TSR Foreign Affairs Hub

Personally I won't accept anything other than a democratic state and the complete overthrow of the Islamic Republic. I do believe the future constitution should be secular (like it was before the revolution) but I have no problem with Iranian politicians or people being Muslim either so long as they are, as you put it, liberal and keep it strictly personal i.e. no state Islam.

In a democratic state, if people want to vote for secular groups like the Iranian Mojahedin (who are a) firmly pro-Islam and b) commited democrats), that's their right and good for them. I probably wouldn't, but hey, that's me.

BUT, any party which would actively seek to interfere with and run people's lives according to Islam(or any other religion, but obviously Islam is the majority faith in Iran), would never be acceptable to me as it is authoritarianism, plain and simple.

Even if they are democratically elected?

In a democratic state, if people want to vote for secular groups like the Iranian Mojahedin (who are a) firmly pro-Islam and b) commited democrats), that's their right and good for them. I probably wouldn't, but hey, that's me.

Isn't the Iranian Mojahedin the terrorist group that supported Saddam's persecution of the Kurds in Iraq?

Absolutely not, those are smears and lies spread by the Islamic Republic's intelligence ministry. It's an illogical smear too since the umbrella organisation the Mojahedin is a member of (the National Council of Resistance of Iran) has Kurdish representation and membership.

Indeed, Hoshyar Zebari (Iraqi FM, Kurd and former member of the KDP) has gone on the record to say:

"(We) can confirm that the Mujahedeen (sic) were not involved in suppressing the Kurdish people neither during the uprising nor in its aftermath. We have not come across any evidence to suggest that the Mujahedeen have exercised any hostility towards the people of Iraqi Kurdistan."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-safavi/emreality-checkem-mek-sup_b_526627.html

Frankly IMO, putting the islamic republics smear aside, if theres anything worse than what we have now it would be the mojahedin in power.

How can you see completely through this regimes lies and not see through maryam rajavi and what a manipulative bitch she can be. Just because they are against this regime and (only for the last 10 years) have put on their "secular, democracy" line, it doesn't mean they should be encouraged. Didn't you learn anything from the revolution?

The way they present themselves publicly today, even with the "secular democracy" lines, is still pretty disgusting and dishonest.

As long as the MEK are not involved in some sort of regime change from the outside then I'm pretty convinced that in a democratic iran, they wouldn't get even one seat in parliament.

How?

I agree that the *regime* in Tehran needs to be changed (and I've always said that)...but that doesn't mean that I see neo-conservativism - or its supporters - as the solution.

To be very short and sweet: I have no interest in any conservative or capitalist schools of thought, as a socialist I am opposed to neo-conservativism (intellectual or otherwise).

I appreciate that many neo-cons agree that the Islamic Republic needs to go, and many of them even believe in human rights, but what always makes me suspicious is that if the regime went and Iranians (let's pretend) decided to put a communist or socialist into power, I very much doubt those same neo-cons would be all for our self-determination then.

Absolutely not, those are smears and lies spread by the Islamic Republic's intelligence ministry. It's an illogical smear too since the umbrella organisation the Mojahedin is a member of (the National Council of Resistance of Iran) has Kurdish representation and membership.

Indeed, Hoshyar Zebari (Iraqi FM, Kurd and former member of the KDP) has gone on the record to say:

"(We) can confirm that the Mujahedeen (sic) were not involved in suppressing the Kurdish people neither during the uprising nor in its aftermath. We have not come across any evidence to suggest that the Mujahedeen have exercised any hostility towards the people of Iraqi Kurdistan."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-safavi/emreality-checkem-mek-sup_b_526627.html

Weren't they called a terrorist organisation by the UN?

This is more than just a smear, isn't it?

Edit: I am just reading the Huffington article.

So what do you think of the IAEA? United Nations? You consider these institutions to be part of the capitalist class reinforcing the western capitalist US hegemonic interests? Assuming your worldview is a socialist/Marxist one ...

Personally, I think the Iranians have been through enough poverty and oppressive regimes and could do with a chance to move away from that ... so I think they deserve more than a communist/socialist government.

