Since the major gathering of the Iranian opposition, MEK in Paris on July 1, the issue of necessity of regime change in Iran has gained traction.
“The only solution to free the people of Iran and establish peace and tranquility in the region, is the overthrow of the Iranian regime,” declared Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the Iranian Resistance, in the major gathering of Iranians in Paris on July 1. She reiterated, “The regime’s overthrow is possible and within reach, and a democratic alternative and organized resistance MEK exists that can topple it.”
Maryam Rajavi’s call for regime change in Iran was widely echoed and supported by other prominent U.S. and European speakers. Among the speakers were former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton. All supported MEK ’s call for regime change in Iran.
Referring to the MEK , Bolton, said: “There is a viable opposition to the rule of the ayatollahs, and that opposition is centered in this room today. I had said for over 10 years since coming to these events, that the declared policy of the United States of America should be … to change the regime itself. And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!”
After the MEK and Iranian resistance’s July 1 rally in Paris, Fox News reported, “The Trump administration is potentially considering seeking a strategy to try to topple the regime.” The resistance, however, only needs American political and perhaps economic support to effect “regime change from within.”
As the Iranian regime change notion has gained momentum by the MEK rally, the Iranian regime is regarding the issue very serious. Fouad Izadi, an Iranian international expert in an interview with the state television, admitted to the scope of the new sanctions and terrorist designation of the Revolutionary Guards in the US Congress.
In response to the question that what exactly the Americans are after, Fouad Izadi said, “It doesn’t need any analysis...Mr. Tillerson said about a month ago in the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, and a couple of weeks ago Mr. Mattis in a press conference he had, said, … we want to change the regime.” The new bill in the U.S. Congress has added to already shaky regime’s fears. Janati, the head of the Guardian Council announced on Thursday that the main issue which has preoccupied the Supreme leader is his concern over regime change.
Iran Lobby attacks against MEK
At the same time the regime’s apologists and satellite writers in the Western media started their barrage of fake news and attacks against MEK to foil the regime policy.
The Iranian regime and its lobbies have consistently worked to paint the MEK as terrorists – with no evidence to support it – and discredit them in the eyes of the international community.
For instance, Mehdi Hasan an advocate of the Iranian extremist regime in the Britain and an Al-Jazeera English anchorman, could not hide his blind hatred towards MEK. In an article in Intercept, he levied numerous unfounded and threadbare allegations against MEK with many of them rebuked in several court of law during past decade. He also slandered the top politicians for supporting MEK as a viable force and wrote: “Could it be because of the old, if amoral, adage that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”? Perhaps. Could it be the result of ignorance, of senior U.S. figures failing to do due diligence? Maybe.”
The prominent Washington Free Beacon introduced Mehdi Hasan as, “a controversial British media figure whom insiders have billed as a mouthpiece for the Iranian regime. ...praised Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and publicly branded all non-believers as mentally ill "animals".
Ali Fallahian, regime’s former intelligence minister, made shocking remarks in an interview with Aparat Internet TV, In relation to the massacre of 30,000 MEK prisoners in 1988 he said, “the verdict is death sentence ... Mr. Mousavi (Tabrizi) who was the Revolution general prosecutor used to say that there is no need for trial at all ... it makes no sense that we try MEK ... Imam repeatedly insisted that you should be careful not to let MEK go... Imam always emphasized that you should always be cautious of this side ... MEK ruling is always execution. This was his (Khomeini’s) verdict as a supreme leader, either before this issue of 1988 or afterwards.” Fallahian said,”Many journalists are the intelligence agents ... A journalist is not paid well, so he should work with an intelligence service.” It is hard to believe that Mehdi Hasan is mouthpiece for the Iranian regime for free, as it is hard to believe that he moderates NIAC leadership conference or inviting NIAC president Trita Parsi to Al-Jazeera for free. NIAC of Trita Parsi is widely known as an Iranian regime’s lobby entity kicked off help of Javad Zarif, when he was Iran’s Ambassador to the United Nations. Trita Parsi, another MEK blind foe, unsuccessfully campaigned on behalf of the Iranian regime to keep MEK in the U.S. list of FTO. Mehdi Hasan and Trita Parsi are two typical Iran lobbyist stereotyping MEK as cultish and undemocratic. Obviously, by attacking the MEK and their supporters, they are trying to induce that the regime has no viable alternative and to kill any hope or chance for regime change in Iran, which should happen with the MEK at its core.
Iranian lobby is working hard to show that regime change policy for Iran is equivalent to war and they have been successful with some quarters. The New York editorial board on July 20 writes, “Prominent Trump supporters like John Bolton, a former ambassador to the United Nations; Newt Gingrich, former House speaker; and Rudolph Giuliani, former New York mayor, are pressing Mr. Trump to abandon the deal and are speaking out on behalf of the Mujahedeen Khalq, [MEK] exiled Iranian dissidents who back regime change.” The editorial concludes, “Trump would make a grave mistake if instead of trying to work with those moderate forces he led the nation closer to war.”
