AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE

Supporters of residents of Camp Ashraf demonstrate in Geneva (AFP/File, Fabrice Coffrini

BAGHDAD — Negotiations are underway on relocating several thousand exiled Iranian opposition members from a camp north of Baghdad to another location in Iraq, officials said on Friday.

The European Union, meanwhile, urged further cooperation between UN negotiators and Iraqi officials in “difficult” efforts to close Camp Ashraf, which has hosted members of the People’s Mujahedeen Organisation of Iran (PMOI) since the 1980s.

Iraqi authorities have decided to close the camp by the end of 2011.

“The primary and overall responsibility to deal with the situation in Camp Ashraf lies with the government of Iraq within its sovereignty,” Martin Kobler, the UN secretary general’s special representative for Iraq, told AFP on Friday.

“In agreement with the government, we are in continuous contact with all parties, including the residents of the camp and the members of the international community to facilitate a peaceful and durable solution,” Kobler said.

“In this, I count on the full cooperation of the government of Iraq, the Camp Ashraf residents and the international community. International humanitarian standards and human rights have to be respected.”

“We are ready to assist,” Kobler said. “It is in everyone?s interest to find a peaceful solution.”

According to an Iraqi official, the object is to move the PMOI to another location, then for the United Nations to help repatriate those with dual citizenship to their second countries and the rest to Iran or another state.

The UN insists that repatriation to Iran will be on a voluntary basis.

“The EU is following very closely the current negotiations between the UN, UNHCR (UN Refugee Agency) and the government of Iraq about Camp Ashraf,” said a statement issued by the office of EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton.

“These negotiations are very difficult but we trust the UN negotiators to conduct them with the safety of the residents as their main preoccupation,” it added.

“The EU is also in regular contact with the Iraqi authorities and encourages them to be as flexible as possible with the modalities of the evacuation and to cooperate with UNHCR in order to facilitate the relocation of the residents,” the EU statement said.

Earlier in Brussels, the head of the European parliament’s delegation for relations with Iraq challenged the country’s determination to close the camp as “a virtual declaration of war on the UN and international community and a death warrant” for Ashraf residents.

“Ashraf residents … have accepted the European Parliament plan to be transferred to third countries. And we are working full power in this direction,” PMOI spokesman Shahriar Kia said by email.

“The problem is that the precondition for transfer to third countries is confirmation of the refugee status of residents by the UNHCR,” he said.

The UNHCR has said it is ready to “initiate its work by verifying the identity of Ashraf residents,” Kia said, but for “over two months now … we are waiting and the Iraqi government (has been) stonewalling the UNHCR work from the beginning.”

Camp Ashraf, which has become a mounting international problem, has been in the spotlight since a deadly April raid on the camp by Iraqi security forces.

The camp was set up when Iraq and Iran were at war in the 1980s by the PMOI and later came under US control until January 2009, when US forces transferred security for the camp to Iraq.

The PMOI has been on the US government terrorist list since 1997.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hkbU4agiiN6l51kpS1ZwqbE6hgHQ?docId=CNG.c08ef4ed8aae44f2aa1bee94410bd809.561

URGENT STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT’S DELEGATION FOR RELATIONS WITH IRAQ

US, EU, UN’s Grave Responsibility to Prevent a Humanitarian Catastrophe in Ashraf

The Iraqi Embassy in Brussels has notified the European Parliament of the position of the Iraqi Government on the issue of Camp Ashraf in a 10-point official document. The document is disingenuous and illegal in its entirety and amounts to a virtual declaration of war on the UN and international community and a death warrant for the residents of Ashraf. It reiterates the intention to clear the camp by the end of the year, claims the 3400 residents of Ashraf are terrorists, denies that they have any status as refugees or protection under the Geneva Conventions and confirms that their continued presence is creating difficulties with neighbouring Iran. It clearly opposes attempts by the UNHCR to interview the residents and provide them with refugee status. 

The document stresses that “the Iraqi government is committed to its decision to close Camp Ashraf by the end of 2011,” and since resettlement “did not lead to any results because of either refusal by the inhabitants of the Camp to evacuate, or non-willingness of those States to receive them…, the Iraqi government was left with no choice but to evacuate the Camp based on the principle of sovereignty, and transfer its residents to other camps in Iraq and facilitate their travel outside Iraq during the period left from this year.” 

