
….
(Mehdi Abrishamchi and Massoud Rajavi taking orders from Saddam's head of secret services)
(Maryam Rajavi directly ordered the massacre of Kurdish people)
(A cult session in Ashraf Camp Iraq - under the protection of Saddam)
... The Government of Iraq is not only fulfilling the articles of the resolution but has without a doubt exceeded expectations in its humane treatment of the residents of Camp Ashraf ...
Today the European Parliament adopted a resolution on ‘the humanitarian situation of Camp Ashraf residents’.
Although the expectations in the resolution fall far short of what the Government of Iraq has actually done since 1st January 2009 in order to pursue a humanitarian path toward dismantling the camp and freeing its residents, we feel certain that you will welcome this resolution as an expression of concern by members of the European Parliament that your government be protected from malicious accusations of wrongdoing in pursuing your sovereign rights and responsibilities.
Unfortunately the resolution contains some regrettable factual errors (as you are fully aware, the Fourth Geneva Convention has not applied to Camp Ashraf residents since June 2005 and the UNHCR has determined that Camp Ashraf residents do not qualify as refugees), but in spite of this we must warmly congratulate the Government of Iraq on the fact that it has already over-exceeded the requirements of the resolution in guaranteeing the humanitarian treatment of Camp Ashraf residents.
Indeed, the plan pursued by your National Security Advisor, Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie, has shown a profound understanding of the real problems faced by residents in the camp. The enlightened and humanitarian actions, in the face of severe provocation by the MEK leaders, which have already been put in place will, I am sure, become an example for other national governments which may be faced with the task of dismantling a dangerous, destructive cult as is the MEK.
The Government of Iraq is not only fulfilling the articles of the resolution but has without a doubt exceeded expectations in its humane treatment of the residents of Camp Ashraf.
However, I am sure you will agree that your Government faces two main obstacles in fulfilling the obligations which you have set for yourselves and which are repeated in the resolution.
The first is that the MEK has created various obstacles and mounted severe provocations which demonstrate that the group’s leaders will not cooperate in any way with your government’s efforts to safely secure the individual futures of the residents. Indeed, through their continued refusal to abide by Iraqi and/or international law the people residing in camp Ashraf have regrettably defined themselves as outlaws.
The second obstacle is that the expected help and cooperation from other national governments, particularly those of the European Union in fulfilling their obligations under article 4 of the resolution, has not been forthcoming. It is becoming clear that although western governments are willing to talk about their support for the MEK, none are willing to accept the residents as refugees in their countries.
In light of the failure of western democratic governments to offer concrete help to the people of Camp Ashraf in the form of places of refuge, may we urge your government to look further afield.
UN Fourth Geneva Convention status is not for sale
.
... In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004 ...
The MKO’s supporters in the European Parliament today pushed through a last-minute resolution on Camp Ashraf just before the close of parliament for the elections. Although voting does not take place until tomorrow, the resolution is already defunct as it clearly contains false information and misleading political assertions.
The resolution, did not include any criticism of MKO behaviour in Iraq, nor did it oblige the MKO to abide by Iraqi and international law. Instead it re-iterates the false assertion that UN Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the group even though there can be no doubt that the Geneva Convention referred to has not applied since June 2005. Tomorrow members of parliament will be asked to vote on a resolution which is hopelessly flawed.
In my view, as I explained in my latest letter to the European Parliament, the only way forward is for the EU to cooperate with the Governemnt of Iraq to open alternative camps and help these people to reintegrate into mainstream society.
In July 2004, the PMOI forces in Ashraf were declared by the US to be ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, because they had not been belligerents during the Iraq War. The Fourth Geneva Convention protects civilians who, as the result of an international armed conflict or of occupation, find themselves in the hands of a country of which they are not nationals. It states that in no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.
In the case of occupied territory, the Convention continues to apply for a year after the general close of military operations, and partially thereafter if the occupying power continues to exercise the functions of government. The occupation of Iraq formally ended on 30 June 2004.
“IT WAS one of the strangest places I’d ever seen,” says one of the few Farsi-speaking Westerners to have spent weeks in Camp Ashraf, 65km (40 miles) north-east of Baghdad, where some 3,400 Iranian dissidents are hunkered down and are now threatened with expulsion from Iraq, perhaps even back to Iran. It was “like a spiffy midsized town in Iran”, with parks, offices and buildings—but no children. It was “sterile, soulless and sad”. Nearly two decades ago, families living in the camp were “dissolved”, couples were forcibly divorced, and their children sent away, many of them to live with supporters living in the West, to be brought up in the faith of a movement widely described by independent observers as a cult.