What is MEK Demand?
What does MEK stands for and is asking the West to do for the regime change in Iran. Is MEK demanding a war against Iran? No!
MEK supports Mrs. Rajavi call during the July 1, gathering when she said, “Our demands reflect the demands of Sattar Khan, revered leader of the 1906 Constitutional Revolution, and Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq, leader of Iran’s Nationalist Movement in 1950s. As I have reiterated, repeatedly, we want neither money, nor arms. …we say that the struggle of the people of Iran for regime change is legitimate, righteous and imperative. We urge you to recognize this “resistance against oppression.”
Link with Iranian people through MEK
During the July 1 gathering, Judge Mukasy, the 81st Attorney General of the United States in order to get rid of Mullahs, said, “The best way for both Iranians and non-Iranians to do that is to align with the Iranian resistance [MEK ] so as to make it clear to the oppressed citizens of Iran that the world's quarrel is not with Iran but with the mullahs who have subjugated Iran.” He said MEK members within Iran “have provided both an example and a tool with their daring publicity campaign within Iran urging regime change and posting photos of Mrs Rajavi and slogans opposing the clerical regime. They've been writing slogans on walls to support this gathering.
For five decades, the MEK has put themselves at great risks because of their ideals of democracy, freedom and equality. The Iranian regime has killed 120,000 of dissidents, including 30,000 political prisoners, during the 1988 massacre, the vast majority of whom were MEK supporters.
Indeed, regime lobbyists will be out in force this month but the MEK has the Iranian people and those who champion for human rights on their side.
LEADING OFFICIALS OF IRANIAN REGIME ADMIT THE MASSACRE OF MEK MEMBERS
Written by Jazeh Miller
Iranian regime massacred over 30,000 political prisoners in summer of 1988, and kept silent about this atrocity for three decades. Most of the victims were members and supports of the main opposition group the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). This year in the presidential election as conservative cleric Ebrahim Raisie, one of the perpetrators of the massacre, was selected as one of the main candidates, the issue surfaced, forcing regime officials, one after another, to confess about the carnage.
Last week in an unprecedented interview, Ali Fallahian, the former Iranian intelligence Minister, revealed the mindset behind the mass execution of summer of 1988. Ali Fallahian, who was called as “the most feared mullah in Iran” by the News Week is wanted by Interpol for his involvement in the AMIA bombing that killed 85 people on July 18, 1994 in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
In the interview, Fallahian explained that whoever had any relation with the MEK was condemned to death.
"Regarding MEK and all the militant groups, the ruling is the death sentence ... Imam (Khomeini) has said this ... their verdict is death sentence ... Fallahian said in the interview.
“Mr. Mousavi (Tabrizi) who was the Revolution’s general prosecutor used to say that there is no need for trial at all ... it makes no sense that we try them ... Imam repeatedly insisted that you should be careful not to let them go... Imam continuously stressed that you should always be cautious of this matter ... Their ruling is always execution. This was his (Khomeini’s) verdict as the supreme leader, both before and after this event of 1988 (massacre of political prisoners).” Fallahian said in the interview referring to MEK members and supporters.
" First, you should bear in mind that their (MEK’s) ruling was death punishment; and if the religious judge did not sentence them (MEK) to death, his ruling has been illegal ... so all of us should acknowledge that the verdict for a Monafeq [the term used by the regime to call a MEK member or sympathizer] is death sentence, this was both Imam’s fatwa and his verdict... there was a discussion about those who were supposed to be executed, but the executions did not carry out, and those who were to be executed but didn’t get a verdict. ‘Nonetheless’ why they were kept alive against Imam’s (Khomeini) will? “Fallahian said, responding to a question about the victims of the massacres of 1988 (MEK members and supporters) who were serving their sentences.
"When someone is a member of a military group, and that group is fighting with us, regardless of whether that person is armed or not, he is one of them (and should be executed).” Fallahian said referring to MEK members.
In the summer of 1988 Khomeini, the supreme leader of regime issued a religious decree calling for the massacre.
“Whoever at any stage continues to belong to the (PMOI/MEK) must be executed. Annihilate the enemies of Islam immediately!...Those who are in prisons throughout the country and remain steadfast in their support for the MEK are waging war on God, and are condemned to execution…It is naive to show mercy to those who wage war on God,” reads part of the decree.
A committee of four men was formed to implement the order, and in a matter of few months over 30,000 political prisoners were executed, mostly members and supporters of the MEK.