I have always been quietly stunned by the parallel rhetoric of both Islamic/islamist views and socialist/Marxist predilections. They both see themselves in conflict and as the oppressed people. Anyway, I will always have a foreign policy to advance classical liberalism with realist spectacles. Therefore, if history is anything to go by, I will oppose the human rights violations the socialist government will inevitably curtail. If you start meddling in WMD and terrorism, then I'll call for "regime change".

I suppose we're not really on the same page at all.

Weren't they called a terrorist organisation by the UN?

This is more than just a smear, isn't it?

Edit: I am just reading the Huffington article.

I edited this into my last post probably after you posted.

The only reason they gave up their arms was because they're counting on foreign aid to come to power. They have spent literally ZERO resources trying to convince iranians to support them, but INSTEAD used almost every single dollar (and who knows where these millions are coming from considering their circumstances) to lobby to gain support by foreign governments. They pay former, retired officials 20-50grand each to go to conferences in capitals to advocate for them. Thats what they do.

They also throw a tsunami of articles to news agencies around the world with their propaganda, all the way to new zealand.

That isn't regime propaganda, this is stuff I've seen with my own eyes and its so blatant.

There is this documentary and the filmmaker isn't exactly pro-regime, he was imprisioned and tortured after the elections... (he's a iranian-canadian journalist who was working for newsweek covering the elections) Right now he's in the process of suing Press TV for airing his forced confession in prison, they came in during his confession where he was threatened and accused of being a zionist, filmed it and then presented it as an interview as though he was talking freely. The case is like a year and a half old and Ofcom is kinda busy with other things (news of the world), so its taking a long time to go through but ofcom has hinted that it may lead to them banning PressTV outright (it could end up being a much lower punishment, don't know yet.)
His father was imprisoned in Evin by the Shah (i think it was because he was Tudeh) and then his sister in evin under khomeini and then himself after 2009 election.

Talks to former MEK members and family of current members etc... The people making the claims that you would call regime propaganda, are all ex-MEK members living in london etc... On the other hand it also shows how the MEK was brutally tortured by the regime too...

you can watch it here:
http://www.iranian.com/main/2011/aug/mojahedin-cult-chameleon


And frankly, every iranian inside iran I've met who's as anti-IRI as it gets also tells me they're horrified of the MEK.

Ali Safavi (the author) is MEK. So you can't really take that article seriously. I guess Democracy thinks only the Islamic Republic is capable of propaganda.

... omg thats regime propoganda blah ...

. We want to be clear that our conclusions about the Mojahedin do not in any way imply support for the behavior of the current regime in Iran.

Despite Mojahedin assertions that the group has abandoned its revolutionary ideology and now favors a liberal democracy, there is no written or public record of discussion or debate about the dramatic reversals in the Mojahedin's stated positions. Moreover, the Mojahedin's...record of behavior does not substantiate its capability or intention to be democratic.

The intellectual contradictions between Shi'a Islam and Marxism... caused the Mojahedin to split in 1975. The organization broke drown into Marxist and Muslim factions. But the religious disagreement between the secular and Islamic factions of the MKO did not undermine their fundamental agreement on the issue of imperialism, nor their strategy of armed struggle against …American interests in Iran.

Like their dedication to armed struggle, the Mojahedin's emphasis on propaganda reflects the influence of other revolutionaries, who sought both adherents and supporters through indoctrination, since its inception, the group has made drafting and disseminating propaganda a priority.

… it [MEK 1979 manifesto] recommended that Iran cancel all agreements with "racist" state of Israel.

details on the assassinated americans

…in radio broadcasts of the "Voice of Mojahed," [circa 1990s] which are transmitted into Iran from Mojahedin bases in Iraq, the MKO has claimed responsibility for internal violence throughout Iran…A number of these self-described operations included attacks against clearly civilian targets, such as automobiles, highways, government buildings open to the public, businesses.

The organization also transmits unsolicited faxes and mail of its publications to various U.S. government offices, including the State Department, on a regular basis.


