|
|
In this Issue:
-
Specter of forced repatriation,
Washington Times,
October 13, 2009
-
Iran’s heavy hand on human
rights, Boston Globe, October
10, 2009
-
The Iranian Resistance triumphs over the
Iranian regime in Iraq,
Al-Seyassah (Kuwaiti daily), October 12, 2009
-
YouTube: 36 Abducted Camp Ashraf Residents
Released on the Brink of Death,
YouTube.com, October 9,
2009
-
ICLW warns against mullahs’ plots to displace
and massacre Ashraf residents,
ICLW Press Release, October 8,
2009
|
|
"Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their
persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and
practices, and their manners and customs.”
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention
“In no circumstances shall a protected person be transferred to a country where
he or she may have reason to fear persecution for his or her political opinions
or religious beliefs.”
Article 45 of the Fourth Geneva Convention
|
Specter of forced
repatriation
Iranian dissidents still need our protection
The Washington Times
October 13, 2009
By Allan Gerson
Death no longer stalks the White House gates. The hunger strike of more than two
dozen Iranian-Americans (as part of a vigil of hundreds of concerned people)
came to a close Thursday with the news that 36 Iranian dissidents forcibly taken
by Iraqi forces had been allowed to return - most in emaciated condition - to
their enclave at Camp Ashraf, 60 miles north of Baghdad.
For more than 70 days, the hunger strike and vigil continued with the demand for
the release of the hostages and protection for the 3,400 members of Iran's main
opposition group, the mujahedeen (MEK), stationed at Camp Ashraf.
But it would be a mistake of enormous proportions to believe that the problem of
Camp Ashraf and the specter of forced repatriation of its members to Iran or
forced displacement inside Iraq (where the dissidents would be exposed to
terrorist attacks by Tehran's operatives) are no longer a matter of grave
humanitarian and national security concern. We should not be lulled into a false
sense of safety that the problem has gone away.
At stake are the lives thousands of MEK members who are dedicated to the
overthrow of Iran's mullah regime and its replacement by a democratic
pluralistic government.
On July 28 and 29, Iraqi forces - undoubtedly heeding the call of Iran, which
wants nothing as much as the eradication of the camp and the repatriation of its
residents to Iran - forcibly entered the enclave. The operation against the
unarmed and defenseless residents left 11 dead, hundreds wounded and 36
arrested.
The State Department maintains that sovereignty over all of Iraq, including Camp
Ashraf, belongs to the government of Iraq and brushes off serious concern by
pointing out that in any event, the MEK remains on the U.S. list of foreign
terrorist organizations.
But Iraqi sovereignty does not entitle neglect of the U.S. promise to protect
the residents of Camp Ashraf. This concerns a solemn pledge made by U.S. forces
early in 2004, when they entered the enclave and signed written agreements
stipulating that the residents would be granted protected-persons status under
the Geneva Conventions until their final disposition.
The MEK terrorist designation, as concerns Americans, revolves around its
purported role in the death of six American service members and military
contractors 35 years ago.
As corroborated by former Assistant Secretary of State Martin Indyk, the
designation in 1997 came about largely as a result of President Clinton's
efforts to induce Iran's then-president, Mohammed Khatami, to adopt a more
moderate posture. (It didn't work.)
In this context, it appeared on an internal State Department determination,
which held that terrorism against our foes (even if directed against judges
issuing death sentences without recourse to legal process) should be of as much
concern to the United States as terrorism directed against American citizens.
The highest court in the United Kingdom recently overturned the terrorist
designation in Britain as totally without merit. A similar conclusion was
reached by the European Union. Interestingly enough, when the MEK filed a
petition for revocation of its designation in July 2008, the State Department's
top counterterrorism official, Gen. Dell L. Dailey, recommended that the
petition be granted.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, however, overruled him - ostensibly because
of the department's zeal not to allow anything to undercut its efforts to
negotiate directly with Tehran.
