For the Sake of Reconciliation

A delisted MEK will have to transform itself from a paramilitary into a political group


For the Sake of Reconciliation
by Hooshang Amirahmadi

As the US Department of State is contemplating whether to remove the Iranian Islamic Mujahedin-e Khalq group (MEK) from its terrorist list, a debate is taking place among pundits with some arguing for the removal and some for the status quo. The MEK has already been taken off the terrorist list of the EU, and in the US the group is being treated as if it is not listed.

Opponents of delisting rightly remind us that the MEK has been involved in acts of violence against Americans, Iranians and their own members, and that the group is a cult-like and anti-democratic force. Founding members of the MEK murdered several Americans in Iran in 1970s, and the group actively supported taking Americans hostage in Tehran in 1980.

The MEK supported Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran in 1980. That “long war,” when Iraq also used chemical weapons, left some 500,000 Iranians dead and maimed, destroyed about 120 Iranian cities and towns, and caused close to $120 billion in economic loss. The MEK also helped Saddam Hussein to suppress the Kurdish rebellion in 1991 following the first US war with Iraq.

It is no wonder that the MEK is despised in both the US and Iran. It is a terrorist group to the Americans, a “Monafegh” (hypocritically Muslim) group to the Islamic Republic, and a “khaen” (traitor) group to most Iranians. Even MEK’s past members have charged that it forbids internal democracy and treats members critical of the group’s activities quite savagely.

While the MEK is building support among western officials, it is still censured by most Iranians. This was not the case in its formative years in 1970s when the guerilla group was a hero to young Iranians contesting dictatorship of the Shah and American domination. The original MEK included Islamists and Marxists; before long they split violently and the Islamists took over.

The tragic conversion from a loyalist to a traitor group began in 1979 when the MEK parted with the Islamic Republic, murdered state officials, including a president and a prime minister, and joined Saddam Hussein. Ever since those early blows, a tragically vicious cycle of violence has continued between the Islamic Republic and the MEK, resulting in several thousand deaths.

Opponents of delisting rightly suspect that the group may never become democratic or even pragmatic. However, it is ridiculous to assert, as they do, that removing the MEK from the US terrorist list will strengthen the Islamic regime, demoralize the Iranian reformers, threaten the freedom of Iranian-Americans, and give the MEK the power to impose a US war on Iran.

First, Iran’s “rising” power and reformers’ adversity occurred while the MEK was on the terrorist list. Second, a delisted MEK could hardly bully Iranian-Americans in a democratic America. Finally, the US’ Iran policy is designed to avoid war while intensifying “targeted sanctions.” Short of an accident, failure of sanctions can be used to justify a war - a la Iraq.

Not all opposed to delisting are genuinely concerned about its upshot; some are moved by sheer self-interest - anti-Iran activism is a business. These people use MEK as a facade to conceal their own deleterious acts, e.g., supporting sanctions and calling for the surveillance of Iranian scientists. Delisting will expose these foul-crying groups who deceptively single out the MEK as the only wicked force.

Enemies of the Islamic Republic have often used the MEK as a bogyman even if the group has been a failure. To them, delisting will mean public funds and more power. More money sure, but delisting will weaken the MEK as it becomes one among many contesting opposition groups. The Islamic regime will publically scorn the US, accusing it of hypocrisy in fighting terrorism; privately, however, Tehran will welcome delisting as it pacifies the MEK.

Delisting the MEK might indeed be a step in the right direction. Iranian patriotism has suffered for the fact that a group among them has been on the terrorist list of the US, a nation which many of them cherish. The MEK in the past was the most anti-American of all Iranian groups. US delisting the MEK is then a step toward normalizing relations between Americans and Iranians.

The Iranian people will welcome any moderating influence on the MEK, which has been a source of extremism, violence and fear in a nation that is longing for peace and reconciliation. A delisted MEK will have to transform itself from a paramilitary into a political group. If this were to happen, the Iranians would be relieved and Iran’s vilified image will be somewhat rectified.

