Mideast: Are the People’s Mujahedin of Iran Still Relevant?
GENT SHKULLAKU/AFP
The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, an organization founded in 1965, has garnered a controversial reputation both inside and outside of Iran. But considering the hegemonic state of Iran’s current government how formidable an opposition group is the organization, and what role if any, does it have in working with actors in the international sphere?
The People’s Mujahedin of Iran, or Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), was an organization originally formed as a revolutionary movement bent on the overthrow of then leader of Iran, Shah Pahlavi. Overpowered by the influence of another movement spearheaded by Ayatollah Khomeini, the organization was sidelined and remained relatively marginalized in Iran as the country transformed into an Islamic Republic and the goals and ideology of the organization became increasingly disparate from the official ideologies of the new Iranian government.
The MEK was founded on principles based on a revolutionary interpretation of Islam which would contrast severely with Khomeini’s more conservative approach to religion as well as its application to the political sphere. Since its inception, the MEK has had a precarious history involving changes in ideology (indeed trying to square Islamic theology with what at first glance appears to be secular-minded Marxism or the like),a re-rooting from Iran to countries that could serve as a base of operations for the organization, and severe repression of members within Iran; all illustrated by the MEK’s own website which gives a primer of their own perspective of the history of the organization.
Currently the MEK is regarded as controversial and is split on international support. Indeed, the MEK has garnered a reputation of being cult-like but has also drawn attention from Western leaders hoping it can serve as a bulwark at least, and a counterforce at most to Iran’s unstable government. Indeed, as well be seen the MEK, a once designated terrorist organization, has recently come into favor with leading US politicians, making an argument for its relevancy in 2020.
Relationship with the United States and Europe
Within Iran, the MEK is heavily marginalized and has virtually no political presence in the country. Making it hardly formidable to the current Iranian administration. Leaders of MEK after the 1978 revolution were thrown into exile and were forced to find a new base of operations turning to Saddam’s Iraq at one point, drawing the disproval of many Iranians who began to see the organization as treasonous. They were then forced to make their way into Albania with the help of the Obama administration in 2013, as Iraq’s government was by then decidedly pro-Iranian, and as of 2018 around 4,000 members of the MEK made their homes in Albania.
The MEK was regarded as a terrorist organization not just by Iran and Iraq, but also for a time also by the United States and the European Union. In the EU, the MEK was after lobbying from the organization, dropped from the EU terror list in 2009, this after the designation was place on the MEK in 2002. In the United States, the MEK had the designation of “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” revoked, a designation the organization had since 1997. Since then and especially since the Presidency of Donald Trump, the United States has viewed the MEK in a much more positive light. A well-known Trump associate, Rudy Giuliani, has been a well-known supporter of the MEK and has been on the organization’s paywall along with previous Attorney General Michael Mukasey. Moreover, John Bolton, Trump’s previous National Security Advisor, has vocally made his support of MEK known and sees the organization as a ready-made replacement of the current Iranian government. However, as Trump’s Administration may be on its way out it is hard to predict what sort of relationship the MEK will have with a new American political administration, especially if Joe Biden is to become president; considering the possibility of much warmer relations with Iran.
How relevant is it in 2020?
The MEK remain relevant because of their relationship with figures in the West and especially in the United States. Although the organization remains outside of Iran, its influence can very well accumulate if given enough material resources and support from the international community and of course the US. The Trump administration, and specifically the work of a few key actors including Rudy Giuliani and John Bolton has made it so that the MEK can find favor in a powerful international ally. That is not to say that the MEK is a good-actor nor that it presents a viable alternative to the current Iranian regime, however. The People’s Mujahedin of Iran has conducted numerous terror attacks since its inception that have killed American and Iranians alike. Furthermore, the MEK not only has been accused of being a terrorist organization and even a cult ,but has also had very real allegations thrown at it that torture, both psychological and physical, as well as brainwashing and even forced sterilization, are all common practice within MEK circles.
Considering all the above, it would hardly be a good idea to equip the MEK with any sort of ability to actively bring about the end of the current Iranian regime. Indeed, the abuses committed within the organization as well as its lack of experience in Iranian politics makes it a unwise choice to cultivate opposition against the Iranian government. It would be a mistake for the United States to continue its support of the MEK on these grounds. However, this does not change the fact that the organization remains relevant in 2020. Not least because of its ability to co-opt high ranking politicians in the United States and market itself as a viable alternative to the current Iranian regime. Which for all intents and purposes, does not seem accurate.
