Has the US chosen the MKO as a tool against the government of Iran?
This is a question being asked along with other questions about Iraq.
The answer to this question, in its simplest form, is to accept that US’s soft behavior with this group is performed in order to stand against Iran and gain advantage from it.
In this case, who’s the winner; Iran or the US?
The answer to this question is evident; if someone has a little information about the dimensions of this issue, he will be able to answer this question. (Americans themselves can answer this better than anyone else, unless they’ve lost their conscious due to happiness of defeating Sadism)
The main challenge is that “how will the US cooperate with a group being labeled as terrorist by America itself?”
The answer to this depends on the Americans and that how much they are faithful to their sayings and their formal positions! So, we’ll reach various results.
US’s recent agreement and related questions should be reviewed in an another field and if we are going to determine the loser of such a case, we should look at the issue from a technical angle.
Firs, we should remind that in the given field the topic that whether this group is terrorist or not is not set forth at all. Whether it has been henchman of saddam is not important either. Their betrayal to their country is not placed in this field.
What is paid attention here is related to two general issues:
repeating Saddam’s faults
In political framework, if Americans select as so, they will have problems in long term.
One of the biggest mistakes done by Saddam was that he chose Mojahedin as a winning card against the Shiites due to his own enmity and hatred of Iran. Saddam put the blame of the Shiites on Iran, while his crimes about this large population of Iraq made their hatred toward Saddam. He should have accepted that their issue is an Iraqi national problem and he could have neutralize foreigners’ interference with adopting a reasonable policy. (but, Saddam’s method was unwise and dictatorial so that he did fascist behavior toward the Kurd minorities).
With such a calculation, he put a group of barely 5000 in front of the large mass of the Shias (July 1988); while Mojahedin can hardly gather a hundred people with spending a lot of money in Europe and are forgotten and hated inside Iran.
Americans haven’t ignored these facts. One of the deepest analyses about this group has been presented by US department of State.
Could Saddam take advantage of Iran with supporting Mojahedin? The answer is evident: never!!
The information, of which Iran has no interest to reveal, indicate that in the talks between the statesmen of Iraq and Iran, Iraqi side has always offered Iran to deal on Mojahedin but Iranian side has never paid attention to it.
Maybe as Iranian leader said twenty years of chanting the slogan of “down with MKO and Saddam” was sweeter than dealing with guys who supported this group.
More importantly, Iranian officials have now started scolding US officials for hypocrisy and not being faithful to their mottos of fighting against terrorism; and the head of Iran’s Islamic revolutionary guards have put the blame of MKO’s terrorist acts on the US.
There’s no doubt that these arguments will prove Iran’s logic in the political scene.
We can say that, in terms of politics, supporting Mojahedin is a reminder of Saddam’s stupidity. According to the Department of State, the using of Mojahedin by Saddam was the only reason for supporting them.
Mojahedin’s military power
Americans have repeatedly referred to this fact that Mojahedin’s military power is a part of Saddam’s army and this group was strengthened by the support and backing of Saddam’s regime.
If Mojahedin could give gifts to western reports in order to exaggerate the number of this group’s forces earlier (for instance, once it was said there are 40000 armed men or 3000 trained fighters or more recently it was said that 15000 members of this group have surrendered), now US forces can line them up to get their exact number which is not more than 3500.
This number can not do anything even if is willing to. Meanwhile, there are some reports indicating that most of these forces have no motivations to fight against Iran or stay in Iraq.
It rarely seems that US experts have mistakenly taken Iran as Nicaragua. Furthermore, American support of Contras will certainly have a negative outcome in Iran and will cause Iranians’ anger and unity.
In terms of diplomacy, as well as interfering in Iran’s affairs it has some paradoxes, such as non-compatibility of such an approach with US positions. In addition, this group is like an addicted man who can’t stand except injecting money and equipments.
Will the US continue this support, that was done by Saddam up to yesterday?
Will the US continue Saddam’s mistakes, by being obstinate to Iran or by ignoring the Shiites?
These questions will be answered very soon. At most up to 6 months from now.
Joseph Lieberman, long regarded as the “Republicans’ favorite Democrat” because of his militarist foreign affairs agenda and support for a number of right-wing domestic policies, represented Connecticut initially as a...
Representing families of Iranian victims of terrorism, Habilian Association organized a conference themed “Iran victim of terrorism; From MEK to ISIS” on the occasion of national day of combating terrorism...
Dr. Raz Zimmt investigates Iranian social media responses to the annual conference of Mojahedin-e Khalq, an Iranian opposition group whose support for Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War remains a searing...