December 22, 2024

U.S. must step up to help exiled Iranians in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf

Detroit Free Press
June 17, 2011

After the death of Bin Laden, the world is again focusing on the Arab spring with even more vigor, because the message of Arab Spring is opposite to that of Bin Laden — freedom, democracy, and secular Islam.

When Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi began to fire on his own people, the United Nations stepped in — as it should have — with air strikes to protect civilians and stem the brutal attacks.

In Iraq, there is a similar situation, and perhaps even worse. Many Iraqi citizens have been gunned down in Baghdad and other cities because they called Maliki “a liar,” and wanted a better living condition for the country.

Iraqi forces, at the behest of, and with the assistance of the Iranian regime, have fired on guests in the country — unarmed defenseless men, women and children. The only way to describe this action is as a human rights crime.

The scene of the this horrific act is Camp Ashraf, a mini-city north of Baghdad that has been a peaceful home for two decades to exiles from Iran’s mullahs’ — 3,400 men, women and children who are members of Iran’s principal opposition movement, the People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran (MEK).  But Ashraf no longer is peaceful.

On April 8, Iraqi forces invaded the camp and mercilessly slaughtered 35 residents of Ashraf, including eight women, and wounded hundreds more.

The onslaught infuriated members of Congress. Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, wrote to the Secretary of State, expressing concern about the deadly raid, which described as “extremely troubling” and “directly contradict(ing) the Government of Iraq’s commitment to protect Camp Ashraf residents according to our agreement with them and in accord with its international obligations.”

Equally encouraging was the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, who said, “United Nations confirmation of the scope of last week’s tragedy at Camp Ashraf is deeply disturbing and the Iraqi military action is simply unacceptable.” He then suggested steps that need to be taken, “the Iraqis must stop the bleeding and refrain from any further military action against Camp Ashraf.” Senator Kerry added, “the investigation must hold accountable the responsible parties and ensure that there will be no sequel to these horrific events.”

Kerry described the current situation at Camp Ashraf as “untenable,” and concluded, “The United States must redouble efforts with all the relevant parties — including the Iraqi government, the United Nations, the European Union, and the Mujahedin-e Khalq itself — to seek a peaceful and durable solution, and to find permanent homes for the residents of Camp Ashraf.”

Particularly disturbing is that Maliki is doing the bidding of Tehran, which sees the MEK as a major threat, and for good reason.

The MEK wants to bring democracy to Iran, something that is far from the minds of the mullahs. Indeed, they are terrified of anyone who supports a democratic Iran, which is why they not only are masterminding the action at Camp Ashraf but are fighting demonstrations in the streets of Iran’s cities and having public hangings of dissidents.

It is heartening that the world, including senior American officials from the Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations, as well as French and European politicians, has called for an immediate end to Iraqi occupation of the camp forces and ensuring the protection of its residents by the United States and the United Nations.

The U.S., EU and UN should intervene quickly to protect Ashraf from the assaulting Iraqi forces from Ashraf, and as dozens of senior officials of Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations have recently said, the U.S. should remove the MEK from the terrorist list so it can be able to work for a free Iran in full throttle. In his letter to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Levin requested that the State Department “accelerate its review of the Mujahadeen-Khalq’s designation.”

The terrorist designation was meant to curry favor with the ruling Ayatollahs in Iran to alter their outlaw behavior; that policy has badly failed.

The Ashraf situation has once again demonstrated who the terrorists are – and it’s not the MEK. To the contrary, as Andy Card, former chief of staff to President George W. Bush said, “the MEK is the example that others can follow in the entire region of the Middle East.” That example is a free Iran, which is crucial for a democratic, secular, and non-belligerent region.

Mike Khodadost is the president of the Iranian-American Cultural Society of Michigan.

http://www.freep.com/article/20110617/OPINION05/110616057/Online-commentary-U-S-must-step-up-help-exiled-Iranians-Iraq-s-Camp-Ashraf?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cp

Ted Poe wants Iranian group removed from terrorist list, says it now seeks peaceful regime change

Houston Chronicle
June 16, 2011

Rep. Ted Poe is urging the State Department to remove an Iranian group from the department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

The Texas Republican said Mujahedin-e Khalq, also known as the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, is now a peaceful organization dedicated to regime change in Iran.

“I have not been convince they should remain on the list,” Poe said, adding that he has received both classified and non-classified briefings from the State Department and has yet to see evidence that marks the group as a terrorists.