Fallahian is not the only official confessing to the massacre of political prisoners and MEK members and supporters. Ahmad Khatami, a board member of the regime’s Assembly of Experts, in Tehran Friday prayers sermon called for the perpetrators of the massacre of MEK members to be awarded medals.
Mullah Abbasian, another Friday prayers imam, made similar remarks and said:
“During the election season we witnessed how a number of people sought to change the MEK’s image and criticized those who stood against the MEK… Hat’s off to the judge who executed MEK members” Earlier this month in an interview with a state news agency Ali Razini, the head of Branch 41 of the Supreme Court – said that the execution of prisoners in 1988 in what has been named the 1988 massacre was “fair” and “lawful”. In the interview he confessed that the objective of the massacre was to uproot the MEK.
“Rulings by the top 20 judges and I ensured the country’s security at that time and ever since. As a consequence, the MEK can never establish itself here. We nipped them in the bud.”
Razini said referring to the rulings of massacre of thousands of MEK members.
Last week a number of political prisoners in Rajai Shahr prison in Karaj in a letter to UN Human Rights council wrote: “The formation of a committee to investigate the massacre in 1988 is necessary not only for the same crimes and prosecution of the perpetrators, but also for preventing repeat of such atrocities. The fact is that the number of executions and human rights violations in Iran are still catastrophic, as the perpetrators of those crimes were not held accountable or punished...”
Marking the 29th anniversary of this horrific purge, the time has come to hold the mullah’s regime accountable for crimes against humanity.
*****
More about MEK:
A Long Conflict between the Clerical Regime and the MEK
The origins of the MEK date back to before the 1979 Iranian Revolution., the MEK helped to overthrow the dictatorship of Shah Reza Pahlavi, but it quickly became a bitter enemy of the emerging the religious fascism under the pretext of Islamic Republic. To this day, the MEK and NCRI describe Ruhollah Khomenei and his associates as having co-opted a popular revolution in order to empower themselves while imposing a fundamentalist view of Islam onto the people of Iran.
Under the Islamic Republic, the MEK was quickly marginalized and affiliation with it was criminalized. Much of the organization’s leadership went to neighboring Iraq and built an exile community called Camp Ashraf, from which the MEK organized activities aimed at ousting the clerical regime and bringing the Iranian Revolution back in line with its pro-democratic origins. But the persistence of these efforts also prompted the struggling regime to crack down with extreme violence on the MEK and other opponents of theocratic rule.
The crackdowns culminated in the massacre of political prisoners in the summer of 1988, as the Iran-Iraq War was coming to a close. Thousands of political prisoners were held in Iranian jails at that time, many of them having already served out their assigned prison sentences. And with the MEK already serving as the main voice of opposition to the regime at that time, its members and supporters naturally made up the vast majority of the population of such prisoners.
As the result of a fatwa handed down by Khomeini, the regime convened what came to be known as the Death Commission, assigning three judges the task of briefly interviewing prisoners to determine whether they retained any sympathy for the MEK or harbored any resentment toward the existing government. Those who were deemed to have shown any sign of continued opposition were sentenced to be hanged. After a period of about three months, an estimated 30,000 people had been put to death. Many other killings of MEK members preceded and followed that incident, so that today the Free Iran rally includes an annual memorial for approximately 120,000 martyrs from the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran.
The obvious motive behind the 1988 massacre and other such killings was the destruction of the MEK. And yet it has not only survived but thrived, gaining allies to form the NCRI and acquiring the widespread support that is put on display at each year’s Free Iran rally. In the previous events, the keynote speech was delivered by Maryam Rajavi, who has been known to receive several minutes of applause from the massive crowd as she takes the stage. Her speeches provide concrete examples of the vulnerability of the clerical regime and emphasize the ever-improving prospects for the MEK to lead the way in bringing about regime change.
The recipients of that message are diverse and they include more than just the assembled crowd of MEK members and supporters. The expectation is that the international dignitaries at each year’s event will carry the message of the MEK back to their own governments and help to encourage more policymakers to recognize the role of the Iranian Resistance in the potential creation of a free and democratic Iranian nation. It is also expected that the event will inspire millions of Iranians to plan for the eventual removal of the clerical regime. And indeed, the MEK broadcasts the event via its own satellite television network, to millions of Iranian households with illegal hookups.
MEK’s Domestic Activism and Intelligence Network
What’s more, the MEK retains a solid base of activists inside its Iranian homeland. In the run-up to this year’s Free Iran rally the role of those activists was particularly evident, since the event comes just a month and a half after the latest Iranian presidential elections, in which heavily stage-managed elections resulted in the supposedly moderate incumbent Hassan Rouhani securing reelection. His initial election in 2013 was embraced by some Western policymakers as a possible sign of progress inside the Islamic Republic, but aside from the 2015 nuclear agreement with six world powers, none of his progressive-sounding campaign promises have seen the light of day.
