December 22, 2024

Posts Comments

Washington Post: Bipartisan Letter to President Obama

November 22, 2011 by

Click on image for PDF

Time Is Running Out, Keep America’s Promise, Prevent an Impending Massacre at Camp Ashraf, Iraq.

Dear President Obama,
As you are undoubtedly aware, the undersigned strongly believe that the continued designation of the Peoples Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) as a terrorist organization is unjustified and unlawful. The designation has been lifted by our European allies and was characterized by a British review panel as “perverse”. Over fifteen months ago, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that our State Department had violated the Constitutional rights of the MEK by failing to adequately identify the sources upon which it relied to continue the terrorist designation for this organization. To date there has been no response to the court by State.

Tragically, however, the Iraqi government has used the listing to justify two attacks on the defenseless residents of Camp Ashraf which the United States previously promised, in writing, to protect, which has resulted in 47 deaths and over a thousand wounded. The humanitarian tragedy is more appalling since it was initiated by troops trained, vehicles provided and weapons supplied by the United States of America.

You should also know, Mr. President, that these murderous assaults have been encouraged and applauded by the Iranian government that has killed thousands of MEK supporters at home. We would encourage you to view the video of the most recent assault of April 2011 in which kneeling snipers shoot unarmed civilians and American Humvees are driven over them. If another bloodbath occurs, the United States would most certainly be held accountable by the world community, and perhaps more importantly, by our own conscience.

Mr. President, the same leadership you showed in preventing genocide in Benghazi is needed now. Immediate intervention is critical to avoid a pending humanitarian catastrophe inflicted on thousands of men and women our country promised to protect in 2004. We can withdraw our troops but we cannot relinquish our responsibilities. Only America, acting decisively, can prevent the potential genocide at Camp Ashraf.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has recognized the residents of Camp Ashraf as “asylum seekers” who are entitled to international protection as well. Unfortunately, the Iraqi government, which has been supported by the blood and treasure of our country, is impeding the work of the UN agency and has declared a deadline to close Ashraf by the end of this year.

We believe we are in a dramatic countdown to a looming genocide. Time is running out for our country to keep its written commitment to protect these men and women.

The December deadline is a pretext for a forcible displacement of the surviving residents of Ashraf throughout Iraq where their disappearance and death will go unnoticed. There was a Persian spring that the world, including the United States, ignored. Although the mullahs have killed thousands of men, women, and children in Iran who raise their voices for freedom and democracy, their pleas have been ignored by the countries who have heard similar cries from within Syria, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere.

We promised to protect the residents of Camp Ashraf. The honor, commitment and credibility of the United States are at issue as well.

The pending attack on the camp and the future closure and displacement of the residents must be prevented and the US, working with the UN, has the moral and legal responsibility to do so immediately.

This country did not sacrifice over four thousand lives to install and protect a government whose cowardly assault on defenseless members of the MEK dishonors and disgraces the memories of our fallen heroes.

These bravemen and women did not give their lives to support a brutal regime that bends to the will of Iran by harassing, wounding and killing innocent people our military previously assured would be protected.

Mr. President, time is running out! To prevent a monstrous and unspeakable tragedy, we urge you to lead an international effort and take the following actions:

First. Delist the MEK. The law is clear and must be applied regardless of political or diplomatic considerations.

Second. Publicly denounce the Iraqi deadline and use whatever means necessary to convince the Maliki government to cancel it. The UNHCR needs substantially more time to relocate the residents.

Third. We encourage you to lead the initiative within the Security Council to station a full time, UN led monitoring team with sufficient “blue helmet” troop protection to ensure the safety of the residents and the staff of the UNHCR until the residents are resettled in third countries.

Mr. President, we urge you to respond immediately to our appeal for your leadership and for immediate and decisive action. Time is running out and the fate of 3,400men and women is exclusively in the hands of the United States of America.

Signatories in alphabetical order:

  • Ambassador John Bolton
  • Secretary Andrew Card
  • General James Conway
  • Ambassador Dell Dailey
  • Governor Howard Dean
  • Director Louis Freeh
  • Mayor Rudy Giuliani
  • Admiral James A. Lyons, Jr
  • Congressman Patrick Kennedy
  • Judge Michael Mukasey
  • Governor Ed Rendell
  • Ambassador Mitchell Reiss
  • Secretary Tom Ridge
  • General Hugh Shelton
  • Senator Robert Torricelli
  • General Chuck Wald
Filed Under: Camp Ashraf, Luminaries, News, Publicity Ads Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Don’t abandon Iran opposition

November 15, 2011 by

 THE BOSTON HERALD

U.S. leaves cooperative dissidents hanging

Tom Ridge, the former U.S. secretary of Homeland Security.

The just-released International Atomic Energy Agency report on the Iranian nuclear weapons program should be the final warning to the West: Iran must be dealt with now, before its advanced nuclear weapons program is operational, and while the United States still has viable options for changing the regime in Tehran. However, the news that Iran is developing nuclear weapons isn’t news at all: Western policymakers have been warned of such plans and intentions for years with exacting intelligence from the main Iranian opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK).

In 2002, MEK activists risked their lives and revealed the existence of secret nuclear sites in Iran, notably the uranium enrichment site in Natanz. Since then, these activists have played a key role in the international community’s efforts to catch Tehran in its hide-and-seek escapades.

