You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Only a fraction of Teheran's brutality has come to light
2006-03-20
Originally from the Sunday Telegraph.
She is the female figurehead of what she hopes will become a new Iranian revolution. Now, after almost 25 years in exile, the world is beginning to beat a path to her door. Maryam Rajavi wants those who visit her near Paris to know what sort of regime Iran's mullahs are running.

As the leader of the largest exiled Iranian opposition group, she talks angrily of the 15-year-old boy flogged to death for eating during Ramadan, and the girl of 13 buried up to her neck and stoned for a similarly trivial "crime".

When she describes the punishments meted out by Iran's rulers, a picture of the limp bodies of two hanged men suspended from a crane is projected onto a screen. She waves a large bound book that, she says, contains the names of 21,676 people who have died resisting the clerical regime. Another 120,000 people have been executed since the mullahs took power in 1979, she claims. Now Iran's rulers are trying to develop a nuclear weapon.

"We have always said that a viper cannot give birth to a dove, but nobody believed us," she told the Sunday Telegraph. "Only a fraction of the true nature of this regime, which is a brutal dictatorship of religious fanaticism, has come to public attention."

British MPs, lawyers and human rights campaigners are among those who have recently travelled to hear Mrs Rajavi, 52, hold court on behalf of the National Council for Resistance for Iran (NCRI). Yet while some see her as the best hope to lead a moderate Islamic government in Teheran, others are more cautious. Washington, the British Government and the European Union all regard the organisation's military wing as a terrorist group. Mrs Rajavi has been described as a self-serving zealot, and the head of a personality cult.

She combats criticism with smiles, regular repetition of the words "freedom and democracy", and the claim that the clerics in Teheran are deliberately trying to slur the opposition group. "Terrorists, then cult," she said. "They're trying to substitute one for another. As we disprove them, they find another name."

Mrs Rajavi is everything the mullahs fear and loathe - a former revolutionary student turned opposition leader who has been a thorn in the side of the Iranian government. She talks moderate Islam, against their religious fanaticism, and is anxious to present the NCRI as tolerant, progressive and reasonable.

As one of six children of a middle-class Iranian family under the Shah's regime, she was a 22-year-old metallurgy student at Teheran University when her elder brother was jailed. Shortly afterwards, she says, her older sister was executed for political activism. Mrs Rajavi joined the Mujahideen-e Khalq (People's Holy Warriors, also known as the MEK) - a student association that mixed Islam and Marxism, and violently opposed the Shah.

Mrs Rajavi married a fellow revolutionary and had two children but divorced to wed the Mujahideen leader, Massoud Rajavi. Yet her hopes for the 1979 Iranian revolution turned to disillusionment. "Very quickly we witnessed the mullahs hijacking the freedom of the people," she said. "We had to start a new push, against Islamic fundamentalism."
So she sounds like a frustrated Marxist.
In 1982, her younger sister, Masoumeh, 22 and eight months pregnant, died under torture by Ayatollah Khomeini's regime, Mrs Rajavi left Iran for France. Now she presides over the NCRI's heavily protected headquarters in Auvers-sur-Oise, 20 miles north-west of Paris. She and up to 100 supporters pursue the overthrow of the clerical regime and installation of an NCRI government, with her as leader, until free elections.

Mrs Rajavi's followers are so devoted that, in 2003, after she was detained for a fortnight by French police on suspicion of terrorism, two set fire to themselves and died. More damaging is the terrorist label slapped on the organisation's military wing by the US State Department in 1994, and subsequently by Britain, and the European Union, after deadly attacks by the group around the world. Last week, visiting British members of the Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom said it was time for the Government, and the EU, to remove the "unjust tag".

