Photos of Chapter seven Chapters: One - Two - Three - Four - Five - Six - Seven - Eight - Nine - Conclusion

Chapter Seven -Ideological Divorce - Date 1989-1992


Throwing stones toward ‘Satan’

All the way from Paris to Baghdad, I was thinking, “How can I write my report, How can I express my feelings and say where mentally, I am.” Either I have lost all my faith in the organization, or I was losing it very fast.

            Ideologically, I could feel not only my belief in God and Islam is not stronger than when I was not supporter of the Mojahedin, but daily I was losing any moral and belief I had on anything, including: ‘one should not lie or deceive others for his objectives.’

            Emotionally I was on the edge of collapse, I was going to surrender myself to my love for my wife and children, and forget my oath with my people, my country and my God. Operation of Forogh was an end for many of our Ideological, political and even moral believes and expectations. As a result of that operation, not only we retreat from our country, but we did from our beliefs, our objectives, our desires and hopes. This operation changed the meaning of many basic values. Life and death, Love and hate, Comfort and Pain, happiness and sadness. All were lost. Our smiles, our tears, our sigh, our anger, and our likes and dislikes all became meaningless.

            Politically none of our predication or analysis was coming close to reality. Once Abrishamchii said: “OK, we said downfall of the regime is in ‘short time’. It didn’t happen, so we extended the meaning of the ‘Short time’, and if it doesn’t occur, we extent it to as long as it takes and still we announce that we will overthrow the regime in ‘short time’, even if it takes hundred years. What else can we do? Can we live under Khomieni’s regime?.”

            At the beginning, I was on this impression that, this is only I, who has lost his faith and lives in hell. But more and more I could see and understand others around me with the same feelings. As meaningless and artificial were my smiles and show of happiness, so was theirs. We all were changed into actors playing for each other and encouraged by each other. This lie, this deceiving, reached to its climax, when our ‘ideological leader’ couldn’t accept and admit to his wrong prediction, judgement and failure. Not only in our propaganda, which could be understandable as could be used against us by our enemy. But even among us. Even in our high ranking meetings we had to praise him for achieving that victory. More than any body else, we were deceiving ourselves. I think when one can lie to himself and accept his own lie, is not so difficult to lie to others and persuade them to accept it as well!!

            Once we were told and learned, that believing in Mojahedin is based on two foundations. Their sacrifices for the people, and their honesty towards people. Clearly after Forogh we lost the last droops of our honesty and sincerity toward people and more than that toward our supporters and ourselves. So from then on the organisation’s foundation reduced into one, ‘Sacrifice’ and more ‘Sacrifice’. To believe in organisation more, we had to sacrifice more and accept that our leader has sacrificed more than any body else.

            Perhaps with sacrifices we could polish our rusted beliefs, and could gain some incentives for going forward. But were we able to gain support of people as before?! We were calling Khomieni, ‘DAJAL’, the one who deceive people at its highest. We were not calling him thief, or sex monster, or mercenary of foreigners. We could not deny the sacrifices of Khomieni’s supporters for him. So the main difference between them and us was the truthfulness and honesty. People believed in Khomieni, when he promised them democracy and respect for the rights of all individuals, and found new kind of dictatorship. Now even before reaching to power, they could see the contrast between our actions and our words. Our selfishness, which paralysed us to criticise ourselves. So how could we expect them to support us against the regime?!

            Plane was reaching Baghdad and I was thinking. “What can I write? What should I write?.” After all I could see my own weakness! How could I be sure that my judgement is not as a result of my own tendency toward ordinary life and return to my family? Was that the devil, wanting to stop me from my way in path of God?

            In Hajj we throw stones towards symbol of Satan; the same stones he received from Abraham when he was going to deceive him, not to sacrifice his son for God. Did I have to throw the same stones toward my own devil? I thought, I should. And I did. I wrote a detailed report about myself, criticising myself for weakness I felt and showed during my return to my family. The weaknesses that forced me to doubt the organisation, the leadership and my beliefs, my path toward people and God.



