The MEK's new project in its main political centre

What follows is my English translation of a short article by Alireza Niknam, originally in Italian, published on ComeDonChisciotte.org on Saturday 30th November 2024. (All emphasis mine).

The MEK terrorist organisation, formally known as the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK), has played a controversial role in Iran's political arena. Over the years, this organisation has orchestrated several campaigns to destabilise the Iranian government and attract the support of international powers. The MEK's latest efforts, after the failures of previous projects in France and Albania, have moved to Berlin [see my previous post on this topic]. There, the group apparently intends to hold a meeting on “human rights”. However, analysts suggest that this project is an attempt to exert further pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran using dubious information about the country's nuclear facilities - information that has often misled leading officials of hostile states. In the past, for example, Netanyahu told the UN General Assembly that Iran was building a nuclear bomb at a specific location on a map he provided, only for journalists to later reveal that the site was actually a carpet cleaning shop. The incident became an international media joke for months.

The MEK was founded in the 1960s to oppose the Pahlavi regime in Iran, but after the 1979 revolution it quickly turned against the Islamic Republic. Over the years, the organisation has used various tactics, such as armed conflicts, assassinations and propaganda campaigns, to oppose the Iranian government. The MEK has always tried to align itself with international powers opposing Iran. In particular, cooperation with the Trump administration has demonstrated the group's desire to find effective allies to reinforce its goals against Iran.

During the Trump presidency, the MEK received substantial support for its anti-Iranian agenda. The group thought it was getting closer to its goals with Trump's “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran. However, the change in US policies under the Biden administration, along with a renewed diplomatic approach to Iran, has created a difficult environment for the MEK. With declining support, MEK leaders feel threatened and have turned to alternative methods to regain attention and legitimacy.

Reports indicate that the MEK is planning to organise a meeting in Berlin under the guise of a human rights conference. The aim is to invite retired politicians and “tenants” [sic] to create a human rights defence performance, even though, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International, the group has not even defended basic rights among its own members. However, through this performance, they hope to exploit the European political climate, which is particularly sensitive to issues of human rights and nuclear non-proliferation.

The main objective of the Berlin meeting is to reignite international concerns about Iran's nuclear programme by making claims about secret nuclear facilities. According to reports, the MEK intends to present a list of alleged nuclear sites in Iran, claiming that these locations are used for clandestine nuclear development. However, in previous claims, it was discovered that the designated locations had no connection to nuclear programmes; one such case led journalists to a carpet cleaning shop instead of a nuclear site. Ultimately, the main objective of spreading this information is to portray the MEK as active, thereby increasing its popularity and securing funding from Western governments. In recent years, support for the MEK has plummeted and members of the group in Albania and France have faced police raids and seizures of their assets, which were allegedly used to carry out terrorist activities in Iran.

Focusing on the nuclear issue allows the MEK to attract the attention of the US and European countries, for whom nuclear non-proliferation remains a top priority. The MEK's strategy is based on the assumption that new concerns about Iran's nuclear programme could again garner support from the West, especially from factions sceptical about Iran's nuclear intentions.

To support its claims, the MEK intends to present individuals as witnesses and experts to testify to the accuracy of the information provided on Iran's nuclear activities. However, these individuals are believed to be MEK members posing as witnesses or independent experts. Presenting internal members as foreign witnesses is an attempt by the MEK to add credibility to its fabricated narratives, although these old tactics are usually met with scepticism. This deceptive approach exemplifies the MEK's traditional methods of offering unverifiable claims to support its anti-Iranian claims.

The MEK's use of these tactics raises serious doubts about the credibility of its claims. Critics argue that the Berlin meeting is just another attempt by this group to exploit geopolitical conditions and pressure the West to provide further funding, despite the lack of solid evidence for its claims.

The timing of the Berlin meeting coincides with the US reassessment of its policies towards Iran. Recently, Trump emphasised on the campaign trail that his only demand of Iran is to refrain from building nuclear weapons, marking a complete retreat from his previous terms. This change of position underlines the failure of the MEK's new strategy. Trump's reduction in support and his emphasis on a single nuclear condition indicate that the campaign of maximum pressure has largely failed.

These developments have wide implications for the MEK's strategy. As the need for anti-Iranian tools to pressure Iran diminishes, the MEK's position is increasingly vulnerable. The Berlin meeting can be seen as a desperate attempt by the group to keep the nuclear issue in the minds of Western governments and to maintain its relevance. From an examination of the MEK's activities, which have lost much of their effectiveness, it appears that the group faces significant challenges in the future as changes in international and US policies undermine its traditional methods. The reliance on unverifiable claims and dubious tactics has raised numerous concerns about the MEK's intentions and credibility.

---