Concerns over US relations with a terrorist group started when western press disclosed that Bush administration is reviewing
Concerns over US relations with a terrorist group started when western press disclosed that Bush administration is reviewing a plan for covert support of a terrorist group in order to destabilize Iranian regime.
Many news and reports were summarized as follows:
Neo-conservatives in the US believe that MKO (Mujahideen-e Khalq) should be bolstered as an opposition group so that it can be used against Iran when necessary, since MKO is useful for providing intelligence from inside Iran.
Very soon, the administration understood that it has faced a pile of questions by public opinion and reporters and journalists about such a dirty deal, so it retreated sooner than it was expected.
Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor, and some other high-ranking officials rejected this idea and said: "although some may call these people as freedom fighters, terrorist is a terrorist."
The words of Department of State's spokesman Richard Boucher in his weekly press conference also reveal this reality: "we consider Mojahedin-e Khalq as a terrorist group. They have been disarmed in Iraq and prevented from performing more terrorist acts and we still consider them as terrorists due to their previous acts."
Douglas Feith, undersecretary of Department of Defense, accompanied by Paul Wolfowitz, as supporters of the idea, said in an interview: "MKO is a terrorist group. We asked for their surrender and they were disarmed in Iraq." Feith added: "some may think that we had a special behavior toward MKO and there are even some reports that Department of Defense is going to use them like what it did with northern alliance in Afghanistan, but there has never been such a plan and we will never do it. He added: we consider MKO as a terrorist group and we have behaved them as such.
But the story doesn't end here, reporters ask DOS: we have heard from commanders in Iraq that have asked for lifting MKO name from terrorists list!
Journalists and people have heard other things so they press officials to get answers for US double standards; DOS spokesman frankly says: we have had no contacts with National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and contrary to their claim we have got no direct information about Iran's nuclear weapon programs.
Apart from these words by Mr. Boucher, whether true or not, couldn't deviate people's thought from this issue that why don't they do anything to the forces of this group in Iraq and why don't they behave them according to the international laws?
The line of US officials (even neo-conservatives such as Mr. Douglas Feith) stance toward this group shows this uncontroversial fact that the US, with all its slogans against global terrorism, can't follow double standards (at least in appearance) and that it should stand against this group according to the least of international treaties.
US officials' withdrawal from supporting this group is a part of political cost that the US government paid during the fight against terrorism in recent crisis. But ignoring realities about this group and not considering people's hatred of this group will have more severe costs.
Following such tactic by the US is exactly the same way that Saddam Hussein passed. Saddam gave shelter to this group and accepted responsibility for terrorist acts of this group in practice. He shared this group's act. That's why Iranian people believed that Saddam is backing terrorist acts of MKO.
Is the US likely to accept such high price and does it like Iranian people to look for the shooter of American Bullets, just in the result of terrorist acts of this group and to save the leaders of this group. Such an interpretation is not special for Iranians. As one of "the Star daily" writers describes it is bothering that the Republican President (Bush) who's claiming of war on terrorism is now embracing a terrorist group which had been sheltered and financed by Saddam for a long time.
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...