The document deliberately ignores the extensive efforts of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI), the European Union, and United States, who have bent over backwards to reach a peaceful resolution to the Ashraf issue involving the resettlement of its residents, but have been repeatedly blocked at every turn by the Iraqi Government. The document is a blatant effort to set the stage for the massacre of Ashraf residents, clearly at the behest of the Iranian regime. The UNHCR, European Parliament, US Congress, Amnesty International and other international bodies have repeatedly demanded in past months that the wholly unworkable deadline for closure of Ashraf by the end of 2011 should be extended until such time as refugee status of its residents could be affirmed by the UNHCR, enabling their safe transfer to third countries. 

The 10 point document clearly shows that this a policy dictated by the Iranian regime. It explicitly states that Iraq is committed to non-interference in the internal affairs of neighbouring states and “the existence of this Organization however raises problems with Iran.” In another part of the document it is stated, “The presence of this Organization in Iraq threatens… the security of neighbouring countries and gives an excuse to neighbouring countries [Iran] to interfere in the internal affairs of Iraq.” Article 10 of the document states, “Iraq, as a democratic and peaceful country, wants to build peaceful relations with the neighbouring countries [Iran]…” 

The document falsely states the reason for the closure of Ashraf to be “the Organization [PMOI] has already been classified by the international community as a terrorist organization” and “The presence of the Organization is prohibited under the Iraqi Constitution that prohibits the presence of any terrorist entity on Iraqi territory.”

The letter ludicrously says, “Iraq is dealing with the residents of the camp as individuals and in accordance with the human rights principles and rules of international law enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” It appears as if the massacre of 47 residents, wounding of more than 1,000 others, the barbaric three-year siege of Ashraf, and the denial of medical facilities causing the painful death of sick and wounded patients, is according to the Iraqi Government an integral part of the principles of human rights enshrined  in international law. This is quite simply a joke! 

Since the letter leaves no doubt about the Iraqi government’s intentions for the massacre of Ashraf residents, I find it necessary to stress the following points: 

1. The international community, in particular the United States of America, the European Union, and the United Nations, must mobilise all their efforts to prevent another predictable bloodbath and a repeat of Srebrenica in Ashraf. The Iraqi government, whose hands are stained with the blood of unarmed and defenceless Iranian refugees, came to power with the help of the US and British and other Western governments. These countries, therefore, bear an important moral responsibility in preventing this looming catastrophe. 
2. The international community, in particular the United States of America and the European Union, must fully support the mission of the United Nations and the UNHCR for the affirmation of Ashraf residents’ refugee status and their resettlement to third countries. They must force the Iraqi government to postpone its deadline until the completion of this process. The United States in particular must prevent a great tragedy by precluding the Iraqi government from implementing the orders of the fascist dictatorship in Iran who seek the annihilation of Ashraf. If such a tragedy were to occur, the United States would bear the greatest responsibility. 
3. The European Union and its High Representative, Catherine Ashton, must adopt a clear position by condemning the Iraqi deadline and any forcible relocation of Ashraf residents inside Iraq. EU member states should immediately accept some of the Ashraf residents, particularly the ill and wounded, and persons who have been asylum seekers or who have family relations in European countries. This would be a tangible sign that the evacuation process had begun and would make any invasion of the camp by the Iraqi authorities more difficult to accomplish under the eyes of the world’s media. 
4. Any promises by the Iraqi Government are worthless. A few hours prior to the start of shooting in April 2011, the residents of Ashraf received a message via the US Embassy from the Iraqi Prime Minister giving assurances that there would be no violence. When Ashraf residents are dispersed in small groups, Iraqi forces and the terrorist Iranian Qods force will torture and assassinate them without the world being informed. In such circumstances if the world stands aside and allows matters to take their course without intervening, the resident of Ashraf, including more than 1000 women, face certain death.

Struan Stevenson, MEP

President of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with Iraq

18 November 2011

 PublicServiceEurope.com

Paulo Casaca is director of the Alliance to Renew Cooperation among Humankind campaign group. He was an MEP from 1999 to 2009

THE HUFFINGTON POST

On Tuesday 1 November 2011, there was an urgent press conference at UK’s Houses of Parliament.

The press conference was attended by a large number of the Iranian and non-Iranian community and chaired by David Amess, the Conservative Member of Parliament for the constituency of South end West.

The key speakers were Mr Mark Williams from the Liberal Democrat party, Mr Steve McCabe from the Labour party; and Lord Dholakia deputy President of the Liberal Democrat party in the House of Lords. Amongst the speakers, was also Mr Hossein Abedini, a member of the Parliament in exile of the Iranian resistance (NCRI) who also belongs to the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran. Mr Abedini is a victim and one of the few survivors of Iran’s acts of terrorism.