The group,  founded in 1960s by Iranian Marxists who opposed the Shah of Iran,  is credited with several terrorist attacks that killed Americans in the 1970s, according to the State Department. Poe said MEK’s past may be spotted but the group is now peaceful.

“Iran wants them on the terrorist list. That should be a red flag,” P0e, R-Humble, said, adding that the group’s removal might help “move the country [of Iran] into a freer nation.”

Poe introduced a non-binding resolution in January that urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to remove the group from the terrorist organization list.

The Texan is not alone in his efforts to remove the MEK from the terrorist list. The Iranian-American Community of North Texas hired diGenova & Toensing to lobby on the issue earlier this year. The top lobbying firm based in Washington has been reaching out to members of Congress, a partner at the firm said.

“The MEK had denounced violence, disarmed and embraced a free market economy and embraced the declaration of human rights,” Victoria Toensing, a partner at the firm, said.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/06/ted-poe-wants-iranian-group-removed-from-terrorist-list-says-it-now-seeks-peaceful-regime-change/

Washington Times, June 15, 2011: 800 Faith Community Leaders Call on Secretary Clinton to Delist MEK

 

Washington Times, June 15, 2011: 800 Faith Community Leaders Call on Secretary Clinton to Delist MEK

 

U.S.-Iran Policy: P.J. Crowley, Stuart Eizenstat and Nancy Soderberg, Join Former Republican Officials in Urging President Obama To Support a “Persian Spring”

PR Newswire
June 6, 2011

WASHINGTON, June 6, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Several former U.S. Government officials spoke to the need for the Obama Administration to focus more on the Persian Spring as the administration is calibrating its new Middle East initiative to adapt to the realities in the region, during a symposium in Washington, DC, entitled “New U.S. Middle East Initiative and the Policy on Iran,” organized by Human Rights and Democracy International. 

P.J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs until March 2011, said, “Change is going to occur from the bottom up.  It’s not going to be imposed from the outside in but we have to be in a position where we can help shape change and support people and institutions that can bring democratic governance to the region as a whole, including to Tehran.” Addressing the protection of Camp  Ashraf, where 3,400 members of Iran’s main opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) reside, he said, “It is up to the international community…beginning with the United Nations, supported by the United States and the European Union, to begin a process to find a solution that allows people at Camp Ashraf to depart Iraq and take up residence in other countries and that should be the policy of the United States and it should be under the leadership with the intervening protection of the United Nations as the international community works to resolve this crisis.”

Nancy Soderberg, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, concurred. “The government of Iraq absolutely must stand by its obligation to protect those in that border and U.S. must push it harder to do so,” she said, adding, “I am confident the Obama administration’s current review [of MEK’s designation] will be decided on the merits.  Having spoken to a variety of people in the administration, I do think this will be decided on the facts.”

Ambassador Stuart Eizenstat, former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, said in part of his remarks, “It is important to strengthen the democratic opposition.  It is Iran which is the terrorist state.  That’s where the terrorism emanates. The State Department is going through their process as the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia required them to do and I hope as they do so they will expedite their decision and that they will reflect on the fact that the UK and the EU to which I was an Ambassador, have both lifted their restrictions with respect to the MEK.”

“It’s long past time for this country to act based on its principles, to delist MEK and thereby encourage those in Iran who are struggling for regime change and to make certain that the residents of Ashraf are either permitted to remain where they are with security provided by international force or that they are permitted to leave Iraq for other countries,” Judge Michael Mukasey, former United States Attorney General emphasized.

Former CIA Director, Porter Goss said, “We can’t kick down the situation on the MEK anymore.  We’ve got a deadline coming up…  [W]e have to encourage our Department of State to come up with the answers on what they are going to do to finish this review. The FTO designation is an impediment to the final solution of relocation and I think, therefore, the sooner we get a judgment on that, that is what I think where common sense will lead us….There’s not any justification based on what I’ve seen… I think if the case is adjudged that they should no longer be on the list, it will make it simpler to deal with the relocation question [of Camp Ashraf residents]… I think the first thing to do is get the FTO question resolved and the second thing to do is say these folks [Camp Ashraf residents] deserve a future.”

“There is nothing that is likely to be more decisive and more influential in reducing the strategic threats from Iran’s current regime than having a vigorous democratic opposition in Iran. It should be a central goal of EU policy to support the democratic opposition in Iran and the U.S. should be prepared to do so with as much aid as is required and without any concessions,” stressed John Hillen, former Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs.

