Justice: Label triggers law freezing assets, denying visas and punishing Americans for financial, arms support.

The Los Angeles Times
Thursday, October 9, 1997
By NORMAN KEMPSTER

WASHINGTON–Secretary of State Madeleine Albright designated 30 foreign organizations as terrorist groups Wednesday, triggering a law that freezes their financial assets in the United States, denies U.S. visas to their members and subjects Americans who give them money or weapons to 10 years in prison…

Newly listed organizations include the People’s Moujahedeen, an anti-Iranian guerrilla group based in Iraq that maintains an office in Washington and has parlayed its anti-Tehran activities into substantial support on Capitol Hill.

One senior Clinton administration official said inclusion of the People’s Moujahedeen was intended as a goodwill gesture to Tehran and its newly elected moderate president, Mohammad Khatami. The People’s Moujahedeen was once accused of anti-American terrorism but in recent years has concentrated on paramilitary attacks on Iranian targets. Iranian warplanes invaded Iraqi airspace last month to bomb the group’s bases…

U.S.-Iran Relations Since Khatemi’s Election
Updated January 14, 2000
CRS Report for Congress

On October 8, 1997, the State Department officially designated the Iranian opposition People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) as a terrorist group, in accordance with the provisions of the Anti- Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-132). Two years later, the Administration designated the PMOI’s umbrella group, the National Council of Resistance (NCR), as an alias of the PMOI, thus applying the same restrictions on the NCR as apply to the PMOI (a ban on contributions by U.S. persons to the group, and a ban on entry into the United States by group members, and a freezing of group assets in the United States). However, the NCR continues to operate in the United States. Some in Congress consider the PMOI/NCR a legitimate organization fighting the regime in Tehran, and that the U.S. terrorist designation represented an unwarranted concession to Tehran.

The Washington Times
May 28 2003
Arnold Beichman

….”The Great Con-Game” has been responsible for one of the most mysterious chapters in the making of American foreign policy over the past two decades. I am referring to the what-the-hell-is-going-on secret diplomacy between the State Department and Iran, a country that President Bush included as part of the “axis of evil.”

……PMO actions enlisted the enthusiastic support of a majority of members of Congress and many members of European parliaments. Despite all evidence to the contrary, the State Department put the PMO on a list of terrorist organizations. This designation was a Chamberlainesque act of appeasement, the successful triumph by the ayatollah regime as part of “The Great Con-Game.”

…..”The Great Con-Game” appeasement policy began with the Clinton administration which put the PMO on the State Department list of terrorist organizations. An unnamed senior Clinton official told the Los Angeles Times (Oct. 9, 1997): “The inclusion of the People’s Mujaheedin was intended as a goodwill gesture to Tehran and its newly elected moderate President Mohammed Khatami.” Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk told Newsweek on Sept. 26, 2002, that the terrorist designation of the Mujaheedin was part of the Clinton administration’s strategy and was due to “the White House interest in opening up a dialogue with the Iranian government.”

Arnold Beichman, a Hoover Institution research fellow, is a columnist for The Washington Times.

Reuters
October 14, 1999

WASHINGTON, Oct 14 (Reuters) – The United States renewed its offer of unconditional dialogue with the Iranian government on Thursday but said it could not approve U.S. investments or international loans until Iran makes some policy changes.

In what looked like a goodwill gesture, Washington also announced a crackdown on the activities in the United States of the main Iranian opposition group, the Mujahedin-e Khalq.

Martin Indyk, the State Department official responsible for the Near East, made the appeal for dialogue at the Asia Society, the same forum at which Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a landmark speech on Iran in June of last year.

“It is time for the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran to engage each other as two great nations — face to face and on the basis of equality and mutual respect. When the government of Iran is ready to engage, we will be too,” said Indyk, an assistant secretary of state.

Albright offered to explore new confidence-building steps with Iran, ultimately aiming for normal relations. Indyk repeated that offer, but with evident frustration that the attempts of the past 18 months appear to have fallen on deaf ears in Tehran, at least among Iranian hardliners.