By delisting the MEK the US will lose a useless bogyman, but gain a redundant anti-Iran propaganda machine. This can cost America tax dollars, image and a better Iran policy unless the delisted MEK is put on a tight leash. This control must begin by demilitarizing the MEK, which along with delisting helps resolve the humanitarian crisis in Camp Ashraf in Iraq where some 3400 reside including children.

Delisting will make the US look hypocritical for supporting human rights in Iran given the MEK’s dreadful human rights record. Yet, delisting can advance US-Iran relations and Iranian reconciliation - the musts for democracy in Iran. To strike such moral victory, the US must also renounce regime change and use of force while incrementally lifting sanctions and easing Iran’s security concerns. In return, Iran must gradually address American/IAEA’s nuclear concerns.

The ball is in the US court of goodwill.

Hooshang Amirahmadi is a Professor at Rutgers University and President of the American Iranian Council. ;


Recently by Hooshang AmirahmadiCommentsDate
حذف مجاهدین از لیست تروریستها و سود و زیان احتمالی آن
Aug 25, 2011
Green Ideas Survive Movement
Feb 28, 2011
No Rush
Feb 15, 2011
more from Hooshang Amirahmadi

Rajavi & Polar Bears

by BoosBoos on

Send the MEK to Alaska, and bring the Eskimos to Baghdad ... problem solved.  The poor Eskimos have been freezing in the cold for 1,000 years and never tried to attack Canada.  

Seriously, the MEK gets way too much press.  In a few years they will all have to send away for mail-order dentures and wheelchairs ... a bunch of senior citizens can't pose a threat unless they're delisted and given free reign to openly recruit new members.  Can you imagine "Join MEK Day" at your child's school?  Delist them, and that's what you'll get. 


Was this article first published on the Onion??

by Ehaass on

I mean seriously? I know Amirahmadi have a lot of critics, but I alwasy thought of him as somewhat serious, though wrong. now it seems that perhaps he only wanst to provoke people, or?



by khengali on

Hooshi jun-Dr. Mirahmadi you don't mind me calling you Hooshi jun do you?-Any way Hooshi jun, Mojahedin are not the face of Iranian resistance as you seem to intimate. They do not represent Iranians.Never have and never could.They don't even represent their Iraqi fellow citizens. Why did I say fellow citizens?. As you and I both know, Hooshi jun, Mojahedin are naturalized Iraqi citizens aka Iraqi passport holders.MEK rank and file, their spouses and their offsprings , God bless them ,all have Iraqi national IDs.They, furthermore, posses Iraqi passports for travelling in and out of Iraq. And if camp Ashraf is their home and if they have demonstrated that they rather die and be burried in Ashraf than agree to an eviction, then they love Ashraf and they love greater Iraq. Nothing wrong with Iraqi citizen loving Iraq  so why hide it?.Am I right Hooshi jun? Of course I am right.

So rather than having your MEK clients to everyday pester, harras, and annoy Hillary's state department employees, why not encourage them to wholeheartedly embrace their homecountry Iraq and join other Iraqi fellow citizens in rebuilding post Saddam's Iraq.That would be an honorable thing to do wouldn't it be? And I'm sure other Iraqis would fondly remember services renderd by the  Persian branch of Baath party, i.e., MEK,in helping defend Iraqi motherland against the Al Foros Khabeetheen(Iranihaaye naakes), and would wellcome them in the new Iraq.

Yes we Iranians have majore problems with the IRI ruling clique but we will solve our problems our own way and don't need Iraq sticking its nose in our business or MEK pretending to speake for us.But if MEK insists in doing so then it can expect to hear us say:Iraqi boro gomsho!


MEK rank and file = Al Qaeda

by BoosBoos on

An "accessory" is a person who assists in the commission of  crime but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal.   An accessory is still a criminal.  

Whatever claim the MEK followers had to being "falsely" lured into the PMOI will not be credible - everyone knows the MEK fought for Saddam.  It's public knowledge.   

