[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 115 (Monday, July 14, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page E1445]]
HONORING THE PEOPLE'S MUJAHIDEEN ORGANIZATION OF IRAN
______
HON. THOMAS G. TANCREDO
of colorado
in the house of representatives
Monday, July 14, 2008
Mr. TANCREDO. Madam Speaker, in the 1980's the United States
supported and helped arm the Afghan resistance to Soviet occupation of
their country, a policy later portrayed in the award-winning Tom Hanks
movie, ``Charlie Wilson's War.'' Today we need to show support for
dissidents fighting to overthrow the terrorist regime in Tehran. It
will come as a surprise to most Americans that we are not doing so.
In that struggle to push the Soviets out of Afghanistan, not all of
those Afghan freedom-fighters were fighting for democracy. It was a
coalition of forces who had one thing in common: they wanted the
Soviets out of their country. We supported them, and they won. Not only
did the Soviets leave Afghanistan, within four years the Soviet Union
imploded.
One of the main groups fighting to overthrow the Ahmadinejad regime
is the People's Mujahideen Organization of Iran (PMOI)--also called the
MEK--and its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran
(NCRI). Strangely, instead of assisting these dissidents, our
Department of State decided to label them terrorists in 1997.
In the decade since, a debate has raged about whether the
designation of the MEK as a terrorist group was driven less by the
facts than it was a desire on the part of State Department bureaucrats
to curry favor with ``moderates'' in the government of then-Iranian
President Mohammad Khatami. Either way, it is has become clear that
this ``good will gesture'' on the part of the State Department failed
to yield any progress with Tehran.
The MEK advocates a secular democratic government for Iran, one that
that respects human rights and basic freedoms (including freedom of the
press and freedom of religion) and has provided intelligence and
assistance about the activities of the Iranian regime in Iraq, and
Tehran's covert nuclear program. Moreover, a number of the group's
members are under the protection of Coalition troops in Iraq.
Unfortunately, the group was recently the victim of a missile attack
at Camp Ashraf in Iraq. This is a testament to how much Tehran fears
the group.
I hope the Iranian regime will refrain from future attacks of this
nature, as Ashraf's residents are protected under the Fourth Geneva
Convention. Their well being is and continues to be the obligation of
the Coalition troops in Iraq, and the Iraqi government.
This raises another interesting point. Not only does the MEK not
behave like a terrorist group, in many respects the U.S. government
does not treat them like one.
The MEK is a group that the United States and the west should
cultivate as we seek an organic, democratic change agent in Iran.
Fortunately, the United Kingdom has already come to this conclusion
in removing the MEK from the British terrorist list earlier this year.
Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill were willing to enter into
an alliance with Joseph Stalin and the Soviet Union in 1941 in order to
defeat Hitler. We used every ally and every resource to defeat the Axis
Powers. Yet today, in dealing with the terrorist regime of Iran, a
regime that daily threatens to destroy Israel and the U.S. (the ``Great
Satan'') and is actively seeking the means of fulfilling that threat,
we cannot find it in our interest to render aid to the People's
Mujahideen of Iran because of its checkered past.
It is time for the western world to re-examine our treatment of the
MEK in the wake of the UK court decision.
For starters, the political goals behind designating the MEK as a
terrorist organization here in the U.S. have failed to materialize. If
anything, the Iranian government has become more aggressive and
repressive in the years since the MEK designation. Iran is supporting
violence and terrorism from Baghdad to Beirut, has defied U.N. demands
to end its nuclear enrichment program, and shows no signs of moderating
its behavior--test firing missiles yesterday in violation of UN
Security Council resolutions.
What better way to send a message to Tehran than to free the MEK
from the international stigma that comes with the `terrorist' label.
This year's U.S. State Department Country Reports on Terrorism
rightly brands the Iranian government as the number one state sponsor
of global terrorism. Iran has also been the principal supplier of IEDs
to terrorists in Iraq who are killing American soldiers and Iraqi
civilians.
Despite continued efforts at diplomacy, financial sanctions, and--in
the case of placing the MEK on various terrorist lists--outright
appeasement by many western countries, Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad has declared that his country will never yield its
``dignity'' by suspending its uranium enrichment program.
U.S., EU and UN negotiators have been talking with Tehran about its
nuclear program for many years, but Tehran has shown no sign of
changing course. And why should they when we keep handcuffs on Iranian
dissidents who might cause the Iranian regime real problems?
If western efforts at ``dialogue'' and ``diplomacy'' are to be
successful, they must be more than opportunities for Iran to stall for
time while moving forward with their nuclear program. A willingness to
negotiate with carrots doesn't work unless one is willing to use a few
sticks as well.
Today, there no longer remain any legal or political justifications
for maintaining the MEK on the terror list. I therefore urge our
government to seriously reconsider its stance on the democratic
opposition of Iran and remove the group from our list of terrorist
organizations.
It's time to take the handcuffs off of the MEK.
____________________