SOURCE Human Rights and Democracy International

http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/329404

Obama must support Iranian democracy movement

By Brian Binley
The Washington Times
Friday, May 27, 2011

Start the effort by protecting Iranian exiles in Iraq
As President Obama is in London to talk hard global politics about Libya and the Arab Spring, there is little doubt that in discussions about Iraq, the fate of 3,400 Iranians based in Camp Ashraf deserves to be high on the agenda.

Those Iranians are members of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), Iran’s largest opposition group and the greatest thorn in the side of the current Iranian regime for more than 30 years. The PMOI is famed for revealing the Iranian regime’s clandestine nuclear weapons program and also has played a key role in leading the widespread protests that continue to increase in size and ferocity in Iran’s major cities.

The group’s great success and widespread support have meant that it is the Iranian regime’s No. 1 target. Initially, the Iranian regime used nuclear negotiations to demand that the PMOI be blacklisted in the West as a precondition for Tehran’s entering negotiations. U.S., British and European Union governments of the time had decided that appeasement of Tehran was the order of the day. If this meant unjustly blacklisting the regime’s largest opposition group, then so be it. The United Kingdom and EU blacklisting has ended following historic legal battles. No legal justification remains for the ban in the United States, and widespread calls are being made for the PMOI’s blacklisting to be removed sooner rather than later.

Having been defeated in relation to the blacklisting of the PMOI, the Iranian regime has, since the outset of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, looked to crush the PMOI at Camp Ashraf. With Nouri al-Maliki in power in Iraq, the Iranian regime has found an ally willing to jump at the behest of Tehran’s rulers. Iran’s demands were partly met on April 8 when Mr. al-Maliki ordered 2,500 heavily armed troops to enter the camp, shoot at the residents, run them over with military vehicles and destroy their homes. The vicious attack left 35 residents dead and more than 350 wounded, the majority of whom had suffered direct gunshot wounds. Having killed close to 50 residents and wounded close to 1,000 to date, Mr. al-Maliki has vowed to shut the camp at all costs by the end of the year.

Mr. Obama has a clear duty to intervene to protect this group until a lasting solution can be found. He must not forget that he entered his presidency on the back of a campaign in which he vowed to support democratic movements wherever they arise. Unfortunately, during the widespread protests that followed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s fraudulent return to power for a second term in Iran, the president remained disturbingly silent as the democratic movement was ferociously crushed by the Iranian regime. The U.S. has a clear duty to protect Ashraf residents, to whom it guaranteed protection at the outset of the Iraqi invasion.

Mr. Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron must issue a statement requesting that a United Nations team take control over the safety and security of the camp and guarantee the residents’ safety, preventing further violent assaults by the Iraqi military. Once U.N. protection is provided to the residents, Mr. Obama and Mr. Cameron must back an EU Parliament lead solution, which requires serious and long-term discussions among all parties to find the residents a home away from Iraq and in areas where their safety can be guaranteed by the host nation. This is a clear solution to what increasingly has become an overcomplicated issue.

The story of the residents of Camp Ashraf and their lasting future is not only about providing humanitarian assistance to a beleaguered civilian population at risk of violent assault at the hands of Iraqi and Iranian regimes. It also sends a message to the people of Iran and the region that the U.S. supports their democratic movements and will protect civilian populations from state-sanctioned military assaults against them.

Mr. Obama came to power on the back of a mantra of supporting democracy the world over; he must follow his words with action by guaranteeing the protection of the Camp Ashraf residents and finding a lasting solution to this humanitarian crisis. We should expect nothing less.

Brian Binley is a member of Parliament in the United Kingdom from the Conservative Party.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/26/obama-must-support-iranian-democracy-movement/

Avert a humanitarian catastrophe Mr President

The Independent
By Lord Corbett
Tuesday, 24 May 2011

US President Barack Obama, who is visiting the UK at the moment, will be aware of the urgent humanitarian situation facing 3,400 Iranian pro-democracy supporters in Camp Ashraf, Iraq, who came under deadly attack by Iraqi armed forces last month at the behest of Iran.

At least 34 unarmed and defenceless refugees, members of the main Iranian opposition PMOI, were killed and 350 others injured when Iraqi armed forces raided the camp and indiscriminately opened fire on them; however US officials who visited the camp following the massacre have not published their findings.