Whatever claim the MEK followers have to not being direct participants in the crimes of MEK also is not credible (see the definition of "accessory"); If Bin Laden does the crime and you help hide Bin Laden afterwards, you're also guilty.  

My sympathy for the rank and file of MEK is very little -- they should be given 1 or 2 months to leave, or be treated like Al Qaeda. The MEK rank and file know about MEK's activities to the same extent as the Al Qaeda rank and file knew of Bin Laden's activities. 


For the Sake of Reconciliation, Prescription For The USA

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Since the USA has come up with such a prescription for Iranians, my only advice would be for them to take the same prescription first for themselves, as for us, we have no problems with MEK today so we don't need their remedy yet.

They Need to Remove Al-Quaeda and other Former Terorist groups that have killed Americans, From the Terrorist List and allow them to participate as a legal political parties in the USA, of course with access to similar funds that the MEK would have acess to.

It could serve American Reconciliation and even USA/IRI Relations.  I guess the ball of good will is back in the US Court and hopefully they create an inclusive atmosphere within the USA for all these terrorist organizations.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Dear BoosBoos

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I agree with most of what you say. But I say let us be a bit more reasonable. Give them a trial and a chance to explain themselves. There are some in Camp Ashraf who got lured under false pretense.

They are prisoners of MEK and should be given a chance to reform. Any MEK member who has not committed any violence may be pardoned. As long as they renounce MEK and promise to behave and no violence.

Those who did participate in war against Iran should be given stiff sentences. They may throw themselves on the mercy of the court. Maybe the judges will be forgiving. But in any event a trial is required to determine their guilt or innocence.


PMOI to prison

by BoosBoos on

The U.S. has no problem killing the Taliban en masse - why should the PMOI be treated any differently by Iranians?  Treat them like a terror cell.  

 No sane Iranian would let the PMOI back into Iran without giving each member a prison sentence - people that joined hands with Saddam and helped cause 1 million deaths deserve nothing less. 


Dear VPK:That is exactly how I feel about MEK as you have put it

by Bavafa on

And I read your early posts and find them absolutely factual and logical.

Lastly my distrust of MEK is only matched by my distrust for Neocons in US. We all have seen what they made out of Iraq all out of sheer lies and greed. One can hardly doubt the result of MEK used as the stooge of Neocons.

Edit: one last note, RP has gained a lot of respect and credibility by me just by refraining, possibly refusing to become the Neocons tool.   As far as I am concern a true Iranian patriot will not sell out to these criminals.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Mehrdad Jan

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I very much agree with you. After MEK sided with Saddam that was it. No reconciliation; no forgiveness. I believe there are things that are unforgivable and MEK did one such act.

I don't care if they attacked IRI officials; or are Marxist or Islamist. But treason is just too much particularly at a time of war. I just could not imagine asking brave Iranian soldiers who fought against Saddam and MEK to kiss and make up. It is too much to ask them. MEK made a giant mistake by siding with Saddam. Now they are making another giant mistake. That is attacking Iranian Americans who oppose their de-listing. They are so out of touch they forgot how to make friends. 

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Dear Guive

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


The two most likely groups are the Kurds and Iranian Arabs. Both have been victims of MEK specially Kurds. I just don't think Kurds will forget it. Nor will the Arabs who got butchered by them not very long ago. Besides where do they go? The more likely thing is that Iraqi Arabs would want to join with Iran not the other way! Honestly separatism is more popular among West residing hotheads than Iranians. The Azari separatists are in the "Republic" of Azarbaijan not in Iran.

Besides the 3000 MEK are not a force of any military value. Iran has 200,000 IRG. They will make minced meat out of 3000 MEK. Not to mention a good number of them don't want to be in Camp Ashraf. They are very likely to defect at the first opportunity. Specially if Iran were to give them the option. I bet you in a confrontation AN will say "if you defect now you get a pardon". Then more than half of them will go and do just that. Remember they want to go back to their families.

