Nader Entesar, professor of political sciences in Strange Hill Mobil University in Alabama, considered the recent move by the U.S. as positive and said: "but this move is not a green light and it is only symbolic."
He said that the double standards in confronting MKO in Iraq and the U.S. derive from the internal political problems in the United States. He added: "the U.S. let this group act freely in the U.S. while it had introduced the group as terrorist."
Professor Pirooz Mojtahed Zadeh, the head of London's Yursik Institution, said: "Iran's response toward the case of Mojahedin should be the same as its response toward Iraqi regime. I mean absolute indifference, since the presence or absence of this group has no effect on the national security of Iran. The relation of Iran-US is full of problems and Mojahedin is only a little problem."
He added: "now, eradicating Mojahedin by the U.S. is in compliance with the national interests of that country and is not for Iran and has no benefits to Iran."
The member of National Security Commission said the recent move by the U.S. is a trick to decrease pressures by public opinion.
According to Fars news agency, Hamid Reza Hajj Babayee, representative of Hamedan in Majlis and the member of National Security Commission added: "the U.S. confronted this organization, which had put it in the list of terrorists earlier, to have something to say, specially in recent month when it has violated international laws."
He reminded: "we welcome this act and if it is done honestly, it can improve relations."
Kazem Jalali, Representative of Shahrood, said the U.S. moves are contradictory adding: "basically, the continuation of MKO acts in the U.S. was in contradiction to what the U.S. had announced earlier. Since MKO is an organization which was announced as terrorist by the U.S. earlier."
He asserted: "how Americans let MKO act in Iraq and why don't they confront MKO seriously?" Jalali said the U.S. move was positive but insufficient. He stressed that the problems between Iran and the U.S. are deeper than the case of Mojahedin.
Dr. Javad Mansoori, FM's aide, referred to U.S. support of Mojahedin and said: "the truth of this act is not much clear since Americans have repeatedly announced this news." He added: "if this is true, supporting MKO in Iraq and giving them weapons and mission was really wrong." He said this act is not a green light and said:" the main problem between Iran and the U.S. is more important than a dead group."
Kianoosh Rad, a member of National Security Commission, said: "the relationship of Iran and the U.S. is more sensitive to be repaired by shutting the offices of this group. However, it's a move which has been considered as positive by Iran but it won't be a solution for Iran-U.S. problems. We should not forget that the U.S. has done this in response to public opinion and in accordance to its own benefits."
Ja'far Golbaz, a member of National Security Commission: since this move is temporary and contradictory, it can't be considered as green light. MKO is not our main problem with the U.S. but our main problem is contradictory responses by the U.S.
If this move is continuous, it will be a positive point.
This move was done under the pressure of democrats on one hand and good situation for U.S. soldiers on the other. Golbaz said: "this move is temporary, since we saw that U.S. military bombed MKO bases first but let them act freely later".
Iranian Interior Minister Abdolreza Rahmani Fazli called for tougher measures against the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO, also known as the MEK, PMOI and NCRI) terrorist group by the European Union...