In his speech last month about the seismic shifts unfolding in the Middle East, President Obama referred to the "shouts of human dignity... being heard across the region" and said, "The question before us is what role America will play as this story unfolds."
The ousting of several dictators in recent months, the latest being Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen, and calls for democracy echoing across the region, are clear signals that change is inevitable. That is partly why the president stressed, "There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity."
That sort of laudable attitude, however, must also encompass calls for genuine democratic change in Iran. The United States needs to do much more to stand by the "shouts of human dignity" in Iran, since it has not been as welcoming, perhaps unwittingly, of the sort of fundamental change that will advance the cause of the Iranian people's self-determination.
The Iranian regime is a repressive and totalitarian state, which systematically and barbarically violates the Iranian people's most fundamental and universal rights. It not only brutalizes the Iranian people, but also is trying to exploit the unrest in the broader Middle East and North Africa. Therefore, America's approach vis-à-vis Iran is doubly crucial, owing to the profound regional dimensions.
The Iranian people have shown extraordinary courage in the face of such savagery. The 2009 nationwide uprisings seriously undermined the regime's hold on power. Indeed, as Obama said, we must "remember that the first peaceful protests in the region were in the streets of Tehran." The protests, however, need the power of an organized and able leadership.
The president said that the U.S. will continue to insist that the Iranian people deserve their universal rights. Rhetoric alone will not suffice, however. We remember that the first peaceful protests were in Iran but we also remember that the United States did not take the opportunity to fix a policy that obviously has done little to curb the Iranian threat or support the aspirations of the people. If anything, the prevailing policy has sadly aided the regime unwittingly, most notably by unjustly branding the main opposition as "terrorist."
In an attempt to open dialogue with Tehran, the State Department has blacklisted the principal opponents of the regime, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). The group, which is the most organized resistance movement in and outside Iran, and is credited with blowing the whistle on the regime's nuclear program in 2002, has been a thorn in the mullahs' eyes for three decades. Restricting its activities has been a staple demand and a priority for the regime.
But despite U.S. attempts to encourage more responsible policies by Tehran -- which of course should never have come at such a cost to the Iranian people and the MEK -- the regime has defied the international community and brutally suppressed its own people, in many cases justifying its actions by the very label affixed to the MEK in the U.S.
As a result, not only has the MEK borne the brunt of an atrocious crackdown inside Iran, it also has had its assets frozen in the U.S., its activities severely restricted, its supporters unjustly blocked from participating in the public debate on Iran, and its members in Camp Ashraf, Iraq, perennially harassed by a government deeply sympathetic to Tehran.
America's allies across the Atlantic have delisted the group after several high-profile courts vindicated the MEK against terrorism charges. To say the least, the designation puts the United States out of touch with its allies, its ideals, and its laws. Now for the first time, the Obama administration will have a chance to vacate the hold-over designation from prior administrations. But the State Department has so far delayed the delisting of the MEK even though a U.S. Court of Appeals ruling last July cast considerable doubt on its evidence, strongly suggesting that the designation should be revoked.
The MEK has broad social support in Iran, as evidenced by its ability to access the most carefully guarded state secrets regarding the regime's nuclear program and terrorism. It is well-organized, and ready to lead a broad-based and deeply-rooted opposition against an increasingly vulnerable but dangerous regime.
In addition to pressuring the regime through sanctions and offering moral support to the Iranian people's legitimate demands, the US should follow a two-pronged approach in dealing with the opposition. First, a large bi-partisan group of Members of Congress believe that the State Department should delist the MEK. Some 80 of them have cosponsored H.Res.60, which calls for delisting the MEK. In addition, dozens of senior officials from the last three administrations have called for the delisting of the group, including three former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff, President Obama's former national security adviser, Gen. James Jones, former Governor Bill Richardson, former DNC Chair Howard Dean, former Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Wesley Clark, and former FBI Director Louis Freeh. In a recent symposium in Washington, DC, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey reiterated that call. "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," he said.