You are basing your assessment on a guess as am I. However I know Iranian Lors and Kurds. The ones I know are loyal to Iran. I have a large family with plenty of Lors; and Azaris. They would not separate from Iran for any reason. In fact the Azari in my family are hard core nationalists who refuse to speak anything but Farsi. Despite the fact they were raised speaking Azari. Khamenei himself is an Azari so they hardly feel marginalized. 


Roozbeh: The treasonous act by MEK and siding with Saddam

by Bavafa on

For many of us the treasonous act has been the red line that should not have been crossed and as such hard to forgive the leadership of the group for making such decision. Likewise, this willingness to betray Iran is a key factor that they are being choosen by the special group in US to do their dirty deed.

I have read many of your arguments directly and indirectly supporting this group, however you will gain more credibility in your arguments, by me, if you apply them indiscriminately.

'Hambastegi' is the main key to victory 


Guive Mirfendereski

Dear veiled Prophet of Khorassan -

by Guive Mirfendereski on

You asked, rhetorically, “Who has sympathy in Western Iran for MEK? Western Iran is mostly Azeri; Kurd; Lor and Iranians of Arab origin.”

Again I am offering a general observation – without a particular political perspective on the M-e K or detailed knowledge of their history –


It is a well known theory that the those wishing to disintegrate Iran – conveniently coincidental with removal of the central government in IRI – exploit the sensibilities of the Iranian ethnic minorities, especially those who inhabit territories along Iran’s international (anthropo-geographical) boundaries – Baluch, Turkmen, Azeri, Lor, Kurds, and Arabs. Would these communities ally themselves with M-e K in a push to topple the central government in IRI in return for ethnic autonomy? One cannot say that they would not do so under any circumstance.  

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Roozbeh Jan

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


I am fine with not debating the numbers. Let us agree that between 25-35 people got killed. I agree it was due to pressure from IRI. Obviously USA is not doing a great job at running Iraq!

That means if they do fund MEK they will do as bad a job with them; do you agree? But I do not think the bone is about the nuclear thing. MEK did NOT discover the IRI nuclear program. It was discovered by Israel. They first approached Reza Pahlavi and asked him to "bring it" to USA attention. He refused on the grounds that it would be treason against Iran. Then Israel went to MEK who has no problem with treason! Therefore the nuclear thing would have been out anyway.

The problem IRI has with MEK is the same as the one most of us do. They fought against Iran and sided with Saddam. Plus they killed a number of top IRI officials. Why is IRI not so strongly against Monarchists or JM? Both of them are opposed to IRI. But IRI does not go nuts over them.

These are the lessons I got:

  • Reza Pahlavi is an honorable man who puts his nation above himself.
  • MEK as dishonorable and will do anything for power.
  • IRI is right for once and has good reason to hate the MEK.
  • IRI does not like to have its people blown up.
  • MEK is supported by Neocon gang who are enemies of Iran.
  • Neocon gang think they are doing good for Israel; they are wrong. By supporting MEK just like Hamas they will create a monster they will have to deal with.

I would also request that opposing MEK not be taken as support of IRI. Anyone who knows me is aware of my opposition to IRI. They also know that while critical of Shah I would have been perfectly happy with him. The actions of Reza Pahlavi have only reinforced by belief that he is a good man. Not the best of politicians but a real "Mihan Parast". On the other hand MEK are traitors and their actions proves it over and over.

By the way the definition of treason by United States is this:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

In addition I do not want "good relations" with IRI. I want IRI gone and over! However I see little point in sanctions on rugs and pistachios when oil is running. You don't sink IRI by banning rug imports. If they are serious then there needs to be no oil purchase. You and I know that will not happen because world needs the oil. So the whole sanction thing is a joke. I also do not support funding separatist goons like Jundallah who are worse than IRI. I just as soon see West support RP.



VPK Gerami

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

We can debate the meaning of "mass killing" in terms of numbers forever. But for the sake of avoiding a typically circular argument, lets' agree that it is a matter of opinion.