“Unfortunately the Iranian government’s response to this overture has been, for the most past, hide-bound and unimaginative, insisting that the U.S. must first take a number of unilateral steps” as a precondition for dialogue, he said.

Iran and the United States have not had diplomatic relations since the crisis over the U.S. diplomats held hostage in Tehran after the Islamic revolution of 1979.

The U.S. position is that U.S. and Iranian officials should sit down and bring up whatever concerns them.

The U.S. side would want to talk about Iran’s opposition to Arab-Israeli peace talks, its support for violent organisations in the Middle East, its ballistic missile programme and U.S. suspicions that it seeks nuclear weapons.

Iran is demanding the United States end economic sanctions, stop preventing Caspian oil and gas export pipelines from crossing Iran and lift a freeze on Iranian assets.

“It would be much more beneficial to both countries if we had a chance to actually sit down and work out arrangements that could meet each other’s concerns,” Indyk said.

He added: “We will continue to oppose investment in the development of Iran’s energy sector, bilateral debt rescheduling, Paris Club debt treatment for Iran and the extension of favourable credit terms by Iran’s principal foreign creditors. We will also continue to oppose loans to Iran by the international financial institutions.

“But we stand ready to change all of these policies as soon as Iran changes its practices in our areas of concern.”

The one practical concession Indyk made to Iran was to announce new restrictions on the Iranian opposition in exile, one of Tehran’s longstanding grievances against Washington.

He said the State Department had added the National Council of Resistance (NCR) as an alias for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a group which has assassinated Iranian officials.

The NCR, which has offices in downtown Washington, has acted as the civilian front for the MEK and was not previously subject to restrictions imposed on the Mujahedin.

Indyk said this meant the United States will no longer issue visas to NRC officials, that it cannot raise funds in the United States and U.S. banks will block its assets.

He also praised internal changes in Iran, which has seen gradual political liberalisation since the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989, which accelerated after the election of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997.

Indyk said recent municipal elections were “remarkable for their openness and the level of participation,” that the country had a vigorous and assertive press and that Iranian leaders had made worthy statements on human rights.

New York Times
October 13, 1997
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

The French oil company Total, the Russian oil company Gazprom and the Malaysian oil company Petronas just signed a $2 billion contract with Iran to jointly explore its South Pars offshore gas field. The deal was strongly endorsed by the French, Malaysian and Russian Governments and is a direct challenge to the U.S. law that orders sanctions on any companies that do big energy business with Iran. Here’s my guess at what Secretary
of State Madeleine Albright and President Clinton are now saying to each other.

Clinton: “What a mess. France, Russia and Malaysia all together in one deal to stick a finger in my eye. [French President] Jacques Chirac just won’t forgive me for not giving France that southern command of NATO, and he’s using this to get his revenge. Jacques Chirac — that guy is the Janet Reno of diplomacy. With allies like him, who needs enemies?”

Albright: “Sure, what does France care? Iranian terrorists aren’t attacking their troops in Saudi Arabia. They don’t threaten Russians or Malaysians. What I’d really love to do is sell Iran some long-range missiles with the targeting already programmed to hit Paris, Moscow and Kuala Lumpur. Then we could say to ol’ Jacques: ‘Hey, Jacques, it’s just business, you know, nothing personal. We’re just trying to make a few bucks, and by the way, we’re still out of Iran’s missile range and you’re not anymore. But we’ll hold your coat while you do something about it.”

Clinton: “That would make my day. But we can’t. So what do we do? If we impose the sanctions on these oil companies, their Governments will just sanction our companies and we’ll be in a trade war. But if we waive the sanctions, Al D’Amato will scream that we’re wimps. On top of that, Mobil and Conoco, which I barred from doing business in Iran, are going to demand whatever we give the French or Russian oil companies.”

