Disagreement between NCRI and other Iranian opposition groups
One of the reasons for the disagreement of the Iranian opposition figures and groups with NCRI is its totalitarian attitude and manner towards others and its opponents. This intolerance goes as far as not willing to listen to criticisms of others including the present and former mem-bers of NCRI as well as other opposition groups.
In this section we will raise some of the criticisms put forward by former members of NCRI about the policies and actions taken by chairman of NCRI:
Mr. Hassan Massali from "Gilan and Mazandaran Zahamtkeshan Movement" [198] in a statement announces the reason why his Group left NCRI on 28 May 1983 as follows:
“The way of thinking of some members of NCRI and the mechanism used within NCRI and the public relations of NCRI to communicate with others, have been a source of concern for me. I am worried about the future and I have reached the conclusion that with the continu-ation of such a trend in the policy making process and the thought process of NCRI, we can-not play a positive role as a democratic alternative. If there is a force (MKO) within NCRI that can carry out all the duties alone and has a ready made solution for all the problems, then, why are so many others getting together under the so-called Council? There are some among us that the only thing they can do is to disrupt the democratic gathering of others.” [199] Furthermore, Hamid Reza Chitgar (known as Hamid Bahmani) the representative of the Labour Party [200] of Iran in NCRI, in a letter entitled “Who should be blamed for the violation of principles, MKO or us?” explained the main reason for the withdrawal of his party from NCRI. The letter which was addressed to Manouchehr Hezar Khani, one of the heads of NCRI states: “the reason for the withdrawal of membership was the inner ideological revolution of MKO and the transfer of leadership from NCRI to MKO.” [201] Mr. Mahdi Khanbaba Tehrani who repre-sented the “Left Unity Council for Democracy and Independence” [202] in a statement on 4 April 1985, described the reasons why its group separated itself from NCRI in the following words:
“Left Unity Council as a member within NCRI was faced with undemocratic and hegemonistic relations. It was asked whether we really wanted to build up the future of a country with those that have no toler-ance towards any criticism and opposition.” [203] One other party that left NCRI is the “Democratic Kurdistan Party of Iran”. The Party in a statement issued 30 April 1985 stated:
“MKO rejected resolutely the proposals for a review on the pro-gram and the Statute of NCRI. From the very beginning that the Party joined NCRI, its representatives realised that MKO was against the expansion of NCRI and willing to accept new members only if they were assured that the new members would follow the policies of MKO within NCRI. MKO used the name of NCRI to push forward its own goals and purposes.” [204] On 14 October 1985 Bahman Niroumand, a member of the Executive Board of the “National Democratic Front of Iran” [205] in a statement entitled “National Democratic Front of Iran and NCRI” considered the continuation of membership of the Front in the Council as a violation of the principles of the Front:
“After the passage of a rather short period of time, NCRI gradually changed its form as a coalition of independent forces and individuals to turn to an affiliate to MKO. MKO con-tinues to impose its will on NCRI with saying “either you are with us or against us”. It even uses a threat-ening tone in addressing other organisations and individuals within NCRI. Therefore, it seems that the hope for creating a real democratic force is vanishing.” [206] Dr. Mansour Farhang [207], in an interview published in the book entitled “Rise and Fall of NCRI” said:
“The fact of the matter is that NCRI, from the very beginning, was a tool in the hands of MKO and did not have any independent identity.”208 The Constitutional Party of Iran [209] in a statement issued on 10 July 2005 to its branches and units regarding their cooperation in organizing demonstrations and actions with other groups advised the following:
“It is right that our goal, like other opposition groups, is to topple the regime in Iran, but we are perusing this goal for a more sublime purpose which is to establish liberal democracy i.e. the rule of the majority in Iran within the framework of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Therefore, we are not going to cooperate by any means with an organisation which is seeking to impose its own individual - religious dictatorship. MKO under whatever name, is an Islamic fascist organisation and is opposing all the values that we are fighting for. We do not want, here, to refer to the cooperation of this organisation with Iraqi aggressors who invaded our homeland and killed Iranian soldiers. Our party will not cooperate with MKO or any other business like organisation, whatever its name may be.” [210]
MKO/NCRI faced with these criticisms, instead of providing explanations, began labelling its opponents as mercenaries, criminal mouthpieces, traitors, anti-revolutionist, spies etc. In this way, NCRI answered these criticisms with hallow hue and cries. The followings are some examples:
Mojahed the official gazette of MKO terrorist group in its no. 320 issued on 29 November 1993 stated:
“Bani Sadr [211] has exceeded the mullahs by shamefully disregarding human rights and the principles of political asylum. The role of Bani Sadr is to sharpen the knife of merciless regime on the throat of Mojahedins and strugglers.”