The MEK revealed in 2008 that Tehran’s scientists were working on nuclear warheads in Khojeyr, and in 2009 they unmasked the site where Tehran was working on detonators for implosion. In their latest revelation this past July, the headquarters for coordination of various aspects of nuclear weapons program that was controlled by the dreadful Revolutionary Guards was exposed.

The MEK established the existence of a secret nuclear site at Qom in 2005 — four years before it was announced by leaders of the U.S., United Kingdom and France jointly in 2009. The fact that Iran, under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is moving more advanced centrifuges to this underground site has compounded the concerns. And when the now defunct National Intelligence Estimate in December 2007 claimed that Iran had stopped the nuclear weaponization process, the MEK insisted its information proved the opposite. Time revealed the truth.

The warnings by the Iranian dissidents — most of whose information was at some point corroborated — resulted in precious little action in the West, which lumbered between sanctions and empty threats against the mullahs in Tehran. And instead of showing gratitude, Washington has marginalized the MEK and relegated them to an uncertain future, which may end up in their mass slaughter.

In 1997 the MEK, which at one time advocated the forceable overthrow of the regime in Tehran, was placed on the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) list as a “goodwill gesture” to open dialogue with the mullahs. Yet the MEK, which had subsequently disarmed and renounced violence against Iran, kept providing first-hand intelligence on Iran’s inner workings, particularly in the nuclear area. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in July 2010 strongly challenged the designation and ordered the State Department to review it.

Dozens of senior former American officials from the past three administrations have urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to revoke the MEK’s designation. In their call, they have joined more than 100 members of Congress and more than 4,000 parliamentarians around the world. Yet the State Department is still procrastinating.

The unjust designation of MEK as a foreign terrorist organization has set the stage for humanitarian crisis. It has provided an excuse for Iraq — at the behest of the Iranian regime — to oppress, and even massacre, those among the 3,400 Iranian dissidents residing at Camp Ashraf in Iraq who are “protected persons” under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

After two armed assaults by the Iraqi Army on the camp in 2009 and last April — when 36 people were killed and 300 injured — the Iraq government led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki set Dec. 31 as the deadline for the camp to close. His only excuse for murdering Iranian dissidents is the blacklisting by the U.S.

Last month, when the Iranian regime was caught plotting to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, President Barack Obama vowed to impose the “toughest sanctions.” Now, the prospect of Tehran’s terror masters being equipped with the most dangerous weapons looms as close as ever.

Given the current state of affairs, sanctions alone would not suffice. The U.S. should adopt a contingency plan, applicable immediately that would include the following steps:

  •  Removing the shackles from the Iranian opposition by removing the terror tag.
  •   Extending the deadline on the residents in Ashraf and preventing any Iraqi action on them.
  •   Imposing sanctions on the Iranian central bank.
  •  Organizing a campaign by our European allies to embargo Iranian oil to choke off the lifeline of the Revolutionary Guard.

Three years ago, then President-elect Obama said, “Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon I believe is unacceptable. We have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening.” The time for action is now, Mr. President.

Tom Ridge is the former U.S. secretary of homeland security.

http://bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view/2011_1115dont_abandon_iran_opposition_us_leaves_cooperative_dissidents_hanging

Filed Under: Camp Ashraf, Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

A matter of honor

November 10, 2011 by

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

America has a duty to protect Camp Ashraf residents from Iran’s vendetta

Camp Ashraf - Washington Times

On Oct. 7, 1997, during the Clinton administration, the People’s Mujahedeen of Iran (POMI/MEK) was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. The MEK represents the main opposition group to the Iranian theocracy and has been the source of key intelligence relating to Iran’s secret underground nuclear sites. According to a senior Clinton administration official, the designation of the MEK as a terrorist organization was intended as a “goodwill gesture” to Tehran and its newly elected “moderate” President Mohammad Khatami. Such a goodwill gesture coming on the heels of the Khobar Towers bombing in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, where we had proof of Iran’s involvement, resulting in the killing of 19 U.S. servicemen and the wounding of more than 500 was unbelievable.

Such groveling by our government to a fanatical Iranian theocracy should not have been a surprise. After all, when we had proof of its involvement in the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut Oct. 23, 1983, killing 241 of our finest military personnel and injuring hundreds more, we did nothing. Contrary to a recent book citing the incident, the National Security Agency had translated and promulgated the information on a planned “spectacular” attack on the U.S. Marines on Sept. 27, almost four weeks before the bombing. Further, we have known for years that Iran has provided financing, training and weapons to the insurgents we have been fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, which continues to this day, but has been swept under the rug. Even with their involvement in assisting the Sept. 11 hijackers due to our “hands-off” policy, we have essentially signaled to the fanatical mullahs that they have nothing to fear from us regardless of the atrocities they have committed against us. It is why they had nothing to fear from their attempt to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador in our nation’s capital. That Iran, which has cost thousands of American lives, both military and civilian, has been “off-limits” is a national disgrace.

Now we are faced with another moral situation in which we gave our word to protect the Iranian main opposition group, the MEK at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. In July 2004, we recognized the MEK residents at Camp Ashraf as “protected persons” under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Prior to that, the MEK disarmed in May 2003, turning over all their weapons to the U.S. Army’s Fourth Infantry Division and we signed an agreement with every individual at Camp Ashraf that we will protect them until their “final disposition.” From 2003 to 2009, U.S. forces protected Camp Ashraf from terrorist attacks from Iran and its Iraqi proxies. In 2009, the security of Camp Ashraf was turned over to Iraqi forces.