            Imam Zaman

            The first thing in Baghdad they told me to do was to watch the videotape of an Ideological meeting for ‘executive and high ranking members’, called: ‘Imam Zaman’ after the meeting. Meeting as usual start with a simple question. The question this time was: “to whom do we owe all our achievements, and whatever we have?” Question was simple and the answer to that shouldn’t be so difficult! Some said ‘God’, others, ‘People’, few went steps forward and said: ‘leadership’. All were wrong! Rajavi said “to answer you, I have to emphasis, whatever I am going to say is our final word in our Ideology, so whoever thinks is not able to stay in the organisation and fight till the end, should leave the room now; only those who are prepared to sacrifice everything can and should stay and listen to me.” This was the first time; he was saying these words, which were similar to Imam Hussein’s final words to his disciples. I felt, I was shaking; some sense of fear mixed with anxiety and curiosity was shaking me. I switched off the tape and start walking in the room, thinking, “am I worthy of seeing this tape? Do I stay with this ‘Imam Hussein’ of our time till the end?” I guess eventually my answer was ‘yes’. Without any intention, I start guessing what does he want to tell us? From the name of the meeting, I guessed he want to say, he, himself is the ‘Imam Zaman’. The promised one whom according to our beliefs is coming to save all human kind from the misery and . . . For me it was quite all-right, as I never could accept a man has lived for more than thousand years among us in different disguise, and is going to live for thousands years more. Yes it was quite acceptable for me to see Rajavi as Imam of our time (Zaman means time), rather than believing in that story. Contrary to my expectation, when I switched on the tape, he didn’t say anything new we didn’t know before. He said we owe everything to Imam Zaman and then he asked every body, why they didn’t name him as owner of all our belongings and glories?! From here he wanted to reach to his real objectives and conclusions. But I presume, as he didn’t receive any close answer from his disciples, he left the real discussion to another time, so the rest of the meeting was the same old stories about Imam Zaman.

            Few months prior to this meeting we had another Ideological discussions under the title of ‘Towhidi’ (Monotheism). I don’t think many understood him and his discussion by then either. Once while I was in Paris, we were called to a meeting with highest secrecy and security. Maryam by then was there for a medical check up and asked to see few of us, to discuss about that issue. I along few people under my responsibility were back from a political meeting in London. When she asked me about that issue. I didn’t have a clue what should I say. The only thing I could think of was to elaborate around the meaning of Towhidi. I said: “while this morning I was in London I could feel how stranger we are with that political meeting’s atmosphere, while on contrary, now when I am here with you, I feel a sense of unity with every body. Reaching to this feeling in the organisation was not possible if we could not reach to some sort of unification with you and Masoud as our leaders. To reach to the same feelings with the whole universe and people, I think we have to fly from where we are at the moment and find the same feeling with God, if we be able to feel unification with God, then we are able to feel unified with people and then we can claim we have reached to real ‘Towhidi’. She showed us her usual smile, which didn’t mean yes or no and start telling us her side of story. I don’t think any of us could understand her as her speech was not direct and blunt, and we were too tired and sleepy after our long day in London and then our travel to Paris. Later when I realised how wrong I was, I wrote to her that “my talking that day was like a monkey making face of a human.”

            The main problem of the organisation after ‘Forogh’ was the loss of moral and incentives of members. To overcome this, they found right spouse for almost all high-ranking members, especially those who had lost one. As a result atmosphere of the organisation was changed completely. Every then and on, with some excuses we had festivals, banquet, and celebrations. In all battalion those who had some talent in folklore dancing or could sing, or play theatre, were spending substantial time of theirs, to prepare themselves and others to show their talent to us. Apart from changing the atmosphere of the organisation, our Television could show those acts, first to fill the gap of inactivity of our army and then send a message to Iran that against Regime’s propaganda, we are there, more than ever prepared, ready and happy. Every Thursday families after few days’ separation were gathering together for having fun and dinner together and to be with each other for another day. Fridays all were gathering in sport grounds to support matches between different teams from different departments or battalions. So, apart from any celebration we had. Two days per week, Thursdays and Fridays we could be sure to have some fun. Organisation was spending some money to import some food and luxuries from abroad for easing the atmosphere of the organisation. We tried very hard to create some parks and greens around all battalion bases. As a result one could say the atmosphere of the organisation was more like a large happy family than anything else. Even most of our works were domestic for improving the living conditions of ourselves. So for sure our moral by then was almost revived.



            Having a ‘buffer’ was the reason of our failure in ‘Forogh’!