Mojahed, no. 321, page 13 dated 6 December 1993 wrote:
“Ali Reza Nouri Zadeh [212], a none-entity intellectual pretender figure, shakes his take for who-ever throws bones towards him. This poor mercenary says nonsense against Mojahedin.”
Mojahed, in its issue no. 299 published the statement issued by NCRI dated 17 May 1993 where it is stated:
“Bazargan [213] and his business like company share holders have an anti-nationalist identity. There is no such political organisation by the name of Freedom Movement anymore in Iran. Everybody has left the Movement and only Bazargan and his likes, such as Ebrahim Yazdi have remained. They are a bunch of dispersed individuals who are evermore demising and vanishing.”
Iranzamin publication in its no. 52 dated 1 June 1995 states:
“Saeid Shahsavand [214], this mean adulator and nonsense teller was expelled 10 years ago for the third time from MKO for his immoral behaviour. Rapscallion”
Mojahed, no. 39 dated 4 July 1994, pages 10 to 13 states:
“Nimrouz and Kayhan of London newspapers [215] are torn apart pages remaining from SAVAK of the Shah. They should be called lie dispersing and mean papers.”
Mojahed, No. 327 dated 17 January 1992 states:
“Raheh Karegar216 is a reactionary gathering for garbage dispersion and bites the legs of MKO and NCRI.”
Mojahed, in its no. 351 dated 22 August 1994:
“Mahdi Khanbaba Tehrani is a nonsense teller, disloyal, subdued repentant, once has signed with his own pen the armed struggle policy as the only way out. Traitor mercenary”
Mojahed, no. 260, pages 4 and 15 dated 17 October 1994:
“Mahdi Khanbaba Tehrani, this kicker to MKO and the turkey of the political scene of Iran.”
Mojahed, no. 353, page 11 dated 28 August 1995:
“Reza Pahlavi [217], the retarded son of the defunct Shah and idiot, who in the past, his hated father used to tell lies against MKO.”
The contemptuous language used by NCRI/MKO is not limited to Iranian opposition figures; rather it extends to world mass media that criticises the performance of the group. For example Iranzamin, the publication of MKO in its no. 52 dated 1 June 1995 stated:
“Ayatollah BBC is upset for its isolation and boycott by MKO and NCRI.”
The group calls the members who left the NCRI as nonsense teller, mercenaries, traitors, spies, corrupt, deserters, thieves, liars, counter-resistant and other terms of abuse. These former members who are target of this abusive language are people like Majid Bazgouneh, Reza Toyserkani Shomal, Azghar Koukab Talebi, Asghar Safaei, Jamshid Tafreshi, Haydar Babaei, Asgar Kamyab, Asghar Borzou, Nourouz Ali Rezvani, Abbas Falah Khayrandish, Mohammad Toufigh Assadi, Morteza Sayyad Pour, Hossein Rostami, Parviz Yaghoubi, Fereydoun Gilani, Karim Haghi, Nadereh Afshari, Hassan Khalaj, Mahdi Khoshhal ... [218]
Mojahed, no. 360 dated 17 October 1995 about Abdolkarim Lahiji [219] states: “He is repeating the nonsense of the mullahs against MKO and NCRI- gossip teller against MKO- semi alternative, dependent regime ...”
Iranzamin, no. 151 dated 8 September 1998 stated:
“Manouchehr Farhang [220] is a carious and rotten instrument in the hands of the Iranian regime. He talks like an illiterate and without logic.”
Mojahed, no. 304 dated 11 June 1993 about the Radio belonging to the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan of Iraq calls it a nonsense teller, leased mercenary, thief, aggressor and hated by the Iraq Kurds.
Mojahed, no. 296 dated 16 May 1993 stated:
“Farhad Basharat from Labour Communist Party [221] is a ruminator of the rotten information on inner revolution in MKO.
Iranzamin, no. 62 dated 4 September 1995 treats Habib Ollah Payman [222] as a nonsense teller who tells lies for his own life and alimentation and sucks the blood of MKO members and freedom fighters.
Mojahed No. 341 pages 1 and 2 dated 9 May 1995 stated: “Hollow semi-alternatives are faced with decadence of personality and telling nonsense, dispersing garbage and have feckless analysis and commentaries about the positions and actions of MKO and NCRI.
Mojahed No. 329 dated 9 June 1999 stated that “Avant Garde Constitutionalist organisation [223]” is the remnants of the SAVAK [224] of the Shah.
Masoud Rajavi, the president of NCRI and the leader of MKO in line with this insulting and labelling of his and his group’s critics and opponents states: “Look at non MKO and non NCRI and look all those who are opposing the resistance, since they do not rely on the people, they do not believe in the forced struggle of NLA [225]. They have turned to a bunch of blellums and damp individuals who are in fact having objective union with the regime against the resistance. It remains to be verified that in their minds they rely on the support of whom?” [226]
[BACK]