Secondly, the United States should ensure the protection of some 3,400 MEK members in Camp Ashraf who are being brutally suppressed by the pro-Tehran Iraqi government. The people of Ashraf are a source of inspiration for young activists within Iran. In April, thousands of Iraqi troops stormed the camp at the behest of a regime desperate to curb popular dissent inside Iran, killing 35 and wounding hundreds, all of whom are being denied basic medical care. The residents of Ashraf should be protected both on moral and legal grounds, especially because Washington signed written agreements with the residents promising them protection.
Too much is at stake in a restive Middle East to allow a nuclear-armed Iran to exploit a power vacuum. The least the U.S. should do is to empower democratic forces by removing obstacles that benefit no one but vanishing tyrants. That is where the long-term interests of a hopeful region and an inspired West forcefully converge.
All the above notwithstanding, General Wesley Clark also addressed the assertion that the MEK is not a factor when it comes to Iran. “I was in a conference in Los Angeles three weeks ago and an unofficial representative of the Iranian government, at least that's what he's reported to me, came up to me and warned me about this group. It's a worldwide campaign against this group. Now, you have to ask yourself as a strategist why would this be? How can this group be so powerful if nobody in Iran believes in them, nobody supports them, then why wouldn't the Iranian government just ignore them? So it must not be true.”
Re the betrayal of the principles, as much as I have read the MEK's literature, it has always had one principle, in the 60s up to the present: establishment of a government through the ballot box; a government based on the separation of church and state, gender equality, recognition of Iran's diverse religious and ethnic minorities and the abolition of death penalty.
The MEK has not deviated from those goals even an inch.
If your definition of success is in fact 30 years of bad decisions which led to failure after failure to the point that many core members deserted the organization and the supporters stopped going to the demonstrations, then, Congratulations!
Yes, the Iranian regime uses the MKO as the rouge elements that are igniting uprisings in Iran. But that's because they are smart; they know the MKO are considered traitors and are hated by the majority of the people so this is a perfect excuse for them to crush the uprisings with bullets, arrests and swift executions... And it doesn't help when MKO falsely claims that they had a hand in all this; it's really as if the MKO and Iranian regime are working hand-in-hand.
The regime has gone even as far as accusing Mousavi and his staff and even Ahmadinejad and his staff to be associated with the MKO!
Now, do you get the picture?
There you go again!
I guess you never get tired of repeating the stale and debunked allegations against the MEK.
I am sensing a bit of misogyny in questioning the democratic credentials of the MEK because they have appointed "a bunch of inexperienced women to make critical decisions.!" Misogyny in its most naked form is on display here.
The one thing everyone is impressed by is the prominent role women have played in the MEK, and they have earned it in the course of the 30-year struggle against the women-hating mullahs.
As for the MEK being out of touch with 70% of the Iranian population, the facts on the ground tell a very different story. Here is what a leading Ayatollah said after the major uprising on December 27, 2009, which shook the regime to its foundations: “The Monafeqin (pejorative term for the Mujahedin-e Khalq, MEK) directed the uprisings on Ashura (Dec. 27, 2009). We have evidence to prove that. The slogans that the Monafeqin had posted on its sites since December 7 were the same slogans that the rioters were chanting on Ashura... The Monafeqin were the commanders of the operation on Ashura. These individuals in the streets not only cooperated with them but were also their foot-soldiers.”
Moreover, hundreds in the ranks of MEK at Ashraf and among its network of tens of thousands of supporters outside Iran are in their 20s and 30s.
Stay tuned for more
Allow me to teach you a new lesson, in this age of instant access to information, your strategy does NOT work.
MKO/MEK does NOT have broad social support. Where is the proof? The MKO are hated with extreme prejudice in and outside of Iran. They are viewed as traitors who helped Saddam. They are out of touch with at least 70% of Iran’s population who is under age 30 and your cult left Iran 30 years ago. So how can you say you have broad social support?
And what kind of organization claims to defend democracy yet they don’t practice it themselves? Calling everyone who speaks against you “an agent of the regime”? Or appointing bunch of inexperienced women to make critical decisions, just because they are women. That's not only undemocratic, but also SEXIST.
Finally, the MKO is a terrorist organization. Not because the US says so, because the MKO proudly bragged about their terror strategy back in 1980s. My point is not to defend the victims, perhaps they deserved it. But the strategy still was terrorism.
