Campaign to allow families to contact
Mojahedin members in Iraq

By Anne Singleton 

'Return Our Children To Us' (Paris demonstration slogan)

…any objection raised by the Mojahedin toward people who are trying to establish and protect the rights of individual members in the difficult circumstances of captivity in an occupied country must be looked at with the suspicion it deserves.

We started Iran Interlink with the specific aim of helping people like ourselves who have become trapped inside the MKO because they can no longer accept the outlandish commands of the organisation's leaders. The methodology of coercion and intimidation as well as psychological manipulation employed by the Mojahedin have been written about elsewhere, but suffice it to say that the atmosphere of repression created inside the Mojahedin made it extremely difficult to first establish and then to maintain these contacts.

The normal channel of national Red Cross Tracing Services was instrumental in many families discovering the whereabouts of their relatives sometimes after many years of not even knowing if they were alive. But, of course, the Mojahedin has total control over its forces and the systematic reply from contacted people was that they did not wish to have further contact.

Family contact is of vital importance for cult members. It establishes a bridge to normality and to their emotional roots. It is this bridge which often enables the person to break the taboos and false beliefs which have kept them in thrall for many years as slaves of the cult leadership. Inside the Mojahedin it must not be forgotten that conditions constitute a form of modern slavery in which the slaves are not constrained by manacles but by isolation and by sophisticated mind control techniques. The members have no possessions and work for no money, they do not enjoy freedom of  thought, belief or expression, and fraternization is strictly monitored and controlled. A  strict gender apartheid operates inside the organization. Punishments for dissent include mass humiliation and physical punishment sessions, followed by solitary confinement with simple torture techniques such as 24 hour lighting and loud noises to prevent sleep. This can be continued for many months, in some cases for years. The last stage of punishment became of course the use of Abu Ghraib prison to confine those unable to suppress their dissent and submit to the Rajavis' regime.

The Mojahedin continues to deny the allegations of human rights abuses levelled against its leaders. It should be noted that even members of many years do not become aware of these abuses. Even those who take part in punishment sessions do not recognise them as human rights abuses because they believe that Massoud Rajavi can do no wrong.

For some time, Iran Interlink continued its efforts to establish family contacts. The disproportionate reaction of the organisation was evidence itself of the threat which this simple, basic human right posed to the fabric of its infrastructure.

With the outbreak of war in Iraq in March 2003 the Red Cross' work became extremely difficult. Instead, families took control of their own destinies. Now that the MKO combatants were all confined to Camp Ashraf north of Baghdad and were held captive by US forces, relatives of the captives travelled from inside Iran and from Western countries, to search for their relatives in the Mojahedin. Many suffered much hardship to make the journey, whether physical, financial and emotional.

The Mojahedin reaction was extreme. They barricaded Camp Ashraf against all external influx. The families, including elderly persons, whose reasonable request was simply to meet with their relatives, were met with obscenities and beatings by the MKO guards at the camp gate. A few who persisted were able to see their MKO relatives, but the circumstances of the meetings were far from adequate. None were able to meet without supervision from not one, but several MKO officials. None were able to speak for more than minutes.

From the time of their capture, international observers lobbied the US Administration and US forces in Iraq for the status of the Mojahedin combatants to be made clear; were they, for instance, prisoners of war or civilians. The importance of this distinction for the families and for the potential rescue of dissenting members should not be underestimated. So, it was in this atmosphere of frustration and desperation that on July 26^th 2004 the US Department of State announced Protected Persons status had been granted the combatants under the Fourth Geneva Convention. The announcement stressed that this applied only to their status in Iraq and that the US continues to regard the Mojahedin as a terrorist organisation.

In spite of this proviso to the US State Department statement, the Mojahedin typically claimed this as a victory, as vindication and affirmation of their armed struggle, and as a prelude to removal of the MKO from the terrorist lists. It was a typical misreading both of the document itself and the intent of the captors. The US Department of State has at no time even hinted that it views the organisation as anything other than a terrorist outfit. Indeed, the document itself provides for the gradual dissolution of the organisation because it allows for the individual removal of combatants from the camp, and their dispersal to various destinations as appropriate to their personal status.

Protected Person status under the Fourth Geneva Convention was an absolute gift to the relatives of members trapped in Camp Ashraf. This at last established a legal framework from which to pursue the basic right of family members to have contact with one another outside the coercive and repressive atmosphere of the Mojahedin command structure. As protected persons it means that everyone in the camp is given legal protection as an individual rather than as a member of an enemy army. As such, it provides the individual members rights which they have not enjoyed for years under the rules of the Mojahedin.

A layman's reading of the document shows that it meets the basic demands of the families. For instance, Article 116 states, 'Every internee shall be allowed to receive visitors, especially near relatives, at regular intervals and as frequently as possible. As far as is possible, internees shall be permitted to visit their homes in urgent cases, particularly in cases of death or serious illness of relatives.'

Article 140 states:

'A Central Information Agency for protected persons, in particular for internees, shall be created in a neutral country. The International Committee of the Red Cross shall, if it deems necessary, propose to the Powers concerned the organization of such an Agency, which may be the same as that provided for in Article 123 of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949.

'The function of the Agency shall be to collect all information of the type set forth in Article 136 which it may obtain through official or private channels and to transmit it as rapidly as possible to the countries of origin or of residence of the persons concerned, except in cases where such transmissions might be detrimental to the persons whom the said information concerns, or to their relatives. It shall receive from the Parties to the conflict all reasonable facilities for effecting such transmissions.

'The High Contracting Parties, and in particular those whose nationals benefit by the services of the Central Agency, are requested to give the said Agency the financial aid it may require.

'The foregoing provisions shall in no way be interpreted as restricting the humanitarian activities of the International Committee of the Red Cross and of the relief Societies described in Article 142.'

Article 138:

'The information received by the national Bureau and transmitted by it shall be of such a character as to make it possible to identify the protected person exactly and to advise his next of kin quickly. The information in respect of each person shall include at least his surname, first names, place and date of birth, nationality, last residence and distinguishing characteristics, the first name of the father and the maiden name of the mother, the date, place and nature of the action taken with regard to the individual, the address at which correspondence may be sent to him and the name and address of the person to be informed.

'Likewise, information regarding the state of health of internees who are seriously ill or seriously wounded shall be supplied regularly and if possible every week.'

Article 26:

'Each Party to the conflict shall facilitate enquiries made by members of families dispersed owing to the war, with the object of renewing contact with one another and of meeting, if possible. It shall encourage, in particular, the work of organizations engaged on this task provided they are acceptable to it and conform to its security regulations.'

Many families who have had no news of their relatives from inside the Mojahedin for many years, should now be able to discover whether they are indeed in Camp Ashraf and if they are, be able to visit them there. As Iranian nationals or nationals of Western countries, the protected persons also have the right to leave Iraq as set out in Article 48: 'Protected persons who are not nationals of the Power whose territory is occupied may avail themselves of the right to leave the territory subject to the provisions of Article 35, and decisions thereon shall be taken according to the procedure which the Occupying Power shall establish in accordance with the said Article.'

For the families and for the dissenting members, these basic protections are sufficient to appeal to the US forces and to the International Committee of the Red Cross as well as organizations for the protection of human rights, to free the individual combatants from the artificial and illegal restrictions imposed by the Mojahedin's leadership. Given that the Fourth Geneva Convention is established in international law, any objection raised by the Mojahedin toward people who are trying to establish and protect the rights of individual members in the difficult circumstances of captivity in an occupied country must be looked at with the suspicion it deserves.