For the past six years, the Americans have protected the camp, whose raison d’être is generally opposed by the surrounding Iraqi communities and by most Iranians, whether or not they are for or against the clerical regime in Tehran. But as American troops prepare to go home, the Iraqi government, which wants cosy ties with Iran, now says the camp must be closed and its inhabitants dispersed, probably back to Iran, where they would face an uncertain future, to put it mildly.
The group is variously known as the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (PMOI) or the Mujahedeen-e Khalq Organisation (abbreviated as both MEK and MKO). Founded in 1965 as a youthful underground opposition to Iran’s Shah, it was usually described as “Islamic Marxist”. When the Shah fell it at first backed Ayatollah Khomeini but soon fell out with him, embarking on a campaign of violence and bombings which, on a single occasion, is reckoned to have killed 70 civilians, including several senior clerics; the withered arm of Iran’s current supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was a result of that bomb. The group’s political umbrella is called the National Council of Resistance of Iran.
The PMOI’s leader, Massoud Rajavi, fled to France in 1981 but he and his followers, many of them women, relocated in 1986 to Iraq, where Saddam Hussein gave them a big base at Camp Ashraf, which is thought to be around 20km in circumference. Saddam abundantly supplied the PMOI with Brazilian and British tanks (captured from Iran during the war of 1980-1988) and Russian armoured personnel carriers, among other arms. In return, the PMOI made attacks on Iran itself, which is why Iranians of all stripes tend to regard the group as traitors. It is also said to have spearheaded Saddam’s attacks on rebellious Iraqi Kurds and Shias in 1991, after the first Gulf war, a charge it strongly denies.
Follow my leader No less controversially, the PMOI is widely reviled by human-rights groups for nurturing a messianic cult of personality around Mr Rajavi and his wife, Maryam, and for enforcing a totalitarian discipline on its adherents. Several defectors testify, in the words of one of them, to a “constant bombardment of indoctrination” and a requirement to submit utterly and unquestioningly to the cause. No sources of news are allowed without the PMOI’s say-so. According to one defector, around 50 members who rebelled were sent to Saddam’s prison in Abu Ghraib, west of Baghdad.
Members are completely cut off from contact with their families. When the above-mentioned Farsi-speaking Westerner, who visited Ashraf in 2004, enabled wavering group members to talk to their families in Iran by satellite telephone, some of their parents refused to believe it was their children, for they had been told by the PMOI that they were dead.
No one is sure whether Mr Rajavi is alive but most think not; he has not been heard of since the American invasion of 2003. His wife, known as “the president-elect”, travels the world, soliciting support from a wide range of sympathisers, including some in the American Congress, the European Parliament and the British House of Lords. No one is sure who really controls the PMOI in Camp Ashraf. It is thought that nearly 400 residents have voluntarily returned to Iran, where they are said to have been treated adequately so far. But who can really tell? Several hundred more are seeking refugee status elsewhere. A few dozen have—or rather had—passports to Western countries, some of which have verified their bona fides.
In the past year, the European Parliament and Britain’s courts have removed the label of “terrorist” from the PMOI, mainly on the ground that the group says it has disavowed violence, is not known to have carried out any acts of terror since, at the latest, 2002, and surrendered its weapons (at any rate, its heavier ones) at Camp Ashraf after the American invasion. This has irritated several national governments, especially the British and French ones, which think the PMOI is a nasty nuisance and its presence on their soil bad for relations with both Iraq and Iran.
The outfit is still officially deemed a terrorist organisation in the United States but has a fierce lobby there too, backed by a mix of neoconservatives and leftists, that accepts at face value the group’s insistence that it is a secular and democratic movement with mass support in Iran and a real chance of eventually displacing the mullahs’ regime. Its lobby in Europe is much exercised by recent statements of Muwafaq al-Rubaie, Iraq’s national security adviser, who makes it plain he wants the camp disbanded and its people sent abroad, mostly to Iran, whose rulers have become more vociferous in calling its fellow reigning Shias in Baghdad to send them back.
The PMOI has a sophisticated network of ardent supporters. Without a doubt, its voice of despairing outrage will rise to a squeal if the Americans give way to Iraqi and Iranian demands to cut the movement loose. But it may happen.
Iraq's National Security Advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie
LONDON, April 6 /PRNewswire/ -- In an interview with Anne Singleton of Iran-Interlink, Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie, Iraq 's national security advisor clarified his approach to the Government of Iraq's decision to remove the Iranian terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK, aka MKO, PMOI) from the country.
Responsibility for Camp Ashraf was handed over to the Government of Iraq by the Coalition Forces in January this year. Since then, Dr. al Rubaie's plan for the difficult task of dismantling an extremist cult has revealed an enlightened, humanitarian approach which could become a blueprint for tackling similar organisations worldwide.