Rouhani’s poor record has provided additional fertile ground for the message of the MEK and Maryam Rajavi. The Iranian Resistance has long argued that change from within the regime is impossible, and this was strongly reiterated against the backdrop of the presidential elections, when MEK activists used graffiti, banners, and other communications to describe the sitting president as an “imposter.” Many of those same communications decried Rouhani’s leading challenger, Ebrahim Raisi, as a “murderer,” owing to his leading role in the massacre of MEK supporters in 1988.
That fact helped to underscore the domestic support for the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, insofar as many people who participated in the election said they recognized Raisi as the worst the regime had to offer, and that they were eager to prevent him from taking office. But this is not to say that voters saw Rouhani in a positive light, especially where the MEK is concerned. Under the Rouhani administration, the Justice Minister is headed by Mostafa Pourmohammadi, who also served on the Death Commission and declared as recently as last year that he was proud of himself for having carried out what he described as God’s command of death for MEK supporters.
With this and other aspects of the Islamic Republic’s record, the MEK’s pre-election activism was mainly focused on encouraging Iranians to boycott the polls. The publicly displayed banners and posters urged a “vote for regime change,” and many of them included the likeness of Maryam Rajavi, suggesting that her return to Iran from France would signify a meaningful alternative to the hardline servants of the clerical regime who are currently the only option in any Iranian national election.
Naturally, this direct impact on Iranian politics is the ultimate goal of MEK activism. But it performs other recognizable roles from its position in exile, not just limited to the motivational and organization role of the Free Iran rally and other, smaller gatherings. In fact, the MEK rose to particular international prominence in 2005 when it released information that had been kept secret by the Iranian regime about its nuclear program. These revelations included the locations of two secret nuclear sites: a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak, capable of producing enriched plutonium.
As well as having a substantial impact on the status of international policy regarding the Iranian nuclear program, the revelations also highlighted the MEK’s popular support and strong network inside Iran. Although Maryam Rajavi and the rest of the leadership of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran reside outside of the country, MEK affiliates are scattered throughout Iranian society with some even holding positions within hardline government and military institutions, including the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Drawing upon the resources of that intelligence network, the MEK has continued to share crucial information with Western governments in recent years, some of it related to the nuclear program and some of it related to other matters including terrorist training, military development, and the misappropriation of financial resources. The MEK has variously pointed out that the Revolutionary Guard controls well over half of Iran’s gross domestic product, both directly and through a series of front companies and close affiliates in all manner of Iranian industries.
In February of this year, the Washington, D.C. office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran held press conferences to detail MEK intelligence regarding the expansion of terrorist training programs being carried out across Iran by the Revolutionary Guards. The growth of these programs reportedly followed upon direct orders from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and coincided with increased recruitment of foreign nationals to fight on Tehran’s behalf in regional conflicts including the Syrian and Yemeni civil wars.
In the weeks following that press conference, the MEK’s parent organization also prepared documents and held other talks explaining the source of some of the Revolutionary Guards’ power and wealth. Notably, this series of revelations reflected upon trends in American policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran. And other revelations continue to do so, even now.
MEK Intelligence Bolstering US Policy Shifts
Soon after taking office, and around the time the MEK identified a series of Revolutionary Guard training camps, US President Donald Trump directed the State Department to review the possibility of designating Iran’s hardline paramilitary as a foreign terrorist organization. Doing so would open the Revolutionary Guards up to dramatically increased sanctions – a strategy that the MEK prominently supports as a means of weakening the barriers to regime change within Iran.
The recent revelations of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran have gone a long way toward illustrating both the reasons for giving this designation to the Revolutionary Guards and the potential impact of doing so. Since then, the MEK has also used its intelligence gathering to highlight the ways in which further sanctioning the Guards could result in improved regional security, regardless of the specific impact on terrorist financing.
For example, in June the NCRI’s Washington, D.C. office held yet another press conference wherein it explained that MEK operatives had become aware of another order for escalation that had been given by Supreme Leader Khamenei, this one related to the Iranian ballistic missile program. This had also been a longstanding point of contention for the Trump administration and the rest of the US government, in light of several ballistic missile launches that have been carried out since the conclusion of nuclear negotiations, including an actual strike on eastern Syria.
That strike was widely viewed as a threatening gesture toward the US. And the MEK has helped to clarify the extent of the threat by identifying 42 separate missile sites scattered throughout Iran, including one that was working closely with the Iranian institution that had previously been tasked with weaponizing aspects of the Iranian nuclear program.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) led by Maryam Rajavi is thus going to great lengths to encourage the current trend in US policy, which is pointing to more assertiveness and possibly even to the ultimate goal of regime change. The MEK is also striving to move Europe in a similar direction, and the July 1 gathering is likely to show further progress toward that goal. This is because hundreds of American and European politicians and scholars have already declared support for the NCRI and MEK and the platform of Maryam Rajavi. The number grows every year, while the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran continues to collect intelligence that promises to clarify the need for regime change and the practicality of their strategy for achieving it.
REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN AT REACH WITH THE ONLY ORGANIZED OPPOSITION (PMOI/MEK)
By INU Staff
INU - When confronted with the question of whether the Trump administrations backs regime change in Iran, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Washington would work with Iranian opposition groups to reach “peaceful transition of that government.”
The most organized and renowned Iranian opposition group is none other than the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) with the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK) being the core member of this coalition.
The MEK enjoys vast support both inside Iran and abroad, especially an unmatched network of activists who dare to show their support for NCRI President Maryam Rajavi and her movement at whatever opportunity.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) echoed Tillerson’s view, saying “it’s time the Iranian people had a free and open society and a functioning democracy,” effectively a call for regime change.
Just months ago Senator McCain paid a visit to Albania where most MEK members are currently stationed after a long ordeal in Iraq. The MEK was the target of numerous attacks by Iran-backed proxy groups and even the government of former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki prior to their departure of this country in 2016.
On July 1, a major convention was held in Paris where hundreds of political dignitaries from across the globe explicitly called for regime change in Iran and supporting the NCRI and MEK.
The MEK’s vast popular base was proven as over 100,000 members of the Iranian Diaspora rushed to Paris to express their support for Maryam Rajavi, the MEK and a free and democratic Iran.
Trump allies, including John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration were present and voiced their support for the convention’s cause.
“There is a viable opposition to the rule of the ayatollahs, and that opposition is centered in this room today. I had said for over 10 years since coming to these events, that the declared policy of the United States of America should be … to change the regime itself. And that’s why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!”
We are currently at a period of analysis as the President’s National Security Council reviews Washington’s Iran policy.
The best and most realistic option before the Trump administration is supporting the pro-democracy coalition of dissidents, the NCRI, which is best able to mobilize other opposition groups into an even broader coalition. This, coupled with the MEK’s vast domestic network inside Iran, pose a major threat for the ruling regime in Tehran.
In his visit to Riyadh, President Trump also expressed strong views about extremist groups, sending a stark message to those supporting such entities.
“Drive them out of your places of worship,” Trump said of extremists, “drive them out of your holy land. Drive them out of this earth.”
After the July 1 convention in Paris, reports seen the next day indicated Trump might defy Tehran by signaling his willingness to consider supporting the Iranian opposition.
Iranian people and their resistance, with the NCRI and MEK at the helm, will bring about the “regime change from within.” And that is where U.S. and international support will help.
Washington benefits from aligning with the Iranian opposition NCRI and MEK because this resistance is seeking regime change to bring about democracy and freedom for the Iranian people, and the region, and merely peace and security for the whole world by rooting out the central exporter of terrorism and Islamic extremism. Which is the religious fascism ruling Iran.
Thus, President Trump has before him the option of reaching out to the Iranian opposition during his review of Iran policy.
More about MEK
A Long Conflict between the Clerical Regime and the MEK
The origins of the MEK date back to before the 1979 Iranian Revolution., the MEK helped to overthrow the dictatorship of Shah Reza Pahlavi, but it quickly became a bitter enemy of the emerging the religious fascism under the pretext of Islamic Republic. To this day, the MEK and NCRI describe Ruhollah Khomenei and his associates as having co-opted a popular revolution in order to empower themselves while imposing a fundamentalist view of Islam onto the people of Iran.
Under the Islamic Republic, the MEK was quickly marginalized and affiliation with it was criminalized. Much of the organization’s leadership went to neighboring Iraq and built an exile community called Camp Ashraf, from which the MEK organized activities aimed at ousting the clerical regime and bringing the Iranian Revolution back in line with its pro-democratic origins. But the persistence of these efforts also prompted the struggling regime to crack down with extreme violence on the MEK and other opponents of theocratic rule.
The crackdowns culminated in the massacre of political prisoners in the summer of 1988, as the Iran-Iraq War was coming to a close. Thousands of political prisoners were held in Iranian jails at that time, many of them having already served out their assigned prison sentences. And with the MEK already serving as the main voice of opposition to the regime at that time, its members and supporters naturally made up the vast majority of the population of such prisoners.
As the result of a fatwa handed down by Khomeini, the regime convened what came to be known as the Death Commission, assigning three judges the task of briefly interviewing prisoners to determine whether they retained any sympathy for the MEK or harbored any resentment toward the existing government. Those who were deemed to have shown any sign of continued opposition were sentenced to be hanged. After a period of about three months, an estimated 30,000 people had been put to death. Many other killings of MEK members preceded and followed that incident, so that today the Free Iran rally includes an annual memorial for approximately 120,000 martyrs from the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran.