The attack was condemned by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the European Union and the US State Department. But Iraqi armed forces continue to occupy parts of the camp and there is a real risk of further attacks. The entry of medical supplies to the residents is restricted, and Parliamentary delegations and lawyers have been banned from visiting the camp. At least 42 seriously-injured residents have been denied access to the urgent medical care they need.

Without immediate international intervention there is real threat of a humanitarian catastrophe. Until an accord can be reached by all parties, it is imperative that the United Nations takes over protection of the residents and stations a permanent monitoring team at the camp.

The European Parliament’s proposed solution for the transfer of the residents to third countries and the preconditions attached to it are realistic and practical. However any forcible displacement of the residents within Iraq, as has been suggested by some US officials, would be unlawful and illogical and could quite possibly lead to a bloodbath.

EU foreign policy chief Baroness Ashton said 27 EU foreign ministers discussed the Ashraf crisis at the European Council in Brussels on Monday, emphasising the need for Iraq to respect the residents’ human rights and agreeing on the importance of working with the UN and US in particular to seek a lasting resolution to the issue.

Here in the UK, more than 500 Parliamentarians of all political parties have declared their support for a leading UN protective role, and we hope that President Obama will lend his support to the proposed European option.

Furthermore, President Obama needs to urgently take action on the continued proscription of the Iranian opposition PMOI by the US State Department. Following the Washington DC court order of July 2010 as well as the de-listing of the PMOI as a terrorist organisation by the UK and EU in 2008 and 2009, the designation of the group in Washington is legally unjustifiably, and we have seen the damage it has done as Iraq uses it to justify its deadly attacks on Ashraf residents.

There exists overwhelming bipartisan support in the US for the group’s designation to be promptly revoked, and I ask and hope that President Obama pays personal attention to this matter to ensure that this happens.

Robin Corbett is Chairman of the British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom. He is a former Chairman of the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/05/24/avert-a-humanitarian-catastrophe-mr-president/

Briefing in the US Senate: Call for Removal of Iran’s Principal Opposition, MEK, from FTO List, US Action to Protect Dissidents in Camp Ashraf

PRNewswire
May 20, 2011

WASHINGTON, May 20, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following is being issued by Iranian-American Society of Texas:

As President Barack Obama laid out his vision for a new chapter in American diplomacy in dealing with the new realities of the Middle East, in a briefing on Thursday, May 19, 2011, former senior U.S. government officials urged the removal of Iran’s main opposition movement, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), from the U.S. list of terrorist organizations as an absolute prerequisite to be consistent with the facts on the ground. The panel demanded urgent U.S. action to protect 3,400 Iranian dissidents in Camp Ashraf, Iraq and strongly rejected the State Department’s draft proposal to relocate Iranian dissidents from Camp Ashraf to other places inside Iraq.

General Hugh Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1997-2001), Howard Dean, former DNC Chairman; Tom Ridge, Homeland Security Secretary (2003-2005); Ambassador Dell Dailey, State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism (2007-2009); Patrick Kennedy, Member of the House of Representatives (1995-2011), and Col. Gary Morsch, M.D. (USAR), addressed the symposium, chaired by Professor Raymond Tanter, former National Security Council staff.

“Our own State Department [is party] to the inhumane treatment of MEK members [in Camp Ashraf] because in spite of numerous recommendations it has received from very prominent Americans to take the MEK off the FTO list, it continues to slow roll that issue. By keeping the MEK on the list we, in fact, weaken the support of the most vital organization that could bring about change internal to Iran,” General Shelton emphasized.

Secretary Ridge said, “If we are going to support …freedom-loving movements around the world, we have to include in that vision the pro-democratic forces in Iran — the MEK, and Camp Ashraf. Political, military, law enforcement, and diplomatic leaders throughout this country, Republican and Democrat, liberal and conservative, have been united in their public support of MEK, and have urged this administration to delist them. The silence in face of the brutal retaliation against Iranian dissidents at Camp Ashraf in 2009 and 2011 is certainly inconsistent and one might argue hypocritical, given the administration’s public support for the dissidents, the resistance and the protestors in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Syria.”