Dr. al Rubaie explained, "This is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. In normal everyday language we can say that they have been "brainwashed". He added, "The Government of Iraq does not deal with the MEK as an organization. We deal with the residents as individuals."
Under observation by the ICRC and the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights, Dr. al Rubaie has focused efforts to protect the individuals inside the camp following allegations that human rights abuses are being perpetrated by MEK leaders against the residents. To this end he said, "We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders."
In response to the many obstacles thrown up by the MEK to their removal from Camp Ashraf, Dr al Rubaie told Iran-Interlink, "The Iraqi Army unit posted to defend and secure Camp Ashraf has exercised patience and extreme restraint in spite of the staged provocations and demonstrations that Ashraf's self-appointed leaders have launched in defiance of the legitimate exercise by the Government of Iraq of its sovereignty." "Ashraf is not above the law," said Dr. al Rubaie.
Asked what can the UK , European and other western governments do to help resettle the MEK, Dr. al Rubaie replied, "These governments can agree to allow their citizens and others who have status in their country to return."
An Interview with Iraq’s National Security Advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie
about Camp Ashraf by Anne Singleton
April 5, 2009
.
... Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie: We have and will continue to treat the residents of Camp Ashraf humanely and in accordance with Iraqi law and international law and conventions. We will not initiate acts of violence against them. We do expect them to cooperate in our efforts to exercise our sovereignty according to the rule of law. Should they choose extremist acts such as self-immolation, it will be their decision which we would regret...
Anne Singleton, Iran Interlink, April 05, 2009
.
After 2003 the disarmed Iranian terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) organisation was consolidated from various locales in Iraq and protected by US forces at Camp Ashraf in Diyala province; a bizarre anomaly in Iraqi and coalition efforts to bring unity and peace to the country. The Government of Iraq has long regarded the MEK as a foreign terrorist group which continues to threaten internal security and is culpable for aiding Saddam Hussein in the violent suppression of Kurdish and Shia uprisings in 1991. Successive announcements in 2008 by President Jalal Talabani and Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari made clear their government’s determination to expel all the MEK members as soon as possible.
But solving the conundrum as to why the group has been protected and promoted by western interests for all this time has become clearer since January this year when responsibility for Camp Ashraf was handed over to the Government of Iraq by the Coalition Forces. As the Government of Iraq has moved swiftly to fulfil its decision to expel members of the MEK from the country, so the protests by those who have a stake in the continued presence of the group have intensified.
During March, three debates were held in the UK parliament by members supporting the MEK. In spite of being on the US terrorism list since 1997, CBS and CNN news channels have broadcast MEK films showing its personnel obstructing Iraqi authorities as they try to perform their duties. Additionally, the Washington Post has quoted an MEK spokesman in which he is threatening the Government of Iraq that “a human catastrophe" will follow further action.
Even though Europe and the UK have un-proscribed the group as it claims to no longer believe in violence, no moves have been made to have European and British citizens and those with residency rights removed from Camp Ashraf to safety. Instead, powerful lobbies who have used the MEK for their own interests are continuing their efforts to force the Government of Iraq to maintain the infrastructure of a terrorist organisation in its country. Keeping the group in Iraq can only serve the interests of those Saddamists who still believe the group will give them leverage over the Government of Iraq.
Spearheading Government plans to remove the MEK is Iraq’s national security advisor Dr. Mowaffak al Rubaie. His role is to advise the Government of Iraq and coordinate policies and activity in relation to national security and intelligence matters.
Over several months Dr. al Rubaie has fielded criticisms and attacks with repeated assurances that the residents of Camp Ashraf will be treated according to international human rights standards and that none would be forcibly repatriated. To date, nothing has occurred at Camp Ashraf to give any cause for concern to human rights organisations. In recent weeks two MEK members departed Camp Ashraf voluntarily. One confessed that he had been instructed to commit suicide in order to implicate Iraq’s Army. These two men, who were protected and comfortably accommodated by the Iraqi Government under observation by the ICRC and the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights, spoke openly of the human rights violations perpetrated by the leaders on MEK members. It was partly in response to this information that Dr. al Rubaie has focused efforts to protect the individuals inside the camp.
Indeed Dr. al Rubaie’s plan for the difficult task of dismantling an extremist cult has revealed an enlightened, humanitarian approach which could become a blueprint for tackling similar organisations worldwide.
However, as the clamour continues, I asked Dr. al Rubaie for an interview in order to further clarify his Government’s approach to events at Camp Ashraf.
.
