Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unleash the Iranian Opposition (Mujahedeen-e Khalq)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Unleash the Iranian Opposition (Mujahedeen-e Khalq)

    Unleash the Iranian Opposition[, the Mujahedeen-e Khalq]

    by Daniel Pipes
    New York Sun
    July 10, 2007
    http://www.danielpipes.org/article/4747

    [With slight differences from the NY Sun version]


    These obstacles have not, however, prevented the MEK from trumpeting Islamism as the new global threat, providing important intelligenceterrifying the regime in Tehran, and putting on major displays of anti-regime solidarity.


    Participants at a Mujahedeen-e Khalq rally outside Paris on June 30 boisterously welcomed Maryam Rajavi.

    I witnessed one such display at a vast exposition hall outside Paris last week, where some 20,000 Iranians from around the world metBob Filner, Democrat of California, and former Algerian prime minister Sid Ahmad Ghozali. The crowd then settled in for an 85-minute tour d'horizon by the MEK leader, Maryam Rajavi.



    Second, the event had two apparent goals: reminding Iranians that an alternative does exist to today's theocracy, plus pressuring the European Union to remove the MEK from its terror list. For Iranians, the music portion included pretty girls in (for them, daring) Western clothing. For Europeans, it pointedly included "Le chant des partisans," the anthem of the French Resistance during World War II.

    Third, Rajavi's in-depth analysis mentioned neither the United States nor Israel, something extremely rare for a major speech about Middle Eastern politics. Nor did she even hint at conspiratorial thinking, a deeply welcome change for Iranian politics.


    Young singers at the Mujahedeen-e Khalq rally outside Paris on June 30. Many participants wore vests inscribed with the slogan, "Notre choix, Maryam Rajavi," an allusion to the MEK leader.

    Finally, no other opposition group in the world can mount so impressive a display of muscle as does the MEK, with its thousands of supporters, many young, and a slate of dignitaries.
    These factors, combined with the mullah's near-phobic reaction toward the MEK, suggest that the organization presents a formidable tool for intimidating Tehran.

    Alas, Westerners presently cannot work with the MEK, due to a 1997 decision by the Clinton administration, followed five years later by the European Union, to offer a sop to the mullahs and declare it a terrorist group, putting it officially on a par with the likes of Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and Hizbullah. A Portuguese member of the European parliament, Paulo Casaca

    But the MEK poses no danger to Americans or Europeans, and has not for decades. It does pose a danger to the malign, bellicose theocratic regime in Tehran. The MEK's utility to Western states is reflected in the inconsistent, even contradictory, U.S. government attitude toward it over the past decade. One amusing instance came in October 2003, when Colin Powell, the secretary of state, tartly wrote Donald Rumsfeld, then secretary of defense, to remind him that the 3,800 MEK forces at Camp Ashraf in Iraq were supposed to be treated as captives, not as allies.

    But there will be nothing amusing as the American presence in Iraq winds down and thousands of unarmed MEK members are left to the tender mercies of the pro-Tehran regime in Baghdad. Belatedly, the Bush administration needs to take three steps. First, let the MEK members leave Camp Ashraf in a humane and secure manner. Second, delist the organization from the terror rolls, unleashing it to challenge the Islamic Republic of Iran. Third, exploit that regime's inordinate fear of the MEK.

    As Patrick Clawson and I suggested over four years ago, "To deter the mullahs from taking hostile steps (supporting terrorism against coalition troops in Iraq, building nuclear weapons), it could prove highly effective to threaten U.S. meetings with the MEK or providing help for its anti-regime publicity campaign."
    That remains good advice, but there's not another four years to wait.
    -------------------
    sooz
    Sorry, replies only in English please.

  • #2
    I don't like the elitist and dogmatic nature of this organization, as most Iranians don't, and I personally think they need to integrate into the community and become normal. It would be more effective for a unified front in producing change. And is it me, or is Daniel Pipes known for extremist commentary. That's not a good guy to have on the team I don't think, and I personally resent his haphazard interference in Iranian affairs.
    Take him and cut him out in little stars,
    and he will make the face of heaven so fine,
    that all the world will be in love with night,
    and pay no worship to the garish sun

    - Shakespeare

    "In all intellectual debates, both sides tend to be correct in what they affirm, and wrong in what they deny." - JS Mill

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm sorry but im very passionately anti MEK, i can't understand why any iranian would support such two faced groups who will cling on any power from anyone, todays enemy is their tomorrows friend. MEK's biggest crimes was to side with saddam in the iran iraq war and to take part in violence. They use psychology to manipulate their members and other iranians into nonsense, extremism and violence, and any group which doesn’t allow men and women to have a relationship (mek members in iraq are not allowed to have a relationship) clearly has issues. No in reality the MEK are pawns to be handed over to the iranian regime, i totally agree with the death penalty to its leaders the rajavis but i think it's members should be pardoned. I am no fan of the iranian regime, but i would rather die and defend iran from any groups alike MEK, im up for TRUE democracy to iran, not MEK islamocommunism nonsense which only leads to more decades of uncertainty in iranian politics and society.
      Last edited by csite; 07-10-2007, 05:06 PM.
      I love my Baghali ...

      Comment


      • #4
        I was hoping for some comments about MEK. I know almost nothing about them and want to learn. I posted the article because I mostly respect articles from Daniel Pipes. Perhaps he is completely wrong on this issue. Sounds like it.

        Good to read your comments CSITE and JOUBIN.

        sooz
        Sorry, replies only in English please.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sooz View Post
          I was hoping for some comments about MEK. I know almost nothing about them and want to learn. I posted the article because I mostly respect articles from Daniel Pipes. Perhaps he is completely wrong on this issue. Sounds like it.

          Good to read your comments CSITE and JOUBIN.

          sooz
          Basically the MEK (in my views) are like a political party who have no chance on earth to get in power, so they support any popular unrealistic policies to gain support from left, center and right. The reality is the MEK says one thing, but their history and actions show something very different. During the revolution they were anti America, they used to take part in violent terrorism against america and the shah pre 1979, after 1979 after their failed attempt to gain power by their alliance with the popular islamic movement they started to murder and use terror against the new regime.

          This group actually aided saddam to kill many innocent iranians just to attempt to get some level of power in iranian politics and now they align themselves with the usa, tomorrow they would probably denounce America and align with China!

          IMO noone has the right to use violence to express their views, this group has blood on it's hands, they are no better than the people they criticize.
          I love my Baghali ...

          Comment


          • #6
            MEK has a perty bad history i dont even know why they are still around every group that they suck up to turn out to be there enemy once theys in power

            f the mek i think they are the only opposition group that i dont like


            G-d determines who walks into your life....It is up to you to decide who you let walk away, who you let stay, and who you refuse to let go.


            Comment

            Working...
            X