Albright: “Let’s face it, our Iran policy is coming apart. We need an adjustment. Here’s what I’m thinking: First, we have to impose our sanctions on Total, Gazprom and Petronas, even though none of them have much business in the U.S. to sanction. They have to feel our pain. We would have no credibility if we didn’t. But we also won’t have any credibility if we don’t test whether this new President of Iran, Mohammed Khatami, who was elected by a landslide precisely because the Iranian public thought he would be a moderate, can forge a different relationship with us. Some people say Khatami is just a puppet, and the bad guys are still in charge.

Some say he’s for real. Let’s find out. Let’s sanction the oil companies but announce at the same time that we will review the sanctions in six months. We’ll watch to see if there is any change in Iran’s hostile behavior. If there is, we will consider waiving the sanctions. This way we give the Europeans, Iran and the oil companies an incentive to show that Iran is changing, and we also show we are serious about responding to change.

Clinton: “Do you think the Iranians saw the signal you sent Wednesday?”

Albright: “The U.S. press missed it, but the Iranians won’t. When the State Department issued its list Wednesday of “Foreign Terrorist Organizations” Americans cannot support, you can bet the first thing the Iranians did was look for their own groups. Imagine their surprise when they saw that I also put on the list the Iraqi-based anti-Iranian terrorist group “Mujahedeen Khalq.” The Iranians will get the point: We’ve just made it illegal for Americans to support the Mujahedeen — a group dedicated to overthrowing the Iranian Government. We also approved that gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Turkey, via Iran. Those are enough signals from us. It’s time for Teheran to send some back.”

Clinton: “Look, I’m dubious about Khatami’s prospects. I fear that Iran is like the Soviet Union — a totalitarian system that can’t be reformed. It either stays as it is or crumbles. I also fear that even if the so-called moderates in Iran do respond, the extremists will kill some Americans just to prevent any rapprochement. Still, it’s worth a try. With a normal relationship with Iran we could do a lot: counterbalance Russia and China’s influence in Central Asia, help Israel and be much more effective at isolating Iraq. So we might as well use this mess with France and the oil companies to test Khatami. Hey, when you’ve got lemons, make lemonade.”

Associated Press
October 15, 1999
By BARRY SCHWEID

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Clinton administration is renewing an overture to Iran for face-to-face talks “on the basis of equality and mutual respect.”

The goal in talking to Iran would be to encourage Iran to support Mideast peacemaking, stop supporting terrorism and halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk said Thursday in a speech to the Asia Society.

Similar overtures have been made by President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. “Unfortunately,” Indyk said, “the Iranian government’s response to this overture has been, for the most part, hidebound and unimaginative.”

And yet, the State Department official said, the administration has streamlined U.S. visa policies and supported academic and athletic exchanges with Iran while Iran has opened its doors to American wrestlers, scholars, graduate students and museum officers.

Indyk also welcomed a statement this week by a high Iranian official that the safety of Americans and other tourists in Iran must be safeguarded.

In a gesture, Indyk said the Mujahedin-e Khalq, a group that claimed responsibility for the assassination of Iran’s deputy chief of staff and the slaying of two high-ranking members of the Iranian government, was redesignated last week by the State Department as a foreign terrorist organization. The National Council of Resistance, an alias of the group, was listed for the first time, he said.

This means contributions to the group are illegal.

“Iran is also a victim of terrorism,” Indyk said. “We condemn these acts as we condemn all acts of terrorism.”

But, he said, Iran continues to support groups that use terrorism, even though senior Iranian officials have denounced attacks on innocent people, and Iran continues efforts to develop ballistic missiles, causing the United States to oppose investment in Iran’s petroleum sector.

With many in the Arab world looking toward a future of peace with Israel, Indyk asked, “what business is it of Iran to encourage terrorist activity,” and “why is Iran still fomenting trouble in Jordan and giving safe haven to Egyptian extremists.”

U.S. sanctions against Iran can be changed through “a parallel process,” he said, not as a precondition to talks, as Tehran insists, he said.

“We should move beyond the stage of gestures and symbols,” Indyk said. “Indeed, it is time for the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran to engage each other as two great nations — face-to-face and on the basis of equality and mutual respect,” he said.