Having been involved as an attorney for the PanAm 103 families in their quest to
hold Libya accountable for the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, I had dealt with the
conditions for removal of Libya from the State Department list of state sponsors
of terrorism.
Clear criteria for designation of an organization as a terrorist entity, and its
corollary - clear criteria for de-designation - are essential if we are to
remain a country of laws rather than one where diplomatic whim controls despite
severe legal consequences. Yet, in dealing with MEK designation, the State
Department refuses to specify applicable criteria. Such a posture degrades the
terrorist designation to a mere political tool.
Clearly, neither Iraqi sovereignty nor the unwarranted U.S. terrorist
designation can justify turning a blind eye to the fate of 3,400 people at Camp
Ashraf who have dedicated their lives to ending the mullah regime in Tehran.
This is not only a matter of grave humanitarian concern, but also one that bears
serious implications for U.S. national security interests. What lesson, after
all, would Iran draw if we were to allow repatriation of the residents of Camp
Ashraf?
What lesson would the world draw if it witnessed the U.S. government's inability
to curry any influence with Iraq, a country in which we have invested so much of
our resources and human treasure?
What is to be done? I recommend that two steps be taken immediately:
1.) President Obama or a high-level envoy needs to forcefully tell Iraq's
leadership that the U.S. government will not countenance repatriation of the
residents of Camp Ashraf or their forcible displacement within Iraq. The only
safe place for them is Ashraf. Muted State Department assurances cannot suffice.
In any event, no European or other nation seems prepared to welcome the
residents of Camp Ashraf to its own shores.
2.) The U.N. secretary-general needs to express the United Nation's concern and
work to set up a monitoring post at Ashraf to ensure that they are protected.
These steps are in America's interest. It cannot afford to ignore the potential
for atrocities against the residents of Camp Ashraf. To abandon the MEK in their
hour of need, especially when they are staunch opponents of the regime in
Tehran, would only serve to encourage Iran to pursue its militaristic policies
at home and abroad and to dispel the trust of America's allies.
Allan Gerson, a former senior State and Justice Department official, is
chairman of AG International Law in Washington and represents the MEK. He is the
author of "The Price of Terror: How the Families of the Victims of the PanAm 103
Bombing Brought Libya to Justice" (HarperCollins, 2002)...
Read
More
Back to the Top
Iran’s heavy hand on human rights
The Boston Globe
Saturday, October 10, 2009
By Gary Morsch
Dr. Gary Morsch is an Army Reserve colonel
AS US officials grapple with Iran’s drive to acquire nuclear weapons, they also
need to address its human rights abuses against its own people as well as the
regime’s meddling in Iraqi affairs.
Soldiers don’t concern themselves with politics; we leave that to the
politicians. There are times, though, when a soldier makes an exception. Like
all American troops who have been deployed to Iraq, I went to serve my country
and to help bring peace and democracy to the Middle East. I’m a doctor from
Kansas and a colonel in the Army Reserve, and I served for a year in Ashraf,
about 60 miles north of Baghdad.
Of all the places I’ve been in Iraq, Ashraf was probably the most peaceful. It
was established 23 years ago by a group of Iranian dissidents, all members of
the People’s Mujahedin of Iran, who want to see democracy return to their
homeland. They fled Iran shortly after the 1979 revolution because they opposed
the theocratic state that had been established. Thousands of their friends had
been slaughtered by the ruling ayatollahs’ henchmen.
In the middle of the desert, they turned a dry wasteland into an oasis. They
built schools and hospitals, shopping areas, and places for sports and
recreation and concerts. Even Iranian students who had gone to America to
further their education returned to Ashraf.
And the Iraqi people befriended them.
After the US-led invasion in 2003, the People’s Mujahedin of Iran turned over
their weapons to coalition forces and submitted to months of investigation - to
prove that they were not terrorists and only wanted to live in peace.