On Feb. 28, 2009, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei urged the visiting Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to expel Iran’s main opposition group, the MEK, from Camp Ashraf. According to reports of the visit, the ayatollah stated, “We await the implementation of our agreement regarding the expulsion of the [MEK] hypocrites,” to Iran and areas in Iraq where they will disappear forever.

Using the State Department’s designation of the MEK as an FTO as an excuse, Iraqi forces in July 2009 launched a raid on Camp Ashraf’s 3,400 residents, killing 11 and wounding 300. The latest attack occurred on April 8. Iraqi forces equipped with U.S. armored personnel carriers and Humvees killed 36, including eight women, and injured 345. Most were shot and some were crushed to death. Not surprisingly, Tehran praised the attack and asked Baghdad to continue attacking Camp Ashraf until it is totally destroyed.

Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called this latest attack a “massacre.” Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking her to ensure the safety of the residents of Camp Ashraf and to accelerate the review of removing the FTO designation of the MEK.

With Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki declaring that Camp Ashraf will be shut down by Dec. 31, action to resolve the situation for the 3,400 residents, including 1000 women, must be taken now. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled on July 16, 2010, that Ms. Albright erred in designating the MEK an FTO. The State Department was ordered to review this designation, strongly suggesting that it should be revoked. Why this review is proceeding at glacial speed is unconscionable, particularly since all our European allies have already removed the designation. Are we still clinging to the hope that we can negotiate with the fanatical mullahs? Such negotiations would be meaningless.

On Sept. 13, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees formally announced the recognition of the residents of Camp Ashraf as “asylum seekers” and requested the Iraqi government to extend the deadline beyond Dec. 31 to allow sufficient time for processing asylum applications and relocation to third-party countries. As of this date, Iraq has not changed its position.

To ensure that our word and honor still mean something, the MEK should be delisted as a FTO now. Furthermore, all tools available to us must be used to make Mr. Maliki understand that the Dec. 31 deadline must be extended. We did not sacrifice more than 4,400 American lives and tens of thousands injured in Iraq to create a country so that it can be another proxy for Iran.

Finally, the United Nations must place monitoring teams at Camp Ashraf to insure the safety of the residents until they can be resettled. The Obama administration has a rare opportunity to not only stand on principle but also to send a signal by delisting the MEK that we will support a “Persian Spring” regime change in Iran.

Retired Adm. James A. Lyons was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/10/a-matter-of-honor/

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

A US Pledge of Protection: What Is It Worth?

November 4, 2011 by

THE HUFFINGTON POST

The UN sanctioned US/NATO Libya operation to topple Gaddafi was based on a singular premise: where there is a looming humanitarian catastrophe and the international community has the means to stop it, it should intervene to do so. Whether the US/NATO involvement exceeded that mandate is another story. But what is indisputable is the legitimization of humanitarian intervention in such circumstances.

Today, President Barack Obama has available the same rationale that justified intervention in Libya to justify a non-military response to avert a humanitarian disaster in Iraq where 3,400 Iranian dissidents — members of the principal Iranian opposition movement, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK) — have been subjected to regular shootings and harassment by Iraqi soldiers. Located at Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad, they are threatened with deportation to Iran. Yet, the Obama Administration seems oblivious to their fate, writing them off presumably as the price of better relations with Iraq or perhaps an opportunity for “engagement” with Iran.

On Dec. 31, 2011, the day that the last American soldier is due to leave Iraq, Camp Ashraf is under orders by the Iraqi regime to close down and for its residents to be dispersed to prisons or concentration camps, or to the tender mercies of Iranian executioners. Two unprovoked armed assaults by the Iraqi Army on Camp Ashraf in 2009 and last April resulted in over forty dead and hundreds injured by Iraqi soldiers carrying US-made weapons. There is no reason to hope that the impending closure will be either peaceful or humane, despite the fact that the Ashraf residents were granted protected persons status under the Fourth Geneva Convention by the US military.

Following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Ashraf residents were provided with written guarantees by US authorities that, in return for disarming voluntarily, the US would protect them. But, since early 2009, when the US handed over responsibility for the security of Camp Ashraf to Iraqi forces, that guarantee has become a cruel hoax as the Iraqi Army continues to impose a punishing blockade, depriving residents of basic services, including access to medical care.

The hand of Iran’s mullahs is easily detectible in this turn of events. Tehran has reputedly insisted that the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki set Dec. 31 as the deadline for the camp’s closure. Iran, rattled by fears of contagion of the Arab Spring and facing a growing international crisis over its drive to develop nuclear weapons and encouragement of terrorist activities abroad (the most recent being the foiled plot against the Saudi ambassador to Washington), wants Camp Ashraf and its residents eliminated at any cost.

Fortunately, the United Nations has stepped into this cauldron of abandoned concern. In September, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), declared that Ashraf residents are asylum-seekers entitled to international protection, and accordingly urged that, at the very least, Ashraf’s closure be delayed. The government of Iraq has ignored these pleas and insists that the December closure deadline is firm.

Yesterday, in a last-ditch effort to head off the impending humanitarian crisis, the top UN envoy to Iraq offered to broker the closing of Camp Ashraf and to prevent Iraqi officials from forcing its residents out at year’s end. It remains to be seen whether these efforts will bear any fruit. If they do not, it appears likely that Iraq will continue preparations for another onslaught on Ashraf’s defenseless residents, with a bloodbath in the offing.

We are at the eleventh hour. All concerned, and especially the United States, must put press now to assure that the Dec. 31 deadline for the closure of Camp Ashraf is not implemented. Instead, UN monitors should be stationed in Ashraf and the UN should send peacekeeping forces to allow the UNHCR to do its work of peaceably resettling Ashraf’s residents.