Show me another “resistance group” that has struggled for over 30 years and has betrayed their own principles at every critical step and then finally prevailed with popular support.
We should take into consideration that Iraq does not mean Al-Maliki and there are good decent democratic leaders active in Iraq today who should be supported.
Al_Maliki has sold himself to the Iranian Revolutionary guards and the Qods Brigades leading by the Iranian Supreme leader.
I do not think Al-Maliki is a strong charactor himself but under trhe guidance of Iran he has accepted or may be forced to be their proxy.
I was wondering if Al_Maliki was realy capable of saying no to Iran now that they have dominated the Iraqi politics. What I mean is that, a big "NO" to The American Delegation to Iraq might cost Al_Maliki less harm than a small "no" to the Iranian supreme leader.
Overall we can say that Iranian regime can not survive without its proxies in Syria and Iraq.
If you are keen to find your answer, please search the NCRI web site at www.nrci.org.
This will help you to prevent you posting baseless comments in future.
Only in Iran, under the mullahs, speaking out about what you believe in is punished, in most cases by death.
AH
CONTINUED:
Iran, being perhaps the most important country in the region, and ruled by religious fascists, is the last place we would want to encounter agonies we are facing in the recorded countries above. So, let’s unshackle the main Iranian opposition by taking them out of the bogus and infamous FTO list and let them do their thing.
The People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) is the most organized, disciplined, and democratic alternative, with a president-elect by the resistance forces, a National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), comprising more than 500 members form all sectors of the Iranian society, religious and ethnic groups, and 25 commissions headed by some of the most prominent and progressive personalities, and democratic platform that has been endorsed by more than several dozen US and European parliamentarians, military, intelligence and law enforcement officials.
Let us not lose a chance to have a good friend before it is too late.
CNGS
I wholeheartedly and unequivocally agree with and support the author for his insightful column on the issue of the “Persian Spring”, and a viable, organized and democratic alternative in Iran, at a time when the mullahs of Tehran have announced the installation of new and advanced centrifuges to develop nuclear bomb. I try to explain below.
The Syrian dictator has created a killing field in cities across Syria, and perhaps will outdo his father, who massacred more than 20,000 people in the city of Hama, north of Damascus. And guess what… in direct complicity with the mullahs’s thugs from imported from Iran.
The Egyptian revolution, where more than a million people assembled at Tahrir Square and overthrow a more than sixty-year military dictatorship, is at a stalemate, for no reason, but lack of an organized, popular and democratic alternative.
In Yemen, where its president is in Saudi Arabia for serious injuries incurred as a result of an attack on his palace, the US has no choice, but to engage in secret bombing ( according to a breaking news by the NY Times) to stem the tide advances by the al-Qaeda forces.
In Libya, the psychopathic dictator, Muammar Qaddafi has been utilizing aviation assets to massacre the freedom fighters for weeks now, and now that the NATO chief feels it is almost the end of Qaddafi, the US and Europe are in a quandary regarding an alternative government.
To be continued:
Instead of acknowledging this legitimate Iranian resistance and dumping the policy of appeasing mullas , US has tried to totaly ignor the Resistance, Its organization and Leadership.
As part of the policy of appeasement, Us has tried to lock out the POMI by unfaily liting it as a terrorist group whithout having any sucess in changing the terrorist regime in Iran.
What amazes me is the Seceretoy Clinton's insistance on this listing.
Finally, I wanted to remind all again that we have paid the heaviest price in resisting the Iranian Regime so far among all of the countries recently going through democratic changes and we like US to acknowledge this fact that we are ready for a democtatic Iran based on Human Rights and respectful of the international laws.
Wake up US and support Iranian resistance by delisting of POMI.
God bless all
Payam
Thank you for your comment. In future try to check-spell your comments prior to posting. Thank you.
You seem to be a follower of AN's goast becareful as the Supreme leader has activated its goast catching team
Thank you for your efforts in informing the public about the political and diplomatic realities behind the MeK's FTO listing, the Iranian regime's activities, and the U.S. policies surrounding these issues.
Let's get a move on!