The more I saw, the more I began to like the people of Ashraf. They are
committed to the goals of democracy and a free Iran. Indeed, I learned that it
was the People’s Mujahedin that first divulged the nuclear buildup within Iran,
alerting the world to the danger the mullahs in Tehran posed.
Ashraf has been protected by an agreement with the United States under the
Fourth Geneva Convention. But the pending withdrawal of US troops has left the
area in a kind of no-man’s land.
Iraqi forces now control their own country, which is fine for most situations.
But the Iraqi leadership is growing closer to Tehran, which wants Ashraf closed
and its people sent back to Iran - to an ill fate one can only imagine.
On July 28, Iraqi police and military forces stormed Ashraf at the behest of
Tehran. Eleven residents were killed, 500 wounded, and 36 were held hostage for
71 days.
And where were the American protectors? From the video clips I watched, they
stood by and observed, doing little to stop the carnage.
The Obama administration criticized Iraqi security forces and their brutal
attitude, but this is not enough. Iraqi forces still occupy parts of Ashraf. The
lives of 3,400 people who trusted the United States are on the line. Knowing of
their need for medical care, I have volunteered to go and provide medical
assistance to the wounded in Ashraf.
I am sad for the people of Ashraf and angered by the American inaction. It was
an embarrassing moment for me as a doctor, a soldier, a humanitarian, and above
all as an American.
The nation I serve made a commitment to protect these people. While I was there,
I carried out that mission. The Obama administration must find a way to honor
that commitment, especially now. It is obvious that the winds of change are
blowing across Iran. The fundamentalist mullahs in Tehran know that they are in
trouble with their own people. The president needs to act now...
Read More
Back to the Top
The Iranian Resistance
triumphs over the Iranian regime in Iraq
Al-Seyassah (Kuwaiti daily)
October 12, 2009
Translated from Arabic (Excerpts)
The horrific state of affairs brought on by the cronies and agents of the
Iranian regime with the objective of terrifying and blackmailing the Iranian
opposition (MEK) has ended with a triumph for the opposition. The Iraqi
government was forced to give in to the demands and freedom-seeking voices of
those calling for the release of Camp Ashraf’s detainees.
This was clearly a significant issue for the Iraqi National Security Advisor
Muwaffaq al-Rubaie. Now it appears he has lost the battle and failed to carry
out his commitments to his true leader, the Supreme Leader of Iran.
The People’s Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI/MEK) recent campaign in Iraq was a true
fight for freedom and they ably obtained their victory. Through it all, they
brought a catastrophic defeat for the Iranian regime, which is trying to use its
regional and international cards.
The Iranian opposition is the one and only force that has the initiative,
especially because it has active networks inside Iran. Despite the rising
threats posed by the Iranian regime’s apparatus of death and suppression, the
MEK is able to mobilize the Iranian people and trigger changes...
Read
More
Back to the Top
YouTube: 36 Abducted Camp Ashraf Residents Released on
the Brink of Death, Triumphantly Return to Ashraf
YouTube.com
October 9, 2009
On October 7, 2009, on the seventy-second day of their hunger strike and seventh
day of dry hunger strike, 36 PMOI hunger strikers who had been taken hostage in
Iraq returned triumphantly to Camp Ashraf. A number of them had already gone
into coma and were taken to hospital by prison guards. Upon their arrival, they
were immediately rushed to Ashraf medical center to be treated due to their
critical condition and the injuries suffered from gunshots and beatings during
the July 28 and 29 attacks. Most of them were on the verge of death.
Watch the scenes of their
arrival at Camp Ashraf on YouTube.com.
Back to the Top
ICLW warns against mullahs’ plots to displace and massacre Ashraf residents,
calls for international intervention
ICLW Press Release
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Formation of the International Committee of Lawyers in support of 1,000 Women in
Ashraf was announced Thursday in a press conference in Paris. The conference
warned against imminent threats to Camp Ashraf residents, particularly plans for
their displacement as a prelude to massacre them. They reiterated that in any
forcible displacement, the prime victims will be women.