To achieve these objectives, they must ensure their organization and its espoused principles appeal to Western audiences and Iranian expatriates.
Current Mojahedin publications assert the group's advocacy of specific guidelines for a future provisional government, including: "democracy," "peace," "love, friendship, and unity," "separation of church and state," and "recognition of private ownership and a market economy…"

The Mojahedin have also begun incorporating the "Mossadeq" name into their publications. "The Lion and Sun" journal, for example, contains report on "The Rising that Restored Mossadeq." In fact, the Mojahedin rejects the nonviolent, constitutional opposition exemplified by Mossadeq. The political party that was the heir to Mossadeq's policies, the National Front, refused in 1981 to work with the NCR because of the Mojahedin's revolutionary Islamic ideology. These cosmetic modifications appear to be aimed at expatriate Iranian audiences, among whom these symbols would resonate.

the Mojahedin's credibility is also undermined by the fact that they deny or distort sections of their history... It is difficult to accept at face value promises of future conduct when an organization fails to acknowledge its past.

How about the state department?

They may have been put on the list in the time of Khatami and the engagement that was going on then. But they knew who they were putting on the list:

http://www.iran-interlink.org/files/child%20pages/USstatedept.htm

Quotes from this state department report:

...

1. I'm definitely not trying to appear as a regime apologist. and that link to iran-interlink is coincidental, its still a state department report.

Look, i don't care what they say they believe, what the regime says they believe, what the shah says they believe. thats not my point. i don't really care for ideologies.

My point is that that aren't a group to be championed.

Theres also this FBI report: It's more about their actions rather than their so called ideologies.

http://www.american.com/archive/2011/FBI%20-%20REPORT.pdf

A lot of details in that.
One example: details money scams they run in the USA (even in washington dc) under BS charity operations to make money.

Just because the regime hates them , and the NIAC won't shut up about them, doesn't mean i'm supposed to like them just because of that fact.

You keep going on about how the regime spreads propaganda, but you don't seem to suggest any reasons why they are a force for good. I think its clear that they are a negative force that should not be championed just because they are anti-regime.

xxx

Well the first few pages seem to be detailing direct action Mojahedin members took against the regime...for which I can only say good on them! I have absolutely no problem with armed resistance against the regime or its operatives

ok, well i'm going to disagree with you here. I think thats a foolish way to look at it.

Erm, are you aware of what your avatar means? The Derafsh-e Kaviani is Iran's most ancient symbol of armed resistance against tyranny. The Islamic Republic is nothing more than the Zahhak of the 21st century, and direct and armed action against them is resistance against fascism, which is to be applauded, not condemned. You're on another planet if you think it's possible to negotiate with or reform the IRR.

BTW: i think our discussion doesn't fit in this thread anymore. I posted some more ideas in the iranian society thread.

What do I think of the UN? World's biggest talking shop.

Well thanks for that, but please do remember that our national hero is Dr Mossadegh who worked directly against the interests of "liberals" who had no sympathy with Iran's people and would have happily had us living in misery to this day...something they managed to accomplish btw by putting their yes-man the Shah into power, which inevitably led to the Mullah regime.

Funny that, because the Iranian socialists are the ones who've been fighting for freedom (and dying for it by the 10000s) since the days of the Shah, someone who your neo-con buddies were no doubt very good friends with...incidentally these classical liberal morons would have had no problem with the deposition of Dr Mossadegh either, because that's what capitalism is all about: ****ing over poor nations so BP can carry on raking in its profits.

So please don't patronise me by telling me that if Iranians fall behind the USA, all our problems will be sorted out.

I know this, and I'm surprised you ever thought we were.

I'm sure we're on the same page in that both of us agree that the Islamic Republic is pure fascism and needs to be overthrown.

I'm even more sure that we differ seriously on how we think that should happen, and what should replace the Islamic Republic.

Nope, the USA (and the UK) put them on their terrorist list at the behest of the regime's president at the time, the smiling oppressor Mohammad Khatami. I'm also pretty sure I know more about this than you, so don't try and paint me out as a conspiracy theorist, this is a known fact...for 32 years the USA have been attempting to engage with this regime, adding a prominent opposition group to a terrorist list is part of that.

Yes, summary executions of US citizens are really the highpoint of his time as President.