Mrs Rajavi says Western governments must end their "dangerous appeasement" of Iran's regime and recognise the worth of her group, the first to reveal Iran's secret uranium enrichment programme in 2002. The mullahs appear to fear her. "They are afraid of freedom and democracy, and of women who stand up for their rights," she said.
Posted by:Steve White

#8  Danielle: Functioning democracies have checks and balances, and the people must agree to be governed. Exchanging one tyranny for another is no longer acceptable with stakes this high.

I am of the classic realist view that when large groups of Iranians slaughter each other, and the body count starts running up, it is not necessarily to the disadvantage of these United States. Especially if we can make it happen without a single American soldier having to risk his life occupying an inch of Iranian soil. Fact is that civil war will weaken the Iranian state, and that is all to the good.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2006-03-20 20:52  

#7  DD: Remember, they shilled for Saddam and served as his toadies for more than 20 years - they deserve no pity and are certainly worthy of no alliance with the US against the mad mullahs.

We allied with Uncle Joe Stalin against the Nazis and Chairman Mao against the Soviets. People who have problems with alliances of common interest are stuck in the paradigm of permanent alliances like NATO. Most alliances in history have been ad hoc ones. We don't have to - and generally don't - give our alliance partners everything they want. We supported the Tibetan guerrillas right until the demands of the Cold War led to Nixon's rapprochement with China. Then we dropped the Tibetans like a hot coal. We had good relations with the Chinese until we realized that they were trying to replace us in the Pacific. That's the way it goes - it's known as getting one barbarian to fight another.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2006-03-20 20:47  

#6  I dunno....an Iranian female figurehead would an excellent alternative to the Mad Mullahs. Maybe the US should court her away from the negative French influence, and I would hope she could see the true nature of the Maoist/Commie regimes. Functioning democracies have checks and balances, and the people must agree to be governed. Exchanging one tyranny for another is no longer acceptable with stakes this high.
Posted by: Danielle   2006-03-20 12:07  

#5  " would only serve to replace an Islamic Republic with a People's Republic - not much of an improvement, IMO"

Then I take it youre NOT one of the people who thinks the mullahs are irrational, and incapable of being deterred? The fact is that we HAVE managed Mutual Assured Deterrence situations with Marxist-Leninist regimes before, and while they will subsidize terror as a weapon, they can at least be deterred on that as well.

In any case, Leninism isnt real strong in the region, unlike Islamism, and so would have less potential appeal beyond Irans borders. In fact it probably would have less appeal WITHIN Irans borders than Khomeinism does - I think theyd have a hard time actually controlling the country.

Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-03-20 10:29  

#4  "...regard the organisation's military wing as a terrorist group..."

What ever name they want to be called, they ALL have blood up to their armpits

The National Liberation Army of Iran
The People's Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI)
National Council of Resistance (NCR)
National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI)
Muslim Iranian Student's Society

My question is, now that MEK recieved Geneva Convention "Protected" status does that allow for some of the State Dept.'s 75 million to go their way?
Posted by: DepotGuy   2006-03-20 09:46  

#3  The Rajavis are welcome to pour gasoline on themselves and light it. The MEK not only supported taking the 1979 US Embassy hostages, but were responsible for killing several US military and civilian personnel in the 1970's. Their only redeeming feature is that after their fallout with the mullahs, the MEK were able to kill quite a few of them.
Posted by: ed   2006-03-20 08:09  

#2  Their info seems to be good. Their politics are screwed. Communism sucks and commies are vipers they are not trust worthy and belong on the Terror list.
Posted by: SPoD   2006-03-20 06:09  

#1  Everything Rajavi and her MEK buddies say needs to be taken with a whole shaker of salt. The MEK beliefs concerning her and her husband border on deification (Mao-esque cults of personality at the very least) and putting them in charge of Iran would only serve to replace an Islamic Republic with a People's Republic - not much of an improvement, IMO. Remember, they shilled for Saddam and served as his toadies for more than 20 years - they deserve no pity and are certainly worthy of no alliance with the US against the mad mullahs.
Posted by: Dan Darling   2006-03-20 05:11  

00:00