The press conference was brought together in order to discuss the recent serious developments on Camp Ashraf’s situation. Camp Ashraf is home to 3400 Iranian dissidents who are also members of the People’s Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI), Iran’s main opposition group. They have taken refuge from the Iranian regime and are living in Iraq for over two decades. During this period, they have been fighting to bring democracy and freedom to Iran and enlighten the world to the crimes of this terrorist regime.

However, for the residents of Camp Ashraf, it has been far from a ‘normal life’ as the mullahs have made every attempt to destroy the camp and ‘get rid’ of the residents.

After the overthrowing of the former president of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, the U.S. forces disarmed the Iranian dissidents in 2003 and promised to provide all of them with protection.

They were also given ‘protected persons’ status under the 4th Geneva Convention. However, two years ago, following plans of U.S. forces’ withdrawal from Iraq, control of the camp was handed over to the Iraqi government. Ever since, the camp has been under two separate attacks, which resulted in killing nearly 50 innocent people and injuring hundreds.

Due to the recent and intense spotlight that the international community have put on the Iranian regime, the mullahs’ fear of being overthrown has increased significantly. They are now the focus of major world leaders, especially in relation to the issue of their nuclear weapon capacity. On the other hand, their relationship with their Arab neighbours are looking worse than ever, following the recent plans of Iran’s terror plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington DC.

In addition, after the Arab spring, Iran is swiftly losing control in the Middle East region and is unable to help dictators such as the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in brutally suppressing the Syrian people and acts of terrorism in different parts of the world. From a very different angle, there is more and more news of economic and political corruption coming to the surface inside of Iran and more tension and division between the Supreme Leader and his followers, and Ahmadinejad and his friends.

When considering all these factors, one can clearly recognise and feel how terrified the mullahs must be. Their desperation to do whatever it takes in order to stay in power is quite obvious. Do they learn from history or the fall of great dictators and try to become better leaders for their people and country? Absolutely not! They continue to suppress the Iranian people while making every effort to destroy their main opposition group at Camp Ashraf.

At the Parliamentary press conference, we were shown a number of video clips, which was recorded by the residents of the Camp despite all kinds of restrictions. The footage clearly showed a very large number of military vehicles and convoys approaching and entering the camp in a noisy and aggressive manner, as to declare their presence and intimidate the residents further. This was following a trip of the Iranian Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi to Iraq.

In addition, we were shown how the number of loud speakers placed around the camp by the Iraqi forces to psychologically torture the residents day and night, has increased from the 300 that it previously was. Furthermore, we could see that the same technical equipments and devices which were used in Iran’s 2009 uprising to disrupt and disconnect all kinds of communication to and from the outside world, was put in place around the camp. This, in itself, is a very serious threat to the lives of the residents, as it is absolutely crucial for them to communicate with the outside world and give words out of an attack. Without communication and by being away from the media’s eyes, the Iraqi forces and Iranian regime have more of an opportunity to carry out a third massacre in Ashraf and it leaves the Ashrafis defenceless to face the barbarity of the Iraqi regime.

All of these are clear acts of coercion and strongly indicates that another attack is on its way if the international community and responsible bodies stand back and do nothing. What is being asked in favour of the residents’ protection is very simple, absolutely lawful and within the international humanitarian law. Mr Abedini explained in his speech, that there are a number of steps, which are required for the protection of the 3400 men and women at Camp Ashraf, these are the following:

1. The U.S., EU and the UN to force Iraq to withdraw its deadline from closure of the Camp by the end of 2011. This deadline is unrealistic due to the large number of the residents and the implications of having them all re-settled in third democratic countries.

2. The UN Secretary General and the Office of the High Commissionaire for Human Rights to station a permanent monitoring team in Ashraf to provide and guarantee the residents’ protection until the complete re-settlement of all residents.

3. The UN Secretary General, the U.S. government and the European governments including the UK government as the main partner in the coalition war against Iraq, to make possible the establishment of a UN peace keeping force and United Nations’ blue helmets to protect the residents until all of the residents have been re-settled in third democratic countries.

4. The UNHCR to re-affirm the residents’ legal status as political refugees.

In his speech, Lord Dholakia added, that we were prepared to establish democratic values and pay the price of it by going to war with Iraq. We were also prepared to bomb Libya for the sake of establishing the rights of the people to survive. Surely, it is not asking too much that the people of Ashraf require the same protection from the international community! Moreover, Steve McCabe wholeheartedly pointed out, that by standing aside and doing nothing, we are dishonouring the British soldiers who lost their lives in the Iraq war, and fought to bring freedom and democracy for the people living in that country.