For me at least, the murder of one Iranian, regardless of his/her political belief, by the foreign Islamist thugs is one too many. 

Whilst on the subject, the real bone of islamist regime and their lobbyist in USA with MKO has nothing to  with MKO's ideology or their "treason" due to their siding with Saddam during iran Iraq war. Lots of Iraqi terrorist organisations being funded by the islamsit regime (Ansaar islam in kurdestan are a good example) were responsible for killing many Iranians during the war and are still killing Iranins in Kurdestan.

The real bone of the islamist regime with MKO is the fact that MKO are alleged to have exposed Iran's nuclear research programme to international community. That resulted of course in  sanctions. Sanctions are bad for islamist regime. Sanctions are bad for the business of a small number of "Iranian_Americans" involved in various forms of "trade", ranging from Carpet/pistachio import, to much much more lucrative oil and weapons trade between Iran and west.

This whole feeble attempts of distorting the truth on internet sites, by people ranging from gullible, wanabe geo-political experts to more kniving individuals and lobby organisations with at least "good relationship" with islamist regme of Iran, are laughable and seriously beneath contempt.

That is all I have to say on this my friend........    

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Dear Roozbeh

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


You said it: This is done after the mass killing of their unarmed members by armed to teeth Khamenei sponsored Iraqi Shia terrorist thugs at camp ashraf a few months ago.

While BBC is not my favorite news service they do have this:

By the MEK's own statement there were about 25 people out of 3000 killed. Do you call this "mass killing"? I guess we have different ideas of "mass". As for Khamenei being behind it from what I know Iraq is occupied by USA not IRI. Hence either USA is doing a really bad job of running Iraq or is taking orders from IRI. '

Just one more thing about MEK. Are people in Camp Ashraf free to leave? Do they get to leave MEK by choice. My knowledge is that they do not. In fact they get short if they want to go. Sounds a lot like the Berlin Wall. 

Plus as others said they are delisted in Europe so why don't they go there? 

Why don't we just be honest. Delisting means opening funds to them. The people behind this are the NeoCon gang who got USA into Iraq. The result was as you say a government that takes orders from IRI. 

I also want to know why do we get so many "Professors" supporting MEK? May this have something to do with grants. Would the dear professors release the sources of their grants. Plus the conditions on which the grants were based on.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


  •  M-e K has already tried its hand and seems to have acquired some sympathies – in western Iran

Are you serious? Who has sympathy in Western Iran for MEK? Western Iran is mostly Azeri; Kurd; Lor and Iranians of Arab origin. Out of these Kurds and Iranians of Arab origin were slaughtered by MEK. I do not think they are very sympathetic to MEK.

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


  • MEK should not be delisted. They are a terrorist cult and must be disbanded.
  • USA makes its decisions based on its interests. We have over a million Iranian American voters. That makes a big difference and we may influence USA policy.
  • If they want to deal with Camp Ashraf the solution is simple. Go in; stop the MEK goons from preventing them free choice. Then let the people decide what they want. Most of them will want to leave. So let them denounce MEK and find them homes in various nations. Including Iran if they want to go back to their home and families.
  • The greatest problem in Camp Ashraf is the MEK goons who keep the members against their will.
  • Publicly mention where the MEK funding comes from. I want to know where they get 25 K per speech to give politicians.
  • Masoud has a right to his opinion. But I find his arguments unconvincing. By saying "any one who disagrees with me does not make sense" you do not really provide an argument. Please remember we are not students worried about a grade. Hence we say what we think without fear. Furthermore it is not really helping JM to have its representatives be so dismissive of other views. Imagine a government run by JM; no thank you.


GM Arguments for de-listing

by MM on

The Iraqi government seems too anxcious to close down camp Ashraf, and appease IRI, so MEK will not be able to operate from any bases outside Iran, especially Iraq.  Radio/TV-MEK?  No way! They have to compete with many other established Iranian telecommunication outlets and the MEK are not trusted in Iran to begin with.