The lawyers call for immediate intervention of the European Union, the United
States and the United Nations to guarantee the rights of Ashraf residents,
particularly women, in accordance with Geneva conventions and to prevent their
displacement as a ploy to pave the way for a humanitarian catastrophe…
Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the Iranian Resistance, in a message to
the conference said that the attack on Camp Ashraf was planned and coordinated
by the clerical regime in Iran. Nationwide uprisings in the past three months
have deeply shaken and destabilized the regime, thus, it desperately needs to
suppress its opposition. The assailant forces are still inside the camp and they
have the motive to repeat the attack.
She warned that the forces in their attacks on the residents of Ashraf
repeatedly threatened women with rape. The fate of 36 Ashraf residents taken
hostage by force is extremely alarming. The attackers abducted them in Ashraf by
force and tortured them. This happened to them while they were recognized as
Protected Persons. Although they were released on Wednesday after 72 days of
hunger strike, but recurrence of this kind of criminal forcible displacement
must not be allowed, Mrs. Rajavi stressed...
Read More
Back to the Top
Back Issues of Ashraf Monitor
|
|
Back Issues of Ashraf Monitor
|
About Humanitarian Crisis for
Iranian Dissidents and their Families in Camp Ashraf
More than 3,400 members of Iran’s
main opposition, the People’s Mojahedin (PMOI/MEK) and their families, among
them nearly 1,000 Muslim women, reside in Camp Ashraf in Iraq. The PMOI
was the source of ground breaking revelation in the United States in 2002 about
Iran’s two until-then secret nuclear sites at Natanz and Arak.
On July 28-29, 2009, Iraqi forces
ordered directly by Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki acting at the behest
of Iran rulers, carried out a violent, unprovoked raid on Camp Ashraf, killing
11 residents, wounding 500, and abducting 36.
The brutal raid on Ashraf was a
blatant violation of the solemn commitment Iraq had given to the United States
that it would provide "humane treatment of the Camp Ashraf residents in
accordance with Iraq’s Constitution, laws, and international obligations."
The assault took place while U.S. service members on the scene were observing
the situation closely. Regrettably they took no action to prevent the
premeditated violence despite direct appeals by Ashraf residents at the outset
and during the attack.
International Humanitarian Law Obligate U.S. to Provide Continued Protection for
Camp Ashraf Residents in Iraq
On July 2, 2004, the United States formally
recognized members of the PMOI in Camp Ashraf as “protected persons” under the
Fourth Geneva Convention.
Both the U.S. and Iraq are parties to all four
1949 Geneva Conventions.
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention specifies that:
“Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their
persons, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and
practices, and their manners and customs […]”.
Article 45 of the Fourth Geneva Convention specifies that:
“In no circumstances shall a protected person
be transferred to a country where he or she may have reason to fear persecution
for his or her political opinions or religious beliefs.“
United States had legal and moral
obligations and responsibilities under international humanitarian law to protect
these Iranian exiles.
About
the U.S. Committee for Camp Ashraf Residents:
The U.S. Committee for Camp Ashraf
Residents (USCCAR) was established in December of 2003 by families and relatives
of residents of Camp Ashraf. The purpose of the Committee is to ensure the
safety and security of those Iranians and others living in Camp Ashraf. The
Committee will defend the proposition that the protections of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, as well as of other treaties and customary international law, must
be applied to the Iranians in Iraq. For more information please visit:
www.usccar.org
About
Ashraf Monitor
Ashraf Monitor newsletter is a
compilation of news and commentaries about the developing humanitarian
crisis for nearly 3,500 members of Iran's main opposition, the People's
Mojahedin of Iran (PMOI/MEK) in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. Ashraf Monitor is
compiled and distributed by the US Committee for Camp Ashraf Residents (USCCAR).
|
|