The obvious motive behind the 1988 massacre and other such killings was the destruction of the MEK. And yet it has not only survived but thrived, gaining allies to form the NCRI and acquiring the widespread support that is put on display at each year’s Free Iran rally. In the previous events, the keynote speech was delivered by Maryam Rajavi, who has been known to receive several minutes of applause from the massive crowd as she takes the stage. Her speeches provide concrete examples of the vulnerability of the clerical regime and emphasize the ever-improving prospects for the MEK to lead the way in bringing about regime change.
The recipients of that message are diverse and they include more than just the assembled crowd of MEK members and supporters. The expectation is that the international dignitaries at each year’s event will carry the message of the MEK back to their own governments and help to encourage more policymakers to recognize the role of the Iranian Resistance in the potential creation of a free and democratic Iranian nation. It is also expected that the event will inspire millions of Iranians to plan for the eventual removal of the clerical regime. And indeed, the MEK broadcasts the event via its own satellite television network, to millions of Iranian households with illegal hookups.
MEK’s Domestic Activism and Intelligence Network
What’s more, the MEK retains a solid base of activists inside its Iranian homeland. In the run-up to this year’s Free Iran rally the role of those activists was particularly evident, since the event comes just a month and a half after the latest Iranian presidential elections, in which heavily stage-managed elections resulted in the supposedly moderate incumbent Hassan Rouhani securing reelection. His initial election in 2013 was embraced by some Western policymakers as a possible sign of progress inside the Islamic Republic, but aside from the 2015 nuclear agreement with six world powers, none of his progressive-sounding campaign promises have seen the light of day.
Rouhani’s poor record has provided additional fertile ground for the message of the MEK and Maryam Rajavi. The Iranian Resistance has long argued that change from within the regime is impossible, and this was strongly reiterated against the backdrop of the presidential elections, when MEK activists used graffiti, banners, and other communications to describe the sitting president as an “imposter.” Many of those same communications decried Rouhani’s leading challenger, Ebrahim Raisi, as a “murderer,” owing to his leading role in the massacre of MEK supporters in 1988.
That fact helped to underscore the domestic support for the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran, insofar as many people who participated in the election said they recognized Raisi as the worst the regime had to offer, and that they were eager to prevent him from taking office. But this is not to say that voters saw Rouhani in a positive light, especially where the MEK is concerned. Under the Rouhani administration, the Justice Minister is headed by Mostafa Pourmohammadi, who also served on the Death Commission and declared as recently as last year that he was proud of himself for having carried out what he described as God’s command of death for MEK supporters.
With this and other aspects of the Islamic Republic’s record, the MEK’s pre-election activism was mainly focused on encouraging Iranians to boycott the polls. The publicly displayed banners and posters urged a “vote for regime change,” and many of them included the likeness of Maryam Rajavi, suggesting that her return to Iran from France would signify a meaningful alternative to the hardline servants of the clerical regime who are currently the only option in any Iranian national election.
Naturally, this direct impact on Iranian politics is the ultimate goal of MEK activism. But it performs other recognizable roles from its position in exile, not just limited to the motivational and organization role of the Free Iran rally and other, smaller gatherings. In fact, the MEK rose to particular international prominence in 2005 when it released information that had been kept secret by the Iranian regime about its nuclear program. These revelations included the locations of two secret nuclear sites: an uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and a heavy water plant at Arak, capable of producing enriched plutonium.
As well as having a substantial impact on the status of international policy regarding the Iranian nuclear program, the revelations also highlighted the MEK’s popular support and strong network inside Iran. Although Maryam Rajavi and the rest of the leadership of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran reside outside of the country, MEK affiliates are scattered throughout Iranian society with some even holding positions within hardline government and military institutions, including the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Drawing upon the resources of that intelligence network, the MEK has continued to share crucial information with Western governments in recent years, some of it related to the nuclear program and some of it related to other matters including terrorist training, military development, and the misappropriation of financial resources. The MEK has variously pointed out that the Revolutionary Guard controls well over half of Iran’s gross domestic product, both directly and through a series of front companies and close affiliates in all manner of Iranian industries.
In February of this year, the Washington, D.C. office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran held press conferences to detail MEK intelligence regarding the expansion of terrorist training programs being carried out across Iran by the Revolutionary Guards. The growth of these programs reportedly followed upon direct orders from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and coincided with increased recruitment of foreign nationals to fight on Tehran’s behalf in regional conflicts including the Syrian and Yemeni civil wars.