Meanwhile de-listing has also been used as an reason to dismantle camp Ashraf and assimilate the MEK back into "the society".

Take your pick, but the truth is that de-listing will allow MEK to use the US funds and trumpet itself as the voice of freedom for Iran.  In return, the MEK foot-soldiers will be sent to Iran to spy on nuclear activities, and wait for an opportunity to take over from the Mullahs.  e.g., See:


Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson (the neocons who started the MEK support idea): (

* "Can the MeK liberate Iran? No. Its strategy of invasion by an army can't work. The foul theocracy in Tehran will come to an end when the democratic forces in Iran finally manage to push it aside. Foreigners can best help them by encouraging satellite-television transmissions from Iranians living in free countries (as U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback has recently proposed)."

* "Can the MeK be useful? Yes. Western spy agencies are short on "human intelligence" - meaning spies on the ground in Iran, as distinct from eyes in the sky. Coalition military commanders should seek out the MeK for information on the Iranian mullahs' agents in Iraq. The MeK can also supply key information on developments in Iran - where, despite a tendency toward exaggeration, it has had some major scoops. Its information in mid-2002 about Iran's nuclear program, for example, was better than what the International Atomic Energy Agency knew, thereby leading a shocked U.S. government to kick off an investigation that confirmed just how far advanced the Iranians are toward building a nuclear bomb."

Guive Mirfendereski

Reasons for de-listing

by Guive Mirfendereski on

Ari, you asked - What is your analysis of why the organization is pushing so hard for being delisted? My general impressions – without any special interest or curiosity about the M-e K’s delisting is as follows:   De-listing is the first step for the United States to start relying on this organization as a nuisance against the IRI. Using Iranian groups outside of Iran to put pressure on the Iranian government inside Iran is an old trick and was tried by the Soviets in many instances in Iran. The refugees from Tudeh who took up residence in the Eastern Bloc were nurtured by the Soviets and also allowed to have their radio broadcasts in order to serve the Communist propaganda machine. The moral and diplomatic support – and protection – was also afforded to the M-e K by the Soviet leadership, albeit when the organization was still in Iran in the early to late 1970s.  De-listing will also allow the United States to support a militarized organization as a rebel force should it come to that in order to overthrow the IRI by beginning small scale incursions into areas that M-e K has already tried its hand and seems to have acquired some sympathies – in western Iran. As for the organization, de-listing legitimizes it – so that it can fundraise openly; operate without the weight of sanctions; have and hold property and bank accounts; ease of travel; and to have open access to the United States Government as an alternative “activist” group to promote “democracy” in Iran, where others outsiders have failed. Much has been said about their sojourn in Iraq, as if that fact should by itself work against M-e K. Even among the most ardent IRI types, this is not sin. The Prophet’s retreat to Madina is often viewed as a strategic withdrawal, with the hope of one day retuning to Mecca in triumphant. The Ayatollah Khomeini himself was in exile for many years, whence he and his cohorts directed the clerical participation in the 1979 revolution.   One aspect of the M-e K’s sojourn in Iraq is also the extent to which it collaborated with Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. Was it captive to its own circumstance? Was its action treasonous? Was it legitimate M-e K cross-border operations against the IRI, its enemy? Viewing it in any context, the answer is one that is difficult to comeby and certainly it is a major criticism for this group to overcome, including among those were not even born when M-e K conducted aids against its own birthland.

Ari Siletz


by Ari Siletz on

It would make me happy if this does not go beyond spy recruitment. So let's hope reason prevails among US decision makers.



