One of the penchants of the Islamic Republic has been its widespread success in exploiting divisions between various ethnic, social, and political groups inside Iran (as well as their activists outside the country) to promote the regime as the only viable form of government. It has promoted the view of non-Persians living mainly in the peripheral parts of the country as dangerous separatists, while conversely indoctrinating the mainstream population in a way that would make it appear to be ethnocentric and hostile to cultural and social interests of of non-Persian groups. It has similarly generated and cultivated a surprisingly resilient narrative of “moderate” “reformists” factions, which were, in reality phantom reflections of the so-called hardliners and did not differ from the mainstream Islamists in letter nor in spirit of their views on governance.
Polarizing the opposition movements is key for the regime’s ability to maintain power for nearly 40 years. Playing off existing divisions is the biggest tool in its arsenal – when Iranians are unified, as it happened during the New Year’s Protests, millions of people in the streets in over 100 cities simultaneously clearly shows the unpopularity of the Islamic Republic, and the across-the-board dissatisfaction. One of the latest boogeymen has been the prominent presence of MEK in Europe and in the United States. MEK (Mojahedin-e Khalq) for a period of time was considered a terrorist group both by the United States and European countries, until it was eventually taken off the lists (in 2012, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton removed MEK from the designation in the US).
That MEK should no longer be considered a terrorist group is a position that united the Obama and the Trump administration. President Trump’s National Security Adviser John Bolton spoke several times at the annual gatherings of the Paris-based National Council of the Resistance of Iran (NCRI), of which MEK is the the major component. The administration consider MEK a significant, if not the leading player in the Persian-speaking Iranian opposition, although recently it has also been looking towards engaging the non-Fars nations. This decision is controversial among foreign policy experts and Iranian opposition alike.
MEK’s ideology which combines elements of Political Islam and Communism, as well as history of deadly attacks against Americans, is not easily forgiven or forgotten; also MEK is a relatively small portion of the opposition with approximately 100, 000 members. At the same time, however, MEK’s role in advancing anti-regime policies cannot be discounted. The organization has served an important purpose in working with the assets of multiple Western and Middle Eastern intelligence agencies to expose Iran’s nuclear program and to sabotage its other bellicose activities. Nevertheless, if the administration is to be successful as to its engagement with Iranian opposition, it must take into account the divisions and differences among the various groups and movements and encourage unity of purpose, rather than exacerbating the competition for attention and ax grinding.
First, it is ultimately up to the people of Iran to choose and forge their own path. Second, to avoid problems down the road, they should not be operating at cross-purposes now, when the resistance to the regime is finally beginning to gain momentum at a speed that should alarm the ayatollahs. For all its historical short comings, MEK has made a significant contribution in communicating the regime’s threats to Western governments, and has maintained an active and aggressive position in helping subvert Iranian operations. Iran perceives MEK as a viable threat, and that’s a good thing. Indeed, it has expended a great effort to portray MEK as terrorists, no difference from ISIS – all the while terrorizing its own citizens, and wreaking havoc in other countries. From the regime’s perspective the upcoming NCRI gathering in Paris, which may bring together hundreds of thousands of the Iranian diaspora opposed to the Islamic Republic is particularly damaging in light of the intermittent and ongoing protests over misuse of funding and various economic issues and discriminatory social and environmental policies inside the country.
And that is a great opportunity for a show of inclusivity and unity in opposition to Iran. NCRI has taken the lead in having a concrete leader that is readily identifiable (Maryam Rajavi), and has succeeded in bringing together significant crowds of people, over many years, which are sure to make their impression. Staunchly opposed to the return to monarchy, NCRI sees itself as a more democratic alternative that could involve the entire country. From the perspective of many other opposing factions, however, it is a small group not representative of most Iranians’ aspirations to a secular liberal democratic republic similar to European states, and for that reason, among many, is seen as illegitimate. NCRI, on the other hand, introduces itself to the Westerners as the one true Iranian opposition. This is precisely the sort of division that the regime seeks to exploit.
It looks to isolate the most successful,f rom the PR standpoint, vocal opponent of the regime, and enjoys the sight of the non-MEK opposition tearing down anyone who calls for a cooperative approach on working together towards an inclusive and democratic post-regime governance model. Is such a vision far-fetched? If MEK is truly dedicated to a better future for the people of Iran and has learned from the mistakes of the past, it would not be the first organization to integrate successfully into a legitimate and functional government. Sinn Fein, once a militant terrorist organization with civilian blood on its hands, put down its weapons and became a legitimate political party. Likewise, MEK’s observations of the dangers of political Islam or Communicsm whether in Iran or other countries, likewise have already influenced and modified the views of many of the participants. It is unlikely that they truly expect to dominate a country of millions if most Iranians want nothing to do with such a position. Like any successful political movement, it will take pragmatic steps to work with the “coalition of the willing” and settle disagreements just as any political organization would.
