Angry in the Great White North

From the Dudley Knox Library at the Naval Postgraduate School, a report on the MEK/PMOI:

The MEK philosophy mixes Marxism and Islam. Formed in the 1960s, the organization was expelled from Iran after the Islamic Revolution in 1979, and its primary support came from the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein starting in the late 1980s. The MEK conducted anti-West-ern attacks prior to the Islamic Revolution. Since then, it has conducted terrorist attacks against the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad.

Clearly the MEK/PMOI is not a friend of the West, but an enemy of the Mullahs. Allies of convenience. Enemy of my enemy and all that.

The group’s worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorism. During the 1970s, the MEK killed US military personnel and US civilians working on defense projects in Tehran and supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran. In 1981, the MEK detonated bombs in the head office of the Islamic Republic Party and the Premier’s office, killing some 70 high-ranking Iranian officials, including Chief Justice Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, President Mohammad-Ali Rajaei, and Premier Mohammad-Javad Bahonar. Near the end of the 1980-1988 war with Iran, Baghdad armed the MEK with military equipment and sent it into action against Iranian forces.

That relationship with Saddam Hussein continued:

In 1991, the MEK assisted the Government of Iraq in suppressing the Shia and Kurdish uprisings in southern Iraq and the Kurdish uprisings in the north.

The MEK/PMOI has global reach, and that is a red flag in the War on Terrorism:

In April 1992, the MEK conducted near-simultaneous attacks on Iranian embassies and installations in 13 countries, demonstrating the group’s ability to mount large-scale operations overseas.

Remember what Liberal MP Alan Tonks said about the MEK/PMOI being "sheltered by international conventions"?

It is alleged that the theocratic Iranian regime attacked the pipelines in order to disrupt the Water supply of an internationally recognized and protected Iranian resistance group known as the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran. The PMOI, currently seeking refuge in Iraq, have long been advocates for democratic reforms in Iran.

Members of the PMOI are sheltered by international conventions and should be respected by lawful governments. I would urge you to intervene in this matter.

Here's the meaning of that reference:

Over 3,000 MEK members are currently confined to Camp Ashraf, the MEK’s main compound north of Baghdad, where they remain under the Geneva Convention’s "protected person" status and Coalition control. As a condition of the cease-fire agreement, the group relinquished its weapons, including tanks, armored vehicles, and heavy artillery. A significant number of MEK personnel have "defected" from the Ashraf group, and several dozen of them have been voluntarily repatriated to Iran.

Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, the rules are laid out:

Article 4 defines who is a Protected person Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals. But it explicitly excludes Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention and the citizens of a neutral state or an allied state.

Article 32. A protected person/s shall not have anything done to them of such a character as to cause physical suffering or extermination ... the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment.

Does the MEK/PMOI really advocate democracy?

The MEK advocates the overthrow of the Iranian regime and its replacement with the group’s own leadership.

Excessive devotion to the leaders is not a healthy sign for a democracy:

Ideologically, the MKO is difficult to describe. Originally being based on a syncretic amalgamation of Marxist and Islamic ideas, the MKO was subject to a number of rapid ideological shifts (each allegedly accompanied by severe internal purges) and has developed a strong sense of veneration for its leading couple, Masoud Rajavi and Maryam Rajavi, which some have described as a personality cult.

So the MEK/PMOI is hardly the pro-Western group committed to the flowering of democracy in Iran.

On the one hand, we have a Conservative MP essentially tricked into appearing in front of a PMOI rally. But either by luck or good political instincts, all Jason Kenney said was that Canada supports democracy in Iran.

On the other hand, we have two letters from Liberal MPs urging the Canadian government to do what it can to make sure that PMOI members in Ashraf are being treated as protected persons. The ones in Ashraf are protected persons, they have disarmed, Canada is a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, and it would appear that Iran might have tried to cut off their water supply.

The Liberal MPs did not suggest that the PMOI be taken off the terrorist list, or that direct contacts be made with the PMOI, at least not at the political level. I do think they give the MEK/PMOI too much credit as being champions of democracy, but then the only way we'll ever know for sure is if they actually replaced the theocracy in Iran.

I think that the anger and frustration of the Boris Wrzesnewskyj situation has made both sides of the issue a bit too quick on the draw.

I fully expect people on the right to call me a coward, and people on the left to continue to demand Jason Kenney's head. I don't care, really, since I think I'm correct on this.