            The other problem of the leadership was member’s feeling of defeat and failure. Though they tried very hard with some successes to force us to accept ‘Forogh’ was a victory and not a failure. Still they were not able to change the fact that we wanted to go to Teheran and here we were in Baghdad. They benefited a lot from our political gains, to cover up the failure of military one, but still deep down, nobody could accept we won that operation. In our internal meetings especially the ones for high ranking members, most of the efforts of the high ranking commanders was to play as escape goat for Rajavi and put the blame of failure on themselves. The objective was to show that we could win and reach Teheran, if we were more united with our leader, as he was with Imam Zaman and God. This was the conclusion he wanted to obtain from last two ideological discussions. In ‘Towhidi’ discussion, opposite to what I said to Maryam in Paris. We had to reach to this conclusion, that Masoud prepared himself to sacrifice every thing he had, (means all of us), for God, as he had nothing else in his mind except what he was asked by God to do, perhaps as Abraham who was prepared to sacrifice his only son for God. On contrary as we were not united with him or in Towhidi state with him, we didn’t follow him without any doubt or reservation. As a result we didn’t follow his direction and couldn’t reach Tehran. In ‘Imam Zaman’ discussion too, we had to reach to this conclusion that there is no ‘buffer’ between him and Imam Zaman, while there is something obstructing us to see him and certainly Imam Zaman and God. If we were able to see our ‘Buffer’, our weakness. Then we could see why and how we failed in ‘Forogh’ and in other activities we have had by then. By then Masoud and Maryam had no doubt that our buffer, for all is our spouse, so they had to get rid of this ‘buffer’, at the same time, though they had been able by marrying them to revive moral of many high ranking members, but parallel to that they created many problems for majority of male members who could see the happiness of families in the organisation, and could not have their own spouse, as the number of women in the organisation was one third of male ones. Hence now it was necessary for the leadership to get rid of the issue of family and sex, for good.



            Maryam, masoul aval (first responsible of the organisation)

            Eighteenth of October 1989, we were called to attend especial meeting of ‘central committee’ of the organisation. This was the first meeting of us under this title. Many of us, including me, even didn’t know such a committee does exist and we are its member. So we were thinking and guessing what is going on and what is the news. The meeting was taking place in our base, close to residence of Rajavi, so many from ‘Ashraf base’ were coming there and it was good opportunity for us to see our old friends.

            As usual, when Rajavi wanted to shock us, asked us to stand up and start reading his hand-written verdict. What he read was not long, on contrary to his usual sermons; it was short and clear. He said: “… By the conclusion of the three stages of the ideological revolution, and in fifth year of this great transformation, which is the root of all our capabilities, whatever we have owned, and gained within our past few years’ struggle with the enemy of God and people . . . As ‘Ideological leader’ of Mojahedin and first responsible of the new Iranian Revolution, . . . I introduce ‘sister Maryam Rajavi’ as ‘masoul aval’, (first responsible) of the Mojahedin. The ‘revolutionary submission to her as ‘Masoul Aval’ of Mojahedin or deputy commander of NLA is ideological responsibility of all Mojahedin. Internal ideological revolution of Mojahedin as a result of this new position of Maryam is reaching to its highest and its most mature point, and is going to be source of new great benefits and blessings for the Mojahedin and their beloved people. Let all exploitation’s chains be broken and let smell of monotheistic society which is written in the heart and on the grave stone of every Mojahed be blown every where, to give the good news of freedom of all human kind . . . At this point I wish to be pardoned for all my failures and wrong doings during years that I was the ‘Masoul Aval’. Whatever was positive and looked strong point, were from the martyred founders of the Mojahedin, especially my great teacher, Hanif, and other martyred commanders and members of Mojahedin. But whatever was considered as negative or weak points were mine and are going to be mine and I accept all its responsibility. Let God Pardon me for all my year’s wrong doings, and cover up all my shortcomings with the help of clean soil of martyr’s graves, and wash my sins with their bloods . . .”

            After reading that written paper, he gave it to Maryam and with that an emblem of the organisation and start clapping, while Maryam was crying with pressing the emblem to her face. We all were clapping too, many were crying and showing their grief or happiness in different way possible.