Anne Singleton: You want to move the residents from Camp Ashraf for their own protection, yet the MEK commanders say they must remain in Camp Ashraf. What do you think motivates them? Mowaffak al Rubaie: The self-appointed leaders at Camp Ashraf will have to speak for themselves. What I will address is how the residents of Camp Ashraf have cooperated or not cooperated with the policies and decisions of the Government of Iraq. The GOI does not deal with the MEK as an organization. We deal with the residents as individuals. The GOI has informed them that as members of a foreign terrorist organization they cannot remain in Iraq and must choose whether to return to their country of citizenship or some other country. Remaining in Iraq is not an option. The GOI has taken steps to assure their security while beginning to exercise sovereignty at Camp Ashraf as we do in every other part of our country. Ashraf is not above the law. Any infractions of Iraqi law will be handled by the GOI authorities with attention to due process and humanitarian standards. To date, the residents of Camp Ashraf have created a series of obstacles to the legitimate exercise of sovereignty by the GOI and this will not be tolerated. They must cooperate in order to avoid obstructing our authorities carrying out their legitimate duties.
AS: Some observers speculate that MEK leader Massoud Rajavi is in the anti-nuclear bunker inside Camp Ashraf and that is why the commanders refuse to move. Do you think this is possible? MR: We do not know exactly what is within the bounds of Camp Ashraf. The GOI has informed the residents that we will diligently and progressively examine all areas of Ashraf to ensure there is no contraband, that there are no illegal activities taking place, and that they must cooperate with this legitimate exercise of Iraqi sovereignty and enforcement of the rule of law.
AS: You have spoken of ‘detoxifying’ the people in Camp Ashraf. Could you explain what this means and why you feel it is necessary? What do you hope to achieve? MR: As you know from observing the behavior of the MEK and from their history, this is an indoctrinated and tightly disciplined organization of extremist zealots who have employed terrorism and at times even self-immolation to secure their aims. In normal everyday language we can say that they have been "brainwashed". As is common in organizations of this type, the indoctrination and discipline rely on the continuous pressure of their leaders and the total control by them of their environment. Therefore, individuals have little ability to exercise their free will because they exist in this closed environment and fear for personal reprisals if they are discovered to have deviated from the approved line of responses. As we strive to determine from each individual where they wish to go since they cannot remain in Iraq, we are conducting individual surveys and a census which are open to oversight by the ICRC and the UN. We believe that if we can separate individuals from the all-encompassing domination by their leaders, we can allow them to begin to exercise their rights as individuals and make appropriate choices. That is, we hope to remove them from the toxic effects of their indoctrination and leaders.
AS: CBS and CNN have been broadcasting clips showing women shouting at and insulting Iraqi soldiers from behind closed gates. Could tell us more about what these scenes depict. MR: You will have to ask CBS and CNN when and under what circumstances they obtained their filmed scenes. What I can tell you is that the Iraqi Army unit posted to defend and secure Camp Ashraf has been in full control since 20 February and has exercised patience and extreme restraint in spite of the staged provocations and demonstrations that Ashraf's self-appointed leaders have launched in defiance of the legitimate exercise by the GOI of its sovereignty.
AS: Families are concerned about having access to their relatives without MEK minders being present. Do you see a time in the near future that such visits can be facilitated? MR: The GOI has already facilitated visits by families and has provided the residents of Camp Ashraf written procedures which are fully permissive. Our security forces at Camp Ashraf have and will continue to facilitate legitimate family visits with no interference by either the MEK or anyone else. These visits are also completely open to ICRC and UN observation. The MEK have been the obstacle to establishing a comfortable facility for such family visits.
AS: The MEK claim that the Government of Iraq has not allowed medical personnel or medical supplies into the camp and that this has resulted in the deaths of some women and that others are dying. They want ICRC and UNHCR intervention. What is your response to this allegation? MR: These allegations are false and baseless.
AS: The MEK’s supporters have paid millions in legal fees to have the group removed from the UK and European Council terrorism lists. Have any of the group’s western supporters offered to help remove these people to their countries? MR: The GOI has communicated with ambassadors from the European Union and all other countries we suspect have citizens or persons with some claim to residency in their countries. We have asked them to offer to allow those with status in their countries to return and to consider hosting others who may want to reside in their countries. We have facilitated visits by representatives of these countries to Camp Ashraf. We are hopeful that this level of openness and transparency by the GOI will persuade these countries to allow such returns.
AS: In your view, what can the UK, European and other western governments do to help resettle the MEK? MR: These governments can agree to allow their citizens and others who have status in their country to return.
AS: The Washington Post quoted MEK member Mohammad Mohaddessin clearly threatening that self-immolations similar to 2003 and other suicide acts would be performed by the residents of Camp Ashraf. What is your response to this? MR: We have and will continue to treat the residents of Camp Ashraf humanely and in accordance with Iraqi law and international law and conventions. We will not initiate acts of violence against them. We do expect them to cooperate in our efforts to exercise our sovereignty according to the rule of law. Should they choose extremist acts such as self-immolation, it will be their decision which we would regret.