Ari - this may well be a spy recruitment plan

by MM on


Here is an interesting passage from Pipes and Clawson in 2002 (pages 150-151):

"Following the second Gulf War, the United States viewed the Mujaheddin-e Khlaq (MEK) as a possible vanguard to topple the clerical regime in Tehran. Neoconservatives Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson, influential with the George W. Bush administration, advocate U.S. support of the group to battle the clerics":

" . . . because Iran's mullahs irrationally fear the MEK (as shown by their 1988 massacre in the jails of Iran of 10,000 long-imprisoned MEK members and supporters), maintaining the MEK as an organized group in separate camps in Iraq offers an excellent way to intimidate and gain leverage over Tehran." (Pipes and Clawson 2002)

However, Daniel Pipes and Patrick Clawson have changed their minds slightly and said the following (

* Can the MeK liberate Iran? No. Its strategy of invasion by an army can't work. The foul theocracy in Tehran will come to an end when the democratic forces in Iran finally manage to push it aside. Foreigners can best help them by encouraging satellite-television transmissions from Iranians living in free countries (as U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback has recently proposed).

* Can the MeK be useful? Yes. Western spy agencies are short on "human intelligence" - meaning spies on the ground in Iran, as distinct from eyes in the sky. Coalition military commanders should seek out the MeK for information on the Iranian mullahs' agents in Iraq. The MeK can also supply key information on developments in Iran - where, despite a tendency toward exaggeration, it has had some major scoops. Its information in mid-2002 about Iran's nuclear program, for example, was better than what the International Atomic Energy Agency knew, thereby leading a shocked U.S. government to kick off an investigation that confirmed just how far advanced the Iranians are toward building a nuclear bomb.


Ari It has nothing to do with that.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

The truth behind US Policy has nothing to do with what we read or discuss.

They presented several reasons but they were all to throw even intellectuals off, let alone the general public, so say in 1986, 1996, 2006, 2016, 2026 no one would be able to read their hand.

As we all know Iran's most important value is its geopolitical/militarily important location, above oil.  So after making their top secret decision, they sold it as the Shah is an ucertain friend and he may turn on us and even presented a cia profile on him.  They portrayed "bambi" as a megalomaniac, despot, dictator to justify their actions. 

But the truth was very different, it had nothing to do with irans location or worthyness as an ally/theshah.  And this truth would require the USA to do everything in its power to configure the Iranian people, via discussions and public discourse in such a way that it could continue to impose tyranny and send the country backwards forever.

Though alot has changed not much has changed on their fundamental reason for Africanizing the Middle east.  I can't really say more.



Ari Siletz


by Ari Siletz on

Yes, the US seems to see an interest in keeping Iran perpetually stunted. Perhaps the late Shah era experience freaked them out.


Ari the possiblities are endless if they come off the list.

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

The shock is RP has advocated democracy for 33 years and has many groups that have similar goals yet they get no funding/backing (actually the opposite/suppression).

Fundamentally the US Agenda has been clear as day light, the Africanization of Iran (as opposed to freedom, justice and democracy).

Another thing is also clear, the MEK like Khomeini before them have absolutely no clue why the US will support them, and loves anti-social philosophies for Iran.  IF THEY KNOW, then they are just heartless. 


Ari Siletz

Thanks MM

by Ari Siletz on

The limited scenario you propose is easier on the mind than the possibility of the US escalating the funds to create a "liberating government" out of the MEK. Iraq and Afghanistan experiece has shown that the power vacuum after a US invasion cannot be easily filled--costly, drags on, very limited success. One remedy would be to grow the power infrastructure prior to the invasion. avaal chaah bekan ba'd menaar bedozd. And yes, there's a chance Iranians will eventually accept the MEK as liberators. We can see the psychology at work in miniature on this website. It goes like this:

1. I hate the IRI.

2. I can't overthrow them.

3. The MEK may be able to.

4. So I'll empower the MEK.

5. I'll worry about the consequences later. Meanwhile seeing the Mullahs hang will be sweet.


1979 mentality!



by MM on

I think the reason that the MEK wants to get de-listed in the US is to use the US funds allocated for IRI-opposition.  The MEK is already de-listed in Europe and can easily disassemble camp Ashraf and move to Europe.  But, my guess is that the MEK wants to keep their forces isolated and intact.

PS, we do not need to be old to remember 1985 and on; when the Rajavis started to sleep with Saddam.