            Many who were crying hard, especially many sisters, from last sentences of his message got this impression that he is admitting to his failures and is resigning from his post? I wish this was the case as it could revive the organisation and give new confidence to every body. But from first sentence of the message, I could see by doing this he has raised his position not only one step forward but perhaps as we could see later, thousand steps upward. Maryam in her speech neutralised any illusion existed in our minds about this matter. She said: “ . . . the only thing which let me to accept this great responsibility is the presence of Masoud as my ideological leader. Also this is because of necessity of placing Masoud in his especial and right position as the Ideological leadership of Mojahedin . . . “ After her speech and show of our hands as ‘affirmative vote’ for this nomination, we received some sweets and juice. Then as usual Masoud start asking us what did we think when we heard his message? Few said: “we thought you are going to leave the organisation . . . “ He asked them why did they think like that? While every thing was clear in the message?! He asked one of the sisters to go close to them on the stage. Then he asked her why she couldn’t see him and what did stop her to see him? Obviously she was not able to give right answer, and then he asked her husband to go there and stand between her and Masoud. Again Masoud asked her what did stop her to see him. Still she was not able to see the answer, even this act didn’t help her. While by now we could see clearly what he meant and every body start laughing while poor woman was astonished what is going on. In no way she could imagine that her husband was her ‘buffer’ to see her ideological leader. He repeats the same act again, this time for one of brothers. What we could not realise was that according to the rule of generalisation in the organisation this was problem of all of us and not just those few. Then few old members of the organisation admit their feeling against election of a woman as ‘masoul aval’ and criticised themselves. It was very emotional meeting, but still I could not see the significance of the meeting. Immediately after the meeting, while it was few hours pass midnight, few of us were asked to go to the room of Mohadessin, (masoul of our political department). In that meeting we were asked the same question. As my response, I referred to the leader of Tanzania, where he resigned from his post as head of the state to place himself as father of the nation. Then I said: “When Masoud was reading that, this idea passed from my mind.” I didn’t dare to say I felt he has placed himself in position of Khomieni, by distancing himself from executive work through choosing a masoul aval (similar to president in Iran, who has to do all the dirty job and accept all the blames for short comings, while the leader can rest in God like position far from any daily life’s problems and dirt). I was not asked to attend such a private meeting during next few weeks as everybody in that meeting were higher in rank than me. Perhaps the reason why they asked me to go to that meeting in first place, was due to my report from Paris which gave them this impression that I have recognised my ‘buffer’ namely love for Anna.

            In the next meeting for all members of our department. I was asked to explain my own buffer as by now we were told that all of us have a buffer and have to find it, In previous past few days I had thought about this matter a lot and my conclusion was that my buffer is my own selfishness. After all even between my dearest, my family from one hand and my own believe, on the other hand, I chose the latter one. So I was sure if any thing stands between me and my leader, certainly is not my family, but is perhaps my own mind, my own logic, believes and principals. Hence in that meeting, I said: “my buffer is my own selfishness.” With saying that, the whole meeting exploded in laugh, rejection, and even insults towards me. I was bewildered about what is going on as I was thinking that my buffer is worse than anybody else. After all those who had their spouse as their buffer could divorce them and reach to some kind of unity with the leadership. But what could I do to save myself? How could I divorce myself?! At the same time I was thinking that criticising ourselves because of selfishness is worse than being attached to our family. But obviously I was wrong and people in that meeting didn’t let me to say anything, to defend myself, after few speeches from different people I had to sit shamefully with this feeling that ideologically I am behind everybody else, not understanding what is going on. In the same meeting Mohadessin asked few people who previously were under my responsibility, when I was directing them in our European political work, if they are happier now or then. By then a sister, named Fahieme’a, who later became the most famous ideological revolutionary among us, had replaced me. Unfortunately for me the answer of majority of them was, then when they were under my responsibility. They argued that I was more expert in political system in Europe and knew what is going on so could understand their problem easier and could direct and help them better. This response of theirs was the start of new wave of attack toward I, as well as them, as between a masoul, politically expert and a masoul ideologically capable, they picked the first one.