Governor Dean said, “The MEK must be taken off the list right now. There is no evidence… The District of Columbia Circuit Court found there was no due process and there was no evidence.  Our State Department needs to comply with the laws of the United States of America and take them off the list. This is a struggle for the soul of America.” “Two senior State Department officials said… delisting wouldn’t help Ashraf and that the U.S. hoped to move them to another Iraqi location. What are they smoking in the State Department?  For God’s sakes… if any harm comes to one of the residents of Ashraf, these so-called senior officials should resign at once… this relocation plan is a disaster…We have an obligation as human beings and as Americans to make sure that doesn’t happen…We can get people out now.”

Ambassador Dailey underscored, “Careful prudent and thought-out support to the organized, effective, and ever present opposition in Iran, the MEK, is essential. Camp Ashraf has been attacked twice as they had no weapons.  They just locked their arms, ten killed the first time; 35 killed the second time.  Clearly, this shows no intent and no capability to conduct terrorist activities. Currently, U.S. diplomats are recommending an internal relocation of the MEK and the Camp Ashraf residents. This will allow Iraq to continue to harass the residents with the eventual elimination of all the residents. This is totally unacceptable and should not be part of the U.S. foreign policy.”

“The reason MEK is still listed as a terrorist organization is that our policy in the past has been one of appeasement. MEK is the biggest threat to the Iranian mullahs.  If the mullahs are manufacturing and exporting systematic destabilization, systematic support for sponsoring terrorism, fundamentalism and the weapons of that war, the IEDs, we want to be on the side of the people who want to stop them,” said Rep. Kennedy.

Having served at Ashraf, Col. Morsch said, “Let’s stop the siege of Ashraf.  Let’s allow doctors and nurses to go in there.  Let’s ask the UNAMI to go in and to protect the people of Ashraf.  Let’s delist the MEK.  They are part of that spring awakening, except they started many, many springs ago.  And the rest of the world is just catching on.”

SOURCE Iranian-American Society of Texas

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/briefing-on-the-united-states-senate-call-for-removal-of-irans-principal-opposition-mek-from-fto-list-us-action-to-protect-dissidents-in-camp-ashraf-122362993.html

‘Democracy’ in Iraq a win for Iran

Orange County Register

The war in Iraq has been over for years, but its unintended consequences continue to linger – indeed, fester might be a better word.

Yes, Saddam is gone and the weapons of mass destruction never were found. But while Iraq now ostensibly is a democracy, the real winner – sad to say – is Iran.

This has been evident for months, but if any more proof is needed, consider the appalling situation at Camp Ashraf, home to some 3,500 members of the main opposition group to the Iranian mullahs who clearly are giving the orders to Iraqi forces.

Ashraf, located 60 miles north of Baghdad, has been the sanctuary for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) since the Iran-Iraq war. Following the U.S.-led invasion, coalition forces protected these unarmed civilians under the Geneva Convention, whose strictures still apply.

On April 8, the forces of Iraqi leader Nouri al-Maliki, who supposedly was going to bring democracy back to Iraq, have been brutally attacking these helpless refuges. Dozens of Ashraf residents have been killed and hundreds injured. Indeed, perhaps 10 percent of the population has been killed or wounded. The Iraqi forces did not even let the injured be taken for medical treatment.

The other day, the UN confirmed that 34 defenseless residents of Ashraf, several of them women were killed, mostly by gunfire.

This action is all at the behest of Tehran, which fears any opposition group and especially the MEK. And Iran doesn’t even have to be involved – it has Maliki to do the dirty work. Thousands of young American lives were laid down in the calls for freedom to give Nouri Al Maliki a tour of the Iranian mullahs to slaughter and kill residents of Camp Ashraf? No way.

Reaction around the world has been unanimous: the attacks must cease and the residents of Ashraf must be left to live in peace. From the United Nations to Amnesty International, to dozens of members of Congress, the call has been loud and clear to Maliki: Cease and desist.

The U.S. State Department stated: “The U.S. Government is deeply troubled by reports of deaths and injuries resulting from this morning’s clash at Camp Ashraf… [T]his crisis and the loss of life was initiated by the government of Iraq and the Iraqi military.”

California Democrat, Howard Berman, the ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, joined the committee chair, Florida Republican Ileana Ros-Letinen, condemning the Iraqi forces deadly attack on Ashraf.

http://articles.ocregister.com/2011-05-13/news/29544047_1_camp-ashraf-iraqi-forces-khalq

Washington Post, May 12, 2011: Senior US Officials Call on Secretary Clinton to Delist MEK

 

Washington Post, May 12, 2011: Senior US Officials Call on Secretary Clinton to Delist MEK

Iranian dissidents and a U.S. dilemma

REUTERS NEWS AGENCY

WASHINGTON — Call it the coalition of the baffled — a diverse group of prominent public figures who challenge the U.S. government’s logic of keeping on its terrorist blacklist an Iranian exile organization that publicly renounced violence a decade ago and has fed details on Iran’s nuclear programme to American intelligence.