These very legitimate historical concerns, philosophical differences, and political tensions and disagreements should be resolved with care and mutual respects through extensive dialogue and mediation. However, those processes should not stop the organizations for coordinating in a mutually beneficial way in the immediate future and work together to corner, weaken, and topple the regime while the vision of the future is being sorted out. The more time the opposition members spend sniping at each other, and deploring each other’s position, the easier it is for the regime to retain power and to ensure that its enemies cannot come together towards a successful end.
That does not mean engaging in apologetics over truly unacceptable issues, incidents, or positions, but rather, to adopt a healthy cooperative pragmatism that will ensure the quickest pathway towards a common goal. For the majority of the Iranian opposition that may wish to see a secular republic in place, engaging with MEK sooner or later will become inevitable to ensure a smooth transition – inevitable because engagement is the best way to avoid problems, and also, because MEK enjoy a significant Western and Middle Eastern support. MEK’s important role as a potential intermediary among most of the country, which remains with limited access to the West and governments that have only general ideas about the internal issues in Iran beyond the obvious headlines, should not be ignored or underestimated.
Joining the NCRI gathering next week is a great way to send the message that the Iranian people are no longer willing to play into the divisive games of the regime, and are setting aside their differences for a show of unity and dedication to liberating themselves from their oppressors. MEK for its own part has been instrumental in bringing attention to the vast human rights violation inside the country, and in pressuring Europe from within to avoid empowering the regime through dubious but seemingly lucrative business deals with the ayatollahs. The #FreeIran gathering on June 30 then is an opportunity to stand up for a common cause in a way that does not force any particular commitments other than to opposing the regime in a visible and vocal way. That many would fear joining the rally may legitimize MEK’s views or history they may have problems with is beside the point – the regime must go, and for that, best practices must be shared even among former enemies, rivals for influence, and ideological opponents.
The ayatollahs must not win an iota of confidence in their ability to continue to hold on to power in the eyes of the Western world. To expose the regime for the weak, corrupt, rotten shell of its formerly powerful self, the various opposition factions, no matter the ultimate interests and goals, must unite and to show that the opposition to the horrendous warmongering Islamist machinery is far stronger than whatever the internal differences and divisions. That MEK is now reaching out to the rest of the opposition to bring everyone together under one umbrella is a positive sign and a start of a fresh, forward-looking strategy that can bring together the Iranian diaspora towards achieving actionable results in the countries they reside, and delivering a coherent, unified, and credible message to Western governments.
The regime has nothing positive to offer. Its PR strategy consists of fearmongering and threats. It has lost all credibility with the public by arresting and torturing protesters, rather than responding to the needs of the Iranian people. Now it seeks to explore what it sees as vulnerabilities in its stalwart foe by conflating everyone who seeks to join the Iran Freedom gathering with MEK and trying to discredit these groups inside Iran due to preexisting history. Once again it looks to sow discord and divisions – at the price of focus on its own misdeeds. Activists should not fall for this old trick, but rather concentrate on their mission. Iran is scared of both the MEK and the growing possibility of a unified opposition. Its PR media strategy has not changed in 40 years, and no one is listening anymore. The ayatollahs are demoralized, old, behind the times. They know not how to overcome the prospects of a new younger generation of opposition that is no longer interested in the finger-pointing and blame game of the past generations, but rather in working towards a better future – and will not be deterred or distracted from its task.
Indeed, the gathering promises to be everything that the regime failed to deliver. To those concerned about the reinvention of the regime with its extremist religious tropes, the gather will address the separation of religion and state. To those, sick of listening to endless lies by the regime, there will be an opportunity to interact with European parliamentarians – and perhaps to ask tough questions about the reimposition of sanctions and withdrawal of European companies in the fading light of the JCPOA. More importantly, however, it is an opportunity to mingle and interact socially in a friendly environment and to get to know each other as individuals and human beings, not just as representatives of particular movements, causes, or ideologies.
It’s time to forge a new paradigm, one based in finding common ground rather than being permanently mired in old feuds and disputes. Instead, activists of all backgrounds, and diverse interests and issues should be gathering together to share best practices for both resistance and rebuilding, as well as to exchange perspectives, humanize each other, and perhaps through such social exchanges arrive at new paths and innovative ideas. The regime is self-destructing; the ayatollahs have only the same old tricks to offer, and no one is buying what they are peddling since the country sees alternatives of peace, prosperity, justice, security, and freedom in various places around the world. The beautiful thing, however, is unlike the group of ossified octogenarians at the help of the Islamic Republic, individuals and organizations can grow, evolve, and move past the challenges and mistakes that have held them back in the past from fulfilling their potential. And the upcoming rally is a great opportunity to test that in action. Come to Paris, support freedom, invest in the future, and stand up to truth and against falsehood. The White House can play an important role in countering 40 years of regime propaganda against various opposition groups, and bringing the opposition together to the same table. Perhaps the first step would be to send an envoy to next week’s gathering and work through hearing various perspectives and committing to a long-term process towards integration.