In the weeks following that press conference, the MEK’s parent organization also prepared documents and held other talks explaining the source of some of the Revolutionary Guards’ power and wealth. Notably, this series of revelations reflected upon trends in American policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran. And other revelations continue to do so, even now.
MEK Intelligence Bolstering US Policy Shifts
Soon after taking office, and around the time the MEK identified a series of Revolutionary Guard training camps, US President Donald Trump directed the State Department to review the possibility of designating Iran’s hardline paramilitary as a foreign terrorist organization. Doing so would open the Revolutionary Guards up to dramatically increased sanctions – a strategy that the MEK prominently supports as a means of weakening the barriers to regime change within Iran.
The recent revelations of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran have gone a long way toward illustrating both the reasons for giving this designation to the Revolutionary Guards and the potential impact of doing so. Since then, the MEK has also used its intelligence gathering to highlight the ways in which further sanctioning the Guards could result in improved regional security, regardless of the specific impact on terrorist financing.
For example, in June the NCRI’s Washington, D.C. office held yet another press conference wherein it explained that MEK operatives had become aware of another order for escalation that had been given by Supreme Leader Khamenei, this one related to the Iranian ballistic missile program. This had also been a longstanding point of contention for the Trump administration and the rest of the US government, in light of several ballistic missile launches that have been carried out since the conclusion of nuclear negotiations, including an actual strike on eastern Syria.
That strike was widely viewed as a threatening gesture toward the US. And the MEK has helped to clarify the extent of the threat by identifying 42 separate missile sites scattered throughout Iran, including one that was working closely with the Iranian institution that had previously been tasked with weaponizing aspects of the Iranian nuclear program.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) led by Maryam Rajavi is thus going to great lengths to encourage the current trend in US policy, which is pointing to more assertiveness and possibly even to the ultimate goal of regime change. The MEK is also striving to move Europe in a similar direction, and the July 1 gathering is likely to show further progress toward that goal. This is because hundreds of American and European politicians and scholars have already declared support for the NCRI and MEK and the platform of Maryam Rajavi. The number grows every year, while the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran continues to collect intelligence that promises to clarify the need for regime change and the practicality of their strategy for achieving it.
How blood of innocents has become an endless nightmare for Iranian regime
By F. MahmoudiSpecial to Al Arabiya EnglishThursday, 27 July 2017
In Iran, 1980s is known as a bloody decade as thousands of political opponents were executed in brutal mass murder.
In the summer of 1988, a massive slaughter took place in Iran’s prisons. Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, the successor of Khomeini, was dismissed as a result of his objection to this massacre.
In September 2016, an audio tape from a meeting of the late Ayatollah Montazeri with members of the committee of executioners (commonly known by Iranians as death committee) was published by his son, which led to his arrest and prosecution.
Ayatollah Montazeri
In the audio tape, Ayatollah Montazeri described this massacre as the worst crime in the history of the Islamic Republic, and named Ibrahim Raisi, Mostafa Pour Mohammadi, Hossein Ali Nayeri and other coordinators as criminals.
Judgment against Islam
In a recent TV interview, Ali Fallahian, the minister of intelligence during the Rafsanjani government, said: “The view of Mr. Montazeri, who disagreed with Imam (Khomeini), was that these executions will ultimately cause a “historical judgment” against us, a judgement against Islam, so it is to our benefit not to conduct these executions, but Imam said that you must perform your religious duty and don’t wait for the judgment of history.”
Ali Fahllahian
The families of victims of 1988 massacre are currently seeking justice for their loved ones who were secretly executed and buried in mass graves at nights without any due process. The call for justice led by Iranian opposition, which started last year, caused a challenge for both of the regime’s factions during the presidential elections.
The created chaos between regime’s factions forced Khamenei to comment in a recent speech that “no one should be allowed to change the place of martyr and henchman in relation to the executions of the 1980s.”
What he meant was that the heads of this government are executioners in the eyes of the Iranian people, and this will create internal and international consequences that must be avoided.
Nimrooz movie
Additionally, state-controlled media released Khamenei’s praises about the “Nimrooz” movie, a production funded by the Iran revolutionary guard corps (IRGC) aimed at demonizing the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK), a prominent opposition movement. The reason of making this film was to prevent another uprising similar to 2009, in which the MEK played a pivotal role in organizing protests against the regime.
After the release of the film, former political prisoners and families of executed prisoners condemned the events showed during this film and called it as a distortion of the reality in history.
In another hasty event, the Iranian regime put up a show, a tour of Evin Prison, to international delegations. The purpose of holding this tour for 50 ambassadors of different countries on July 5 was to destroy and wash the traces of the regime’s crimes. Amnesty International called this tour a “crude PR Stunt” and mentioned in a statement that Evin prison is known in the world as a symbol of wide political oppression in Iran.