On the U.S. Department of State’s list of 47 foreign terrorist organizations, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq is the only group that has been taken off similar lists by the European Union and Britain, after court decisions that found no evidence of terrorist activity in recent years. In the U.S., a court last July ordered the State Department to review the designation. Nine months later, that review is still in progress and supporters of the MEK wonder why it is taking so long.

The organization has been on the list since 1997, placed there by the Clinton administration at a time it hoped to open a dialogue with Iran, whose leaders hate the MEK for having sided with Saddam Hussein in the Iraq-Iran war.

Calls to hasten the delisting process rose in volume after Iraqi troops raided the base of the MEK northeast of Baghdad, near the Iranian border, in an operation on April 8 that left at least 34 dead, according to the United Nations Human Rights chief, Navi Pillay. In Washington, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, called the raid a “massacre.” Video uploaded by the MEK showed gut-wrenchingly graphic images of dead and wounded, some after being run over by armoured personnel carriers.

The raid drew cheers from officials in Iran, where the group is also classified as terrorist, one of the few things on which Washington and Tehran agree. The word schizophrenia comes to mind here. Iran is one of four countries the U.S. has declared state sponsors of terrorism. The MEK’s stated aim is the peaceful ouster of the Iranian theocracy. Isn’t there something wrong with this picture?

In response to the April 8 violence, MEK supporters organized a seminar in Washington whose panelists highlighted the bipartisan nature of those critical of the terrorist label. It’s not often that you see the former chairman of the Democratic National Committe, Howard Dean, a liberals’ liberal, sitting next to Rudolf Giuliani, the arch-conservative former mayor of New York.

At a similar event in Paris on the same day, the podium was shared by Nobel peace prize winner Elie Wiesel, Gen. James Jones, U.S. President Barack Obama’s former national security adviser, former NATO commander Wesley Clark and MEK leader Maryam Rajavi. The theme at both events – take the MEK off the list and protect the around 3,400 Iranians in Iraq, who live in Ashraf, a small town surrounded by barriers and security fences.

To hear Dean tell it in Washington, the April 8 raid was evidence that the Iraqi government is becoming “a satellite government for Iran,” with the terrorist designation used to justify “mass murder.” Dean is not alone in ascribing this and a previous attack that killed 11 in Ashraf in July 2009 to the growing influence of Iran as the U.S. prepares to withdraw most of its troops from Iraq by the end of the year.

WHAT NEXT?

What then? You don’t have to be a pessimist to anticipate more raids, more bloodshed and a humanitarian crisis. Until the end of 2008, the U.S. was responsible for the security of Ashraf and its residents enjoyed the status of “protected persons” under the Geneva Convention. That changed when the U.S. transferred control of Ashraf to the Iraqi government which provided written assurances of humane treatment of its residents.

They don’t seem to be worth the paper they are written on. The Iraqi raid on April 8 came a day after U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Baghdad for talks with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. One of the topics Gates raised — Iran’s influence in the region.

That Ashraf and the terrorist label for its inhabitants would put the United States in an awkward position after the transfer of responsibility was spelt out with remarkable clarity in February 2009 in a cable from the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Marked secret and released through Wikileaks, the cable said harsh Iraqi action would place the U.S. in “a challenging dilemma.”

“We either protect members of a Foreign Terrorist Organization against actions of the ISF (Iraqi Security Forces) and risk violating the U.S.-Iraqi Security Agreement or we decline to protect the MEK in the face of a humanitarian crisis, thus leading to international condemnation of both the USG (U.S. government) and the GOI (government of Iraq).”

Which raises a question. How could the U.S. fail to protect unarmed Iranian dissidents opposed to a dictatorship but go to war to protect Libyans in a conflict between armed rebels and a dictatorship? Unlike the Libyan rebels, of whom little is known, the Iranians in Ashraf were all subject to background checks by the American military in the six years it was in control of the camp.

If there’s logic in protecting one but not the other, it’s not easy to see.

http://blogs.reuters.com/bernddebusmann/2011/04/29/iranian-dissidents-and-a-u-s-dilemma/