Surely, the United States, which has expended so much treasure in lives and money in restructuring Iraq as a friend of the United States retains sufficient leverage to influence a more benevolent approach by the Maliki regime. After all, it was the US military that gave Ashraf’s residents its written assurances of US protection. The failure of the US State Department to remove the MEK from the US List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (despite the plea of the US Court of Appeals that it act expeditiously to provide a further review based on more credible evidence), is of no consequence: all concede that humanitarian concerns apply equally regardless of any such listing.

What is at stake is not only the fate of the 3,400 residents of Camp Ashraf, but the integrity of US commitments of protection. The fate of the Ashraf residents has become the litmus test of whether American pledges of humanitarian protection can be trusted. For the United States to not do its utmost to ensure that the recipients of US guarantees are not massacred, or dispersed so they can be killed in small groups, is innately incompatible with the moral high ground that President Obama staked out in dealing with freedom and democracy in the Arab world.

The US has the means to intervene without the need for military action — direct or indirect — by US forces. The only thing needed is the political will and courage to ensure that the integrity of what the United States says and does is not dishonored.

Allan Gerson is the Chairman of AG International Law in Washington D.C. He is presently involved with other attorneys in representing the PMOI/MEK in its efforts to be removed from the State Department List of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allan-gerson/a-us-pledge-of-protection_b_1076369.html

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

What’s Next for Iran?

November 3, 2011 by

On Wednesday, Democrats and Republicans on the House Foreign Affairs Committee unanimously approved harsher penalties against Iran, citing the regime’s plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia’s ambassador on American soil.

This latest Iranian provocation signals an alarming escalation by a terrorist regime that has been complicit in killing U.S. soldiers through its proxies, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Shia radicals in Iraq.

What evil can we expect next from the Mullahs’ brutal regime?

In a word, the wholesale slaughter of 3,400 unarmed Iranian dissidents whom the U.S. government has sworn to protect…a looming humanitarian catastrophe we are honor-bound to prevent.

There’s no doubt that December 31 will be especially joyful this year; a time when families across our country can welcome home the last remaining sons and daughters who fought bravely in Iraq. 

But December 31 will also mark the illegal and arbitrary deadline set by Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, at Tehran’s direction, for closing Camp Ashraf and dispersing its residents throughout the country– where they can be tortured or killed quietly out of sight of the international community. This is hardly the “successful” conclusion of the nine-year military intervention in Iraq that Americans will want to remember–or that the American president will want to claim as his legacy in an uphill re-election campaign.

Camp Ashraf, Iraq is home to members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (PMOI/MEK) who are “protected persons” under the Geneva Convention. 

The MEK is the principal Iranian opposition movement and it is committed to non-violent regime change and a democratic, nuclear-free Iranian future. 

During the past 25 years, this community has transformed Ashraf from a barren piece of land into a modern, vibrant town with universities, libraries and convention centers, parks, pools, and sports facilities. The Mullah’s in Iran consider MEK an existential threat and have vowed to annihilate its members in Camp Ashraf at all costs.

In 2004, the United States gave each and every man, woman, and child living in Camp Ashraf, a written guarantee of protection until they could be relocated safely. But since early 2009, when the U.S. handed over the camp to the Iraqis, Ashraf has been under a suffocating siege. Residents have been subjected to psychological torture and deprived of basic necessities including access to medical services.

Twice — in July 2009 and in April 2011 — defenseless Ashraf residents were brutally attacked by Iraqi troops acting on Tehran’s orders. The result was 36 dead, including eight women, and over 300 injured. And that was while US troops were in the country! Imagine what will happen when the U.S. military presence in Iraq is removed.

Seeking to extend its influence in the region, Iran will most assuredly exploit President Obama’s decision to leave Iraq without any U.S. military presence. And the opportunity to forge a deeper alliance with Iraq finds a willing partner in Nouri al-Maliki who has flouted international outrage over his actions with respect of Camp Ashraf.

In an ominous development earlier this week, Iraqi military and police units in humvees and trucks entered Camp Ashraf around midnight, sounding their sirens and brandishing their weapons in a calculated effort to intimidate and terrorize the residents.

Maliki’s previous attacks on Camp Ashraf were roundly condemned by The Secretary of State, the UK Foreign Office, the EU High Representative, the U.S. Congress, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, and international human rights groups such as Amnesty International. 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman John Kerry described the raid a “massacre,” calling for a thorough, independent investigation, and emphasizing that Iraqis must refrain from any further military action against Camp Ashraf.

When, shortly thereafter, the European Parliament offered a long-term, peaceful solution to the crisis wherein Ashraf residents would be peacefully evacuated and re-settled in EU member states and other countries (including the US), the Iraqi foreign minister prevented a European Parliament delegation from visiting the Camp.

In June, a senior bipartisan delegation of the House Foreign Affairs Committee also travelled to Baghdad to see Camp Ashraf investigate the April 8th massacre. The Congressmen met Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki. Once again, access to the camp was denied. The delegation held a press conference in the US Embassy after the meeting and called the Ashraf raid a “crime against humanity.”

The need for intervention by the US, EU and U.N. is urgent. American taxpayers, who are funding 27% of the annual U.N. budget for peacekeeping, should demand that the international organization immediately dispatch blue helmet forces to safeguard the unarmed men, women, and children in Camp Ashraf.