First Take a deep breath...

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

Count to three...

now breathe out.....

feeling better? Feeling calmer? Good! Now, read on: 

the MKO are being de listed in order to facilitate their members passage out of camp ashraf to a country of their choice, which might be US. This is done after the mass killing of their unarmed members by armed to teeth Khamenei sponsored Iraqi Shia terrorist thugs at camp ashraf a few months ago. This move can not be done currently due to the MKO terrorist status, which was given to them as a lip service by US government to the "reformist preseident" Khatemei (yea, the "reformist" in charge of "Terrorist free" islamist regime, under him the Tehran University students were murdered in their dorms by Bassiji thugs. The very same "reformist"  under him intellectuals, writers and political figures were savagely murdered in their beds at night or kidnapped, murdered by islamist regime Etelaat Ministry agents and their bodies dumped in the middle of deserts...

And remember, all this hate and anger is bad for your health !

 "Personal business must yield to collective interest."

Ari Siletz


by Ari Siletz on

You state:

"The de-listing itself
and the ensuing discussion about it among the Iranians internally will
allow the airing and remembering of the negatives about the M-e K.
Nothing would serve the demise of the M-e K more than its
demystification for the reactionary youth of Iran."

The MEK is very likely aware of this possibility. What is your analysis of why the organization is pushing so hard for being delisted?


there are some points which should be define

by Saead Soltanpour on



1- Mojahedin
of 1979 to 1985 the year that Masoud Rajavi joined Sadam Hussein are two
different version .


2- till 1981
( 1360) after the revolution , Mojaheddin did not terror any body while the
Ayatollahs ( Rafsanjani-Khoemin and Beheshti ) decided to eliminate whoever is
not in alingment with them and their version of revolution .

Mojahedin after 1981 are a part of circle of violence , the other part the
faction of the system leading by Lajevardi who brutally oppressed any body in
the opposition ( some pf them never fighting the regime ) .

4- so many
people were tourtured, and confessed , they were convicted in a court with no
attorney while they were blindfolded . some times the court was less than a few
minutes . 


5- I agree
that MKO is an undemocratic organization which must held free election inside
the organization for the new generation who have not been part of thier
sectarian actions .

terrorist list  is a game by US so,  , do not fool yourself and people since the
legitimacy  of any government or
political organization  does not come from US or any other country
but Iranian nation and people .

first define
the terrorism then we talk on the list , since who ever is opposing the
US , would be ending in
the terrorist list.


Saeed Soltanpour


روزنامه نگارو فعال حقوق بشر در تبعید - تورنتو


Guive Mirfendereski

De-list, demystify

by Guive Mirfendereski on

All this jittery Iranian reaction to the possible de-listing of M-e K by the United States makes more of an organization than it deserves. What the M-e K did before, during, and after the 1979 revolution is relevant only to those who lived the turmoil of those days. The Iranian youth has no recollection of this group in action, for good or evil. Like it or not, M-e K has always impressed with their superb organizational skills and marches. If the youth of post-revolutionary Iran – including the spineless Greens- need an ally that can push the rock up the hill for them, they may well look to M-e K as a strategic ally, if not a model. That said, I personally will not live in an Iran governed or dominate by the M-e K, as their fascistic core values will impose  – albeit perhaps and arguably a secular - form of oppression. Mass purges will make the Stalinist purges look like a picnic. An organization that has experienced so much backstabbing in the first years of the revolution is bound to be bent on vengeance; that propensity is clearly evident form M-e K’s rounding up and execution of the members of the ancient regime in the first year of the revolution. Nothing will serve the cause of reducing the M-e K as a “viable” political force in Iranian politics than their de-listing by the United States. The de-listing will make them out to be the stooges of the United States - a fifth column. The de-listing itself and the ensuing discussion about it among the Iranians internally will allow the airing and remembering of the negatives about the M-e K. Nothing would serve the demise of the M-e K more than its demystification for the reactionary youth of Iran.