            For the next few days after that meeting I was retired from my responsibilities to think and find my buffer. More I was thinking, less I could find the answer. While every body was talking about their spouse, I was not able to name Anna as my buffer, as after all, I was feeling that I have overcome the family temptation and rejected it and came back to the organisation. So I was searching in the clouds to find something to say and introduce as my own buffer. At the end I saw no way out, except cheating. When I read report of two of my under responsibilities, a brother and a sister, who were asking for divorce from their spouses and had introduced them as their buffer; I thought, to save myself from that misery, I have to write the same report. Before doing that I was called by my masoul and asked to go to Venezuela to represent NCR in a conference. As still my body was in a plaster and I was moving around carrying that heavy plaster, I asked him if they could send somebody else instead of me. He said they can’t and I am right person for this meeting. Then, as on my way, I had to stop in London to get my visa. I asked him, what should I do in London, as Anna will find out about my presence there and I have to see them? He said: “OK see them and be with them for a day or two, what is wrong with that?!” I could feel he is testing me, so I replied, “What about the ‘ideological revolution’?” He felt at the end I have recognised my buffer and asked me to wait till he give me the final answer. Then he went to Mohadessin and informed him about my revolution. Soon I was asked by Mohadessin to see him. He asked me how did I reach to that conclusion, I couldn’t lie and told him by reading the report of two of my under responsibilities. He said, “you had to reach to this conclusion by yourself, but still it is good and congratulation,” Then he asked my to give him my marriage ring. He told me, while I am in London, to avoid seeing Anna, instead of going to our house or our base, I can stay in a hotel.

            Mohadessin’s word of congratulation helped me a lot as during revolution era, this word was symbol of acceptance of the ‘revolution’. It gave me self-confidence and self-assurance. So I got rid of that plaster and prepared the documents we needed to have in Caracas. In Caracas another member under my responsibility joined me, as his revolution was accepted too, we both were very active. As a result apart from official meeting with chairman of Venezuela’s parliament, and members of their government, we could pass a very strong resolution in support of our resistance in that Conference and paved our way for gaining some material support from some European trade unions as well. In our way back to Baghdad we were asked to stop in Paris and talk with people there about new Ideological revolution. It was an honour for me to talk about the revolution, especially as still we were tasting the sweet part of it, and didn’t have any clue about the bitter part. In few days time we received another message to go to Malta and represent our movement in an annual conference of European Christian-Democrat parties. I believe in Malta we were very successful too, as we could have official meetings with president of Malta, Prime minister and foreign minister of Malta, and Luxembourg, foreign minister of Norway, … and could gain official invitation for visiting few countries.

‘Maryam’s ideology’.

            As a result of our achievements in Venezuela and Malta, Two members under my responsibility and I were feeling that we have gained something to offer as a sign of our ‘revolution’. As we were told that after the revolution one has to show, he or she is capable of doing things, hundred times more effective than before the ‘revolution’. But against all our expectations, in Baghdad, we found out, nobody cared about our activities or our achievements, even a book, present of Venezuelan president of parliament for Rajavi didn’t impress any body. The atmosphere of our base was changed completely, rarely any body was prepared to talk to anybody else, smile was rare commodity, which could not be found easily. Most of the times people in our department wanted to be alone and think, and when they could not find any empty room, were walking outside of buildings. Nobody was doing any political work, question and reports of our people in Europe and America, were left there unanswered. Departmental work was at its minimum, only news of different radios were monitored and instead of thick news bulletin of every day, very tiny one was going to be produced. Even in refectory in lunchtime nobody was prepared to stay long and talk or laugh as before. As matter of fact many were preferring to come to lunch as late as possible and leave the hall as soon as possible to avoid any conversion. Once I found one of the member has locked himself in a room and is not prepared to come out. Eventually when he did, I found him with red eyes as red as blood, because of tears he had alone. Well every body was in the process of the new phase of the ‘ideological revolution’. The only legitimate talking was about the revolution and exchange of experiences in that area. Apart from that nothing was important, as there was no outside world. We were astonished, why members there, are so much deep in misery?! What is going on?! What is wrong with them?! Why can’t they have their revolution, and set themselves free from all those pains?! We didn’t know that recognising our buffer is the first stage of this long process, and only has to be considered as tip of the mountain, which was going to come. The next stage was the ‘ideological divorce’ of the buffer, which by now was clear for every body that is their spouse. Poor singles had to divorce as well, not knowing whom should they divorce. Later we learned that they have to divorce all those women, which they felt they love in their mind. One day we were asked to take our personal belonging to move to Ashraf base for attending Ideological meetings with the leadership.