In his 2009 Cairo address, President Obama promised a new chapter in U.S. relations with the Muslim world. Make no mistake about it, America’s inaction in the face of a Srebrenica-style massacre at Camp Ashraf will leave an indelible stain on Muslim-U.S. relations–one that will not be easily forgotten or forgiven in the Muslim world.

The amendment to the Iran Threat Reduction Act of 2011 that was unanimously adopted yesterday in the House Foreign Affairs Committee calls on the Obama administration to pressure Iraq to ensure the safety of the camp residents, prevent their involuntary return to Iran, and delay closing the camp until the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees can resettle them in another country.

Clearly, the United States has a moral and legal duty to uphold the promises it made to the residents of Camp Ashraf, Iraq. To do otherwise would hand Iran a victory, seriously damage American credibility throughout the world and lead to a humanitarian disaster that must be prevented.

Howard Dean is the former Democratic governor of Vermont. He served as chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 2005-09. Tom Ridge is the former Republican governor of Pennsylvania. He served as our country’s first Secretary of Homeland Security in the administration of President George W. Bush.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/11/03/whats-next-for-iran

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tehran’s Anti-MeK Propaganda Machine

October 27, 2011 by

THE NATIONAL INTEREST

If disinformation is defined as deliberate and covert efforts to plant false information to bias media reporting and intelligence collection, the UN’s Durban conferences constitute a prime example. Although organized around an “anti-racist” agenda, they focus on ways to delegitimize Israel and are an icon of intolerance.

A participant in the Durban conferences is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Just as it tries to delegitimize Israel, Iran does the same to its opposition while portraying itself as defender of human rights. By releasing American hostages as a “humanitarian” gesture to “improve” the standing of the regime as President Ahmadinejad arrived at the UN, Tehran shows it is a past master of propaganda.

The Islamic Republic treats Israel and Iranian oppositionists in the same way because both are committed to the rule of law rather than to rule by clerics. In research for my forthcoming book on how to facilitate Iranian democracy, I concluded that the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MeK), an Iranian opposition group, is genuinely committed to democracy and not pretending just to gain support. My conclusions echoed those of under secretary of state George Ball, who stated in 1981 that the MeK intended to replace the Islamist regime “with a modernized Shiite Islam drawing its egalitarian principles from Koranic sources rather than Marx,” and of a State Department report of 1984 asserting: “The Mujahedeen unsuccessfully sought a freely elected constituent assembly to draft a constitution.”

The Iranian regime also misinforms publics, delegitimizes and seeks to destroy the MeK because it challenges clerical rule. By contrast, other dissident organizations, such as the Iranian Green Movement faction headed by Mir Hossein Mousavi, accept clerical rule.

Intelligence communities are targets of Iran’s disinformation. Consider a letter of August 2, 2011, called the “Joint Experts’ Statement on the Mujahedin-e Khalq.” One signatory stands out because of his distinguished background in intelligence: Paul Pillar, former National Intelligence Officer for the Near East and South Asia and now at Georgetown University.

The letter repeats false allegations of the Iranian regime, such as, “Widespread Iranian distaste for the MeK has been cemented by MeK’s numerous terrorist attacks against innocent Iranian civilians.” It resembles regime propaganda against the MeK; see an allegation in the Fars News Agency, the Islamic Republic’s radio and television network, which broadcast alleged statements of two MeK members who “confessed” they had planned to set off homemade bombs in Iran during June 2010. The broadcast includes an interview with Intelligence Minister Moslehi. But when recounting “terrorism” of the MeK, he only pointed to the group’s political and public-relations activities, including sending information outside the country, rather than actions against civilians.

A search of the Worldwide Incidents Tracking System for that period fails to link the MeK to the alleged incident described in the Fars Broadcast. Since 2001, there have not been any military attacks by the MeK, even against regime targets, much less against civilians. Consequently, there is growing bipartisan support for removing the terrorist tag on the MeK, e.g., at least 96 members of Congress, including Chairs of the House Select Intelligence, Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees.

As Iranian-Americans rallied in pro-MeK protests against Ahmadinejad when he spoke at the UN in 2010 and 2011, such well-attended rallies indicate support for the MeK among émigrés, which in turn can be read as evidence of support within Iran. One Iranian specialist who studies the MeK also finds support for the organization in Iran: Patrick Clawson of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy states:

One of the signs that the MEK still has supporters in Iran is that they occasionally provide blockbuster revelations about Iranian clandestine activities. None was more explosive than their revelations about the Iranian nuclear centrifuges at Natanz—revelations that led to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the subsequent unraveling of Iran’s eighteen-year tissue of lies about its nuclear activities, repeatedly condemned by the IAEA and the U.N. Security Council.

More recently, based on similar MeK sources, there was an August 2007 revelation about how the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) dodged international sanctions by using front companies to import nuclear enrichment equipment and take over the Iranian oil and gas sectors, mainstays of the economy. In October 2007, the U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the IRGC.

Another revelation on October 14, 2011, exposed the role of the IRGC-Quds Force (QF) in a plot to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the United States and blow up the Saudi Embassy in Washington. That disclosure reinforced additional sanctions Treasury placed on the IRGC-QF three days earlier.

And what is Tehran’s response to evidence of complicity in the assassination plot? The regime blames Israel and the United States and asserts MeK involvement. The State Department promptly denied MeK responsibility and accused Tehran of “fabricating news stories” and spreading “disinformation” to exploit skepticism about the plot.