Evin Prison infamous
The executed prisoners of the 1980s were members and supporters of opposition groups of the Iranian regime, such as the MEK, Marxists and Kurds. MEK members and supporters accounted for more than 90 percent of the victims. Beleaguered in Iraq in the post 2003 era, the MEK experienced a very difficult and dangerous situation, particularly over the last decade.
Under such circumstances this movement has been able to attract public sympathy through mass media, especially satellite and Internet. Currently, the Iranians and the International communities have become curious to acquire knowledge about this movement.
Inhuman seige
In face of an inhumane siege and the looming danger of further massacres, members of MEK put up a heroic persistence and defended themselves with bare hands and survived the many plots of their enemies. Eventually, the MEK members exited Iraq and resettled in Albania. Now, the MEK is finding a fast-growing following in Iran, especially among the youth, creating a serious challenge for the Iranian regime.
With the rise of the call for justice for 1988 massacre, the Iranian regime is trying to destroy the evidence of this brutal murder and discourage the youth from joining the opposition movement. It has produced a propaganda film to change the place of martyr and executioner, and destroyed the mass graves of executed prisoners.
The Iranian youth, even the children of regime officials, want to know the reality and the truth of what happened in the 1980s, and the history of the movement that recently held a huge gathering in Paris. Also, they want to know what message it conveys for them.
Meanwhile, Khamenei has ordered to produce another film for Assadollah Lajevardi, the former head of Evin prison known as “Evin hangman,” who was one of the criminals 1988 massacre. “Hopefully, you can do something for Lajevardi as well. He is one of the figures who deserves something. His name was mentioned in this film, but he is one of the persons that we called him ‘strong man’ before,” Khamenei said.
It seems the spilled blood of the innocents who were ruthlessly murdered in Iran is now undermining the foundations and the very existence of the Iranian regime. Sympathy for the victims and their family has now penetrated the depths of the Iranian society and has become an endless nightmare for regime.
Political/rights activist focusing on IranOpinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 05: Rep. Elliot Engel (D-NY) speaks during a news conference discussing new legislation on U.S. policy toward Russia April 5, 2017 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. U.S. Also pictured is Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA). (Photo by Zach Gibson/Getty Images)
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday placing new sanctions on Iran, North Korea and Russia. This follows a similar version adopted overwhelmingly by the Senate in a 98-2 vote last month.
The House resolution, however, faced a more peculiar road even riddled with obstacles. Fortunately, the overwhelming 419 to three vote in favor of this bill, the bipartisan Countering Adversarial Nations Through Sanctions Act (H.R.3364) has made it veto proof. Despite the fact of alterations made in the initial text, all glitches have been set aside to gain White House consent.
“The Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), not just the IRGC Quds Force, is responsible for implementing Iran’s international program of destabilizing activities, support for acts of international terrorism and ballistic missiles,” the House Resolution text reads in part.
This development is a devastating blow to Tehran and a major success for the Iranian opposition National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).
I welcome the US House of Reps’ new sanctions and terrorist designation of #IRGC as essential to rectifying the policy of appeasement pic.twitter.com/hfSzmwT3Pz
Calls for regime change in Iran and support for the NCRI have been gaining unprecedented weight in Washington, leaving Iran’s mullahs utterly terrified.
Iran has been found “threatening U.S. national security and undermining global stability with a range of aggressive acts” through ballistic missile tests, supporting terrorist organizations and meddling in the internal affairs of other states. The House bill is calling for political and economic measures to place Iran before accountability.
This resolution can fundamentally be considered the blacklisting of Iran’s IRGC as the criteria imposes mirroring restrictions, and at times goes even further.
The IRGC will be placed on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists following these procedures becoming law and US President Donald Trump taking the engagements necessary. The following is a list of the actions stated in this House resolution:
All assets and property in the US belonging to IRGC-linked individuals and entities will be frozen.
No American individual or entity has the right to establish financial, business, services or other affiliations with any individuals directly or indirectly associated to the IRGC.
No American individual or entity has the right to violate these sanctions through intermediaries or bypassing these procedures.
All individuals and entities having any relations with the IRGC must be sanctioned. Considering the fact that the IRGC officially enjoy a variety of connections and associations, this will effectively be paralyzing for Iran. One such example is the IRGC Khatam al-Anbiya group that is currently cooperating with more than 2,500 economic firms. All these companies will be sanctioned, rendering any relations with them illegal.
As these measures place the IRGC under secondary banking sanctions, practically no financial institution will be permitted to provide direct and/or indirect banking services to IRGC-linked individuals and entities. No foreign bank will cooperate with any Iranian entity that is in any way related to the IRGC and/or its affiliated entities.
These sweeping arrangements follow the NCRI’s annual convention held on July 1st in Paris this year with senior American figures such as former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich calling for even more drastic moves against Iran.