            Still I could not see any reason for misery. Even for myself, I was thinking that the divorce is the only solution, for my relation with Anna. It could save her and children from the state they were in. She was young and could marry again and have the sort of life she was looking and hopping for, children too, they could have more stable life, as I could see no end to my situation. Soon I realised this is not only a legal divorce the organisation is looking for, but emotional or as it was called the Ideological one. We had to divorce our spouse in our heart and further more to hate them, as they were buffer standing between us and our leader for long time.

            In the meeting, Rajavi announced that as our ‘ideological leader’ he has issued the divorce of all of us from our spouses. He asked all to hand over our rings, to our masouls if we have not done so by then.

            That meeting which was carried on for almost a week, was the strangest, the most horrible organisational meeting I had attended by then. Still I could not say exactly if it took several days or weeks or months. As during those days we could not have any sense of time. If I say time and space were becoming meaning less for us, I haven’t exaggerated. The atmosphere of the meeting from the first second was showing us how different this meeting is with others. Though there were few hundred members present in that meeting, one could rarely hear any noise except those who were talking with Rajavi or when he or Maryam were giving speech, or talking to us. Every now and then, we were getting shocked with loud cry of somebody in the meeting as sign of her or his revolution and after that, their talk with the leadership mixed with tear and cry. There was no individual talking, no kind word or happy smile among us. The only thing, which could let us to fly from that atmosphere was the tea brake, when we were receiving tea and some sweets. Though we were not hungry or greedy, but those tea and those sweets were very delicious as were helping us to move our mind from what was happening there and return to the world of reality. On the board behind Maryam all our names were written in red and close to them few names in green. Those who were in process of the revolution, their name were in red and those who had their revolution, in green. At the start it was up to any individual to volunteer for the revolution, but by the end of the meeting, it was changing into a compulsory situation. Maryam was reading names of five by five of those who had not revolted yet and were in final stages of doing so, to go to the stage and have their revolution. Whoever was having his or her revolution had to stand up, and say what has she or he learned or found out about herself or himself. At this point everybody else was free to ask any question from those who were having their revolution, accuse them, criticise them, and even insult them in any way they wished. In this meeting rank of people was not important any more, all were equal except those whose name were written in green as it meant now they are real Mojahed. We were told till the start of this stage of the revolution, the organisation has had no real ‘ideological member’ except Maryam, as she was the only one who could recognise and understand the real ‘ideological position’ of Masoud. ‘She was the only one who paid something as price of being a Mojahed. The rest of us were receiver, not paying anything ideologically valuable for keeping ourselves as a member of Mojahedin’. We were told, in first stage of the revolution we were only audience of what was happening. While Masoud and Maryam were receiving all accusations and sufferings, we were watching them, and even we used to be praised by people as we were considered being the victims of their selfishness, and their whim. Now it was our turn to pay the price of being a Mojahed and keeping ourselves as a Mojahed.

            To understand Mojahedin’s ideology, or ‘monotheistic ideology’ (Towhidi), we had to realise that, there exist only two different ideologies in the world. One, which is based on discrimination among people, according to their class orientation, or their race, their religion, or their sex. Opposite to that is the ideology, which doesn’t recognise any difference among people except those who are prepared to sacrifice more for God and people. As by now in many cultures, discriminations based on class or race or belief is abolished, the anti-Monotheistic ideology at this juncture has been materialised in its most basic and fundamental and also primitive form, in shape of discrimination based on gender. Hence this anti-God, anti-people, anti-evolution, ideology should be called the ideology of sexuality. The opposition to the ‘ideology of Towhidi’.

            One by one of us had to reach to this conclusion that by then we were not among believers of Mojahedin’s ideology and as other people, everywhere in the world, were deep sank in the ideology of ‘sexuality’. To be able to realise this, first we had to divorce or sexuality. The first step in that direction was to forget about sex for the rest of our life. Hence we had to divorce and hate our spouse, as our love was based ‘on sex’, surrendering us to the ideology of sexuality and holding us to understand the ideology of Mojahedin.