In its efforts to suppress dissent, the Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) shapes opinion about the MeK throughout the world. The MOIS also targets the American intelligence community. The ministry plants false stories in the media; then they are used by U.S. intelligence to justify a false narrative against the MeK.

On September 12, 2007, the Mehr News Agency, a MOIS news outlet, announced that before one of the bombings in Karbala, closed-circuit cameras around the Imam Hossein shrine caught a woman and a youngster gathering information from various entrances of the shrine: “After their arrest, it became clear that they had been sent by the Mojahedin Khalq Organization [MeK] to locate ways to sneak into the shrine for terrorist operations, ”states Mehr.

Iran’s Habilian Society, a regime-sponsored group posing as a human-rights organization, published a U.S. Federal Appeals Court’s description of declassified American documents. One carried Iranian stories alleging MeK involvement in Karbala. Several state-run media reproduced the report. On August 14, 2010, Fars wrote:

According to reports recently published by the U.S. intelligence community, the Monafeqin [MeK] maintain their readiness to conduct terrorist attacks and resort to violence; based on recently declassified documents, the U.S. intelligence community emphasized…that…[the MeK] claim regarding having voluntarily renounced violence in 2001 was nothing but a hoax, and this organization maintains its capability to conduct terrorism.

The U.S. intelligence community classified a news account that had been planted in the media by the Iranian regime, allowing it to complete a disinformation cycle—a news-intelligence-news loop. The MOIS plants false allegations in its media, which become classified U.S. documents in the middle and end with Tehran reporting declassified U.S. intelligence as “proof” of MeK involvement in terrorist planning. But during this time period, the MeK in Iraq was under U.S. or Iraqi electronic surveillance. Thus, the MeK could not secretly plan or implement attacks on Karbala without being detected.

Under pressure of the Federal Court order, the State Department on May 20, 2011, released additional classified documents relevant to the terrorist designation of the MeK. One was an AP report of February 9, 2008, about alleged MeK involvement in Karbala plotting. In addition to the irony of classifying a public report later used to justify redesignating the MeK, the report also recalled statements about MeK training of suicide bombers placed in the media by Tehran.

General James Conway, U.S. Marine Corps (retired), former commandant of the Marine Corps who participated in the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the first battle of Fallujah, paints a picture of disinformation by the Iranian regime against the MeK:

The MOIS plants stories in the press of potential threats faced by American military commanders. And then the MOIS goes to those individuals and says, ‘You know, Camp Ashraf, where MeK members reside in Iraq, is a den for suicide bombers. The MeK is training them, and that’s a threat to American forces.’

Regarding Paul Pillar, he is a noted critic of “politicization of intelligence”—and thus it is surprising to find his name among those who wish to keep the MeK listed as a terrorist group. Because the absence of terrorism or terrorist activities during a legally relevant period of two years prior to a redesignation decision does not support maintaining the MeK on the list and there is hard public evidence of a political motivation for the listing, those who oppose politicization of intelligence should also support removal of the MeK from the Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) list.

As Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton makes her decision whether to remove the MeK, there is also a need to encourage others to act against bona fide terrorists. So long as the MeK is on the terrorist list despite its absence of terrorism and terrorist activities, the list is politically suspect. And if a decision to redesignate a group as terrorist were made on political grounds instead of evidence, the list would become a political instrument and reduce counterterrorism utility.

Finally, as the State Department dithers in its decision to remove the MeK terrorist designation, Tehran delegitimizes its main opposition, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-Quds Force pressures Baghdad to destroy members of the MeK in Camp Ashraf Iraq near the Iranian border.

Monday: Muhammad Sahimi, lead political columnist for Tehran Bureau, responds to Dr. Tanter.

Raymond Tanter served on National Security Council staff and as personal representative of the Secretary of Defense to arms control talks in the Reagan-Bush administration. A professor emeritus at the University of Michigan, he is currently an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. His most recent book is Terror Tagging of an Iranian Opposition Organization (Iran Policy Committee, December 2011).

http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/tehrans-anti-mek-propaganda-machine-6097%3Fpage%3D2?page=1

Filed Under: Luminaries, News

Opposition group could give Iran trouble

October 24, 2011 by

 

 

The foiled plot by agents of the Iranian regime to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States has officials in the Obama Administration furiously scratching their heads for an “ appropriate” response.

All too often with Iranian provocations, U.S. policy options swing ineffectually between the uncreative (economic sanctions) to the unrealistic (military strikes). One option sure to get the attention of the ruling mullahs in Tehran — and that could help set the stage for a future democratic transition there — is to unleash Iran’s main opposition group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK), which remains constrained by an ill-advised U.S. policy.

The MeK was put on the U.S. list of “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” during the Clinton administration as a well-intentioned but naive attempt to gain the confidence of Iran’s new and, it was hoped, reform-minded President Khatami. However, Iran continued to be the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism and continued to develop its nuclear program.

The Bush administration followed suit, fearful that the delisting of the MEK would prompt Tehran to send IEDs to murder U.S. soldiers. That decision was also ill-advised, as the Iranian regime not only sent the deadly explosives to Iraq, but has continued to train, arm and finance an assortment of terrorist groups, which have been responsible for hundreds of U.S. service members being killed or wounded.

Today, 3,400 members of the MeK sit in Camp Ashraf, attacked and massacred as recently as this April by Iran’s proxies in the Iraqi military, useless to America’s larger strategic objective to contain and neutralize Iran’s radicalism.