The time for talking on this subject is over. We are facing a major humanitarian disaster. If nothing is done to prevent another attack, a far worst catastrophe should be expected, and the people of Iran who are a nation holding their breath for a democratic change, will hold those capable of doing something about this situation, completely responsible, for the murder of their brothers and sisters at Camp Ashraf.

Naghmeh Rajabi is a Human Rights Activist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/naghmeh-rajabi/stop-another-bloodbath-at_b_1097015.html

THE BALTIMORE SUN

Stop calling MEK a terrorist group and let Iranians transform their own country

The International Atomic Energy Agency‘s latest report about Iran lays bare the true nature of Tehran’s nuclear agenda: an advanced, sophisticated and highly secretive program run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps to build the bomb.

Overwhelming evidence shows a pattern dating back many years of covert activities with significant military involvement that cannot be explained away for any purpose other than building a nuclear warhead. The report contradicts the Iranian regime’s claim that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device,” the IAEA report underscored.

For years, Tehran has been dribbling out information only when confronted, conceding the existence of nuclear sites only after they were exposed by Iran’s main opposition movement, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), and responding to IAEA inquiries only after the fact.

Speculation over what to do about Iran is the topic of the day, but the Iran policy conundrum was not ignited by this or previous IAEA reports, nor is it a matter only for Washington to decide. The West has been engaged in a policy debate for years, in the course of which Europe was pretty much given the lead to deal with Iran, but to no avail.

For three decades, Washington has acted like a pendulum, oscillating between engagement and threats of military action. Given the problematic nature of the latter, engagement has essentially held sway. This has provided the Iranian regime a golden opportunity to rapidly advance its quest for the bomb.

When the European Union started nuclear talks with Iran in 2003, Tehran had not even completed the construction of its only known uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, and it was not enriching uranium. By the time President Barack Obama was sworn in, Iran was already enriching uranium at 3.5 percent levels, thousands of centrifuges had been installed at Natanz, and work was proceeding at a number of nuclear sites.

When President Obama embarked on his campaign to unclench the fist of the ayatollahs and persuade Tehran to abandon its nuclear weapons program, Tehran’s apologists were cheering the anticipated results. Nearly three years later, Tehran is enriching up to 20 percent, is installing centrifuge machines in an underground uranium enrichment facility in Qom, has been experimenting and working on building nuclear warheads, and has enough enriched uranium to make four nuclear weapons, if further enriched to weapon grade.

The moral of the story is that engagement has failed to halt Tehran’s nuclear drive. Sanctions have proven patently insufficient. So can anything be done? The answer is yes.

The opposition MEK has been the source of much of the intelligence about the existence of multiple nuclear sites scattered in different parts of Iran, including the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz and the heavy water facility in Arak in 2002; the key nuclear research and development facility in Lavizan-Shian in 2003; the Qom underground enrichment facility in 2005; and other significant sites over the following years directly involved with nuclear weaponization.

Iran saw major uprisings in 2009 lasting several months before being brutally suppressed. Many MEK members were arrested, sentenced to death or hanged for organizing and/or taking part in the anti-government demonstrations.

Currently, Iran’s economy is in shambles, the ruling elite are increasing fighting among themselves and internal dissent has spread.

Little can be done to stop Iran from advancing its ambitious nuclear weapons program without factoring in the Iranian people and their organized opposition committed to replacing the regime with a democratic, secular and non-nuclear republic. This option has the support of a large, bipartisan group of members of Congress who are calling on the State Department to remove the terrorist designation of the MEK, placed on the movement 14 years ago as a goodwill gesture to Tehran. (Dozens of senior former officials of the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations have made similar calls for delisting the MEK, including a national security adviser, a Homeland Security secretary, three chairs of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, directors of the CIA and FBI, a U.S. attorney general, U.S. ambassadors to the United Nations, and counter-terrorism officials.)

Nothing has been more destructive than engagement packaged under different names. Iran’s nuclear clock is ticking. However, there is no need for foreign governments to allocate money, dispatch troops or launch any kind of military action against Tehran.

This is the era of people power, arguably more deeply rooted in Iran than what we have seen in the Arab Spring. It is time for the West, the U.S. in particular, to focus on the third way: change from within, by relying on the people of Iran and their organized opposition movement.

Alireza Jafarzadeh is the author of “The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis.” He exposed the nuclear sites in Natanz and Arak in 2002, which triggered the IAEA inspections of the Iranian nuclear sites. His email is jafarzadeh@spcwashington.com.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-iran-20111115,0,7202013.story