A large number of prominent former national security officials agree that not only is the MeK not a security threat to the U.S. (the group has dedicated itself to secular, democratic governance in Iran), it has already proven an able and willing partner to the U.S. by providing critical intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program, and the regime’s role in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

So what’s the hold up?

While the Federal Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. ruled in July 2010 that the U.S. government had erred in not delisting the MeK and remanded the case to the State Department for a thorough review, the department has yet to announce its decision.

A well-organized lobbying effort, again by proxies of Iran operating freely in the U.S., has mischaracterized the MeK as a cult with terrorist intentions. But this runs counter to all of the experience by the top brass of the U.S. military as well as intelligence officials who have worked closely with and studied the MeK over the years. It also flies in the face of eight different court rulings in the United Kingdom, the European Union and France, which have resulted in the group’s delisting in those countries.

The still-unraveling plot against the Saudi ambassador demonstrates the skill and reach of the Iranian regime in attempting to threaten and destabilize the U.S and our allies. It is somewhat ironic that while Tehran’s agents are running loose in this country, hatching terrorist bombings and assassinations of foreign diplomats, our government has shackled the main opposition, which the mullahs fear the most.

It is time to revisit this policy. While the administration, obviously caught off guard, is scrambling to find the proper response, delisting the MeK is the strongest signal the U.S. can send to the mullahs of Tehran. The timing could not be better.

Gen. Hugh Shelton is the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This article was originally published in The Charlotte Observer.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2011/10/24/opposition-group-could-give-iran-trouble.html

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mislabeling Iran’s enemies

October 21, 2011 by

NEWSDAY

The death last week of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi means focus will soon shift back to the single most significant threat America is facing: Iran. Officials in the Obama administration are still scratching their heads for an appropriate response to the foiled plot by agents of the Iranian regime to assassinate the ambassador of Saudi Arabia in Washington. All too often with Iranian provocations, U.S. policy options swing ineffectually between the uncreative (economic sanctions) to the unrealistic (military strikes).

One option sure to get the attention of the ruling mullahs in Tehran — and that could help set the stage for a democratic transition there — is to unleash Iran’s main opposition group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), which remains constrained by an ill-advised U.S. policy.

The MEK was put on the U.S. government’s list of foreign terrorist organizations during the Clinton administration as a well-intentioned but naive attempt to gain the confidence of Iran’s new and, it was hoped, reform-minded President Mohammad Khatami. However, Iran continued to be the world’s No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism and to develop its nuclear program.

The Bush administration left the group on the list, fearful that delisting it would prompt Tehran to escalate its efforts to murder U.S. soldiers in Iraq. That decision was also ill-advised; the Iranian regime not only sent explosives to Iraq, but has continued to train, arm and finance an assortment of terrorist groups, which have been responsible for the deaths and injuries of hundreds of U.S. service members.

Today, 3,400 members of the MEK sit in Camp Ashraf, their Iraq-based home for the past quarter century, after they fled persecution in Iran. After protecting them for six years, the U.S. military handed over the camp to the Iran-backed Iraqi government, which was responsible for two deadly attacks on the camp. At Camp Ashraf, they are useless to America’s larger strategic objective to contain and neutralize Iran’s radicalism.

A large number of prominent former national security officials, including former directors of the CIA and the FBI, James Woolsey and Louis Freeh, President Barack Obama‘s former National Security Adviser James Jones, and President George W. Bush‘s Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, agree that the MEK is not a threat to the United States. They point out that the group renounced violence against the Iranian regime years ago and has dedicated itself to secular, democratic governance there. It has already proven an able partner by providing critical intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program and the regime’s role in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

So what’s the holdup?

After the MEK appealed a 2009 decision by the State Department to maintain its designation, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruled that the government had erred and remanded the case to the State Department for a review. Fifteen months after the ruling, the department has yet to announce its decision. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) has introduced a congressional resolution urging the State Department to delist the MEK, and it has garnered 95 co-sponsors, including the chairmen of the Armed Services and Select Intelligence committees.

A well-organized lobbying effort by proxies of Iran operating in the United States has tried to demonize the MEK as a cult with terrorist intentions. But this runs counter to all of the experience by the top brass of the U.S. military, as well as intelligence officials who’ve worked with and studied the MEK over the years. It also flies in the face of eight different court rulings in the United Kingdom, the European Union and France, which have resulted in the group’s delisting.

This propaganda war has served Iran faithfully by keeping the MEK in shackles. The MEK’s terrorist designation gives Iran a license to kill its members at will. In addition to the dozens who have already died in Camp Ashraf, many more were hanged by Iranian authorities.

The still-unraveling plot against the Saudi ambassador demonstrates the reach of the Iranian regime in its attempts to destabilize the United States and our allies. It’s ironic that while Tehran’s agents are running loose in this country and may be planning terrorist acts, our government has hampered the opposition the mullahs fear most.

It’s time to revisit this policy. Delisting the MEK is not only warranted by law, it’s the strongest signal the United States can send to the mullahs of Tehran. The timing could not be better.

Gen. Hugh Shelton was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1997 to 2001.

http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/shelton-mislabeling-iran-s-enemies-1.3264024

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

For an effective response to Iran, remove MeK from terror list

October 20, 2011 by

THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER

General Hugh Shelton, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

The foiled plot by agents of the Iranian regime to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. has officials in the Obama administration furiously scratching their heads for an “appropriate” response. All too often with Iranian provocations, U.S. policy options swing ineffectually between the uncreative (economic sanctions) to the unrealistic (military strikes). One option sure to get the attention of the ruling mullahs in Tehran – and that could help set the stage for a future democratic transition there – is to unleash Iran’s main opposition group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK), which remains constrained by an ill-advised U.S. policy.

The MeK was put on the U.S. list of “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” during the Clinton administration as a well-intentioned but naïve attempt to gain the confidence of Iran’s new and, it was hoped, reform-minded President Khatami. However, Iran continued to be the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism and continued to develop its nuclear program.

The Bush administration followed suit, fearful that the delisting of the MEK would prompt Tehran to send IEDs to murder U.S. soldiers. That decision was also ill-advised as the Iranian regime not only sent the deadly explosives to Iraq, but has continued to train, arm and finance an assortment of terrorist groups, which have been responsible for hundreds of U.S. service members being killed or wounded.

Today, 3,400 members of the MeK sit in Camp Ashraf, attacked and massacred as recently as this April by Iran’s proxies in the Iraqi military, useless to America’s larger strategic objective to contain and neutralize Iran’s radicalism.

A large number of prominent former national security officials agree that not only is the MeK not a security threat to the U.S. (the group has dedicated itself to secular, democratic governance in Iran), it has already proven an able and willing partner to the U.S. by providing critical intelligence on Iran’s nuclear program, and the regime’s role in attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

So what’s the hold up?

While the Federal Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. ruled in July 2010 that the U.S. government had erred in not delisting the MEK and remanded the case to the State Department for a thorough review, the department has yet to announce its decision. A well-organized lobbying effort, again by proxies of Iran operating freely in the U.S., has mischaracterized the MeK as a cult with terrorist intentions. But this runs counter to all of the experience by the top brass of the U.S. military as well as intelligence officials who have worked closely with and studied the MeK over the years. It also flies in the face of eight different court rulings in the UK, EU and France, which have resulted in the group’s delisting in those countries.

The still-unraveling plot against the Saudi Ambassador demonstrates the skill and reach of the Iranian regime in attempting to threaten and destabilize the U.S and our allies. It is somewhat ironic that while Tehran’s agents are running loose in this country, hatching terrorist bombings and assassinations of foreign diplomats, our government has shackled the main opposition, which the mullahs fear the most. It is time to revisit this policy. While the administration, obviously caught off guard, is scrambling to find the proper response, delisting the MeK is the strongest signal the U.S. can send to the mullahs of Tehran. The timing could not be better.

Gen. Hugh Shelton is the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/20/2706257/for-an-effective-response-to-iran.html#ixzz1bNsBUmBe

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Iranian Opposition: No Role In Plot

October 19, 2011 by

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL – Real Time Brussels Blog

Louis Freeh, Former Director of FBI

The Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e Khalq, or MEK, has forged a core of support at the heart of Europe by flying in U.S. political heavyweights for lavish conferences. In January, it was former U.S. ambassador to the UN John Bolton (and his body double), former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson and former U.S. National Security Advisor director James Jones.

This week, Louis Freeh, FBI boss under Bill Clinton, was in town. Mr. Freeh, now a senior partner at his Washington consulting firm Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLP, has positioned himself as an MEK ally and fierce opponent of the regime in Tehran. “We’ve been appeasing these guys since 1979,” he said over coffee, describing his support for a tougher stand on Iran.

The thorny issue of Iran regained prominence last week with the Obama administration’s announcement that it had foiled an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S in Washington. Iran has said that the Iranian defendent in the case, Gholam Shakuri, actually belongs to MEK and recently visited Camp Ashraf, its compound in eastern Iraq. The allegation is nonsense, says Shahin Gobadi, an MEK spokesman. In a statement, he said the mullahs routinely “blame their crimes on their opposition for double gains.”

Instead, the MEK says the recent plot legitimizes its campaign to be taken off the U.S.’s official terrorist list, where it landed in the 1990s following negotiations between the Clinton administration and Iran. It had become, it says, a bargaining chip. The designation was due to MEK’s links to Saddam Hussein’s regime. After much lobbying, it is now off the EU’s list but has yet to be successful in the U.S.

Its other signature issue is the fate of Camp Ashraf, a refugee village of 3,400 MEK sympathizers which the Iraqi government, under pressure from Iran and its Shiite allies in Iraq, has vowed to close by the end of the year.

MEK fears an imminent military crackdown by the Iraqi government, such as one in April that ended with the death of 34 people. “We have received word from inside the Iranian government that another crackdown is planned,” said Maryam Rajavi, president-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which bills itself as the parliament in exile of Iranian dissidents.

Mrs. Rajavi shows pictures of listening devices near the camp she says have been placed there by Iranian agents. Tehran has heavily lobbied Iraq to put more pressure on Camp Ashraf.

Supported by Mr. Freeh, she is calling for the 3,400 residents of Camp Ashraf to receive refugee status. “Right now, many countries, the U.S. included, won’t take these guys in,” he said.

Mr. Freeh, who receives occasional speaker fees and travel expenses from Iranian exile groups, called MEK’s political future unclear. “It’s hard to judge their popularity in Iran,” he said. “I don’t have a position on MEK, except that they’re not a terrorist group.”

Once the MEK is removed from the U.S. terrorist list, said Mr. Freeh, Camp Ashraf residents will be able to obtain refugee status and emigrate outside Iraq.

After that, “the camp should be shut down,” he said.

http://blogs.wsj.com/brussels/2011/10/19/iranian-opposition-denies-role-in-plot/

 

Filed Under: Luminaries, News Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,