            Apart from this basic idea and steps we had to take to understand it, the rest of story and lectures were materials supposed helping us to move forward.

            In one stage Maryam draw detail maps of two ideology, their points of contrast, and basic values in each one of them. By now the opposite Ideology was called sometimes as ideology of sexuality or as a symbol of that, it was called Khomieni’s ideology. For example the meaning of ‘sin’ in each ideology: In Khomieni one is any thing related to sex, such as adultery, or sodomy, which could not be forgiven in any way. It has the harshest punishments, death by stoning, and even after death, by staying in hell forever. While in Mojahedin ones, the greatest sin is to become hopeless from mercy of God. We realised there are seven great sin in ideology of Mojahedin, which cannot be forgiven: 1- Dualism, or Blasphemy. 2- Running from ‘Jihad’ (fighting for God). 3- Killing a person who hasn’t done anything wrong. 4- Witchcraft and sorcery, which was defined in modern language as deceiving people at its highest point. 5- Usury or exploitation. 6- Stealing from an Orphan, which was defined as stealing from treasury of a nation. 7- Accusing a pure and clean woman for adultery.

            Apart from sins, many other things were defined in two ideologies. For example status of women, while in our organisation women can reach to the highest position, as Masoul aval. In Khomieni’s ideology they are denied from their basic rights. God of Khomieni is a God of hatred, God of hell. While our God is God of mercy and compassion. They have ‘Valley Faqih’ which rule over people, while we have ‘Ideological Leader’ who is trying to save us and direct us in evolution path. They get their incentives from hate while we are encouraged by love for people. Their emotions and affections are only for their immediate family, while we have a very big heart, which can place love for all humanity in itself. They will gain their incentives from ‘receiving’, while we gain it d by ‘giving’. Their complexes create their character, while ours is made of our beliefs. They live in their grave, as all the time they are thinking about death and after death and how they can avoid going to hell. While we are alive, we think about life and what can we do for others . . .

            We were told that, our fight with Khomieni’s regime, unlike our fight against Shah, is not only a political one, but Ideological one. This is a fight between two Ideologies, which have stood against each other in the whole history. Like Moses who stood against pharaohs and slavery. Or Jesus who stood against those who were worshipping wealth and power. And Mohammed who fought against worshipers of woods and stones, those who believed in discrimination between different tribes. To be able to fight against Khomieni’s ideology, we have to purify ourselves from his Ideology. To do that we have to get help from Masoud, but we have problem, as we cannot see him as he is, and cannot reach him where he is. So we have to get help from Maryam to understand Masoud. We cannot do so unless we accept her as first responsible of the organisation not in form but ideologically. To do that we have to answer this simple question why is she Masoul Aval? If we answer this question Ideologically and correctly, then we have reached to the point where we can get help from her to understand Masoud. Understand his love for God and People and his hate for Khomieni and his regime, and then we are able to fight against the regime with the same incentives and same hatred and stamina and courage, as Masoud. In this way we are going to fight against that ideology and its symbol Khomieni till last drop of our blood and with last cell of our body.

            At this point Masoud told us, “to be able to see and understand, one has to sacrifice something, to understand more, you have to sacrifice more. To understand an ideological concept, you have to sacrifice the most valuable things you have. Abraham to reach understanding of God, had to sacrifice his son the most precious thing he had. And Marry had to sacrifice her chastity. What is more valuable than anything else for you? Is it your wealth? Well at the moment you are poorest and have nothing to call it valuable. Even if you had something in the past. You have given it to the organisation long time ago. Is it your life and your health? Again answer is no. As many simple supporters of the Mojahedin proved they are capable of sacrificing their life and their health. And after Forogh you all proved that you have passed that stage. So what is most valuable thing for you at this juncture? Yes that is your love for your spouse, alive or death, seen or unseen. Although some of you are not married, still you have somebody in your mind and in your heart. You have to give up that love. But how? By understanding why Maryam is Masoul Aval. As you can see this is a bite complicated but at the same time for those who are able to see things with their heart, and not with their mind, it is very simple and obvious. To understand Maryam you have to divorce ideologically your spouse. Vice versa to be able to do that, you have to understand Maryam. More or less is like problem of Chicken and egg. Which one first? The answer is, none of them, as you cannot solve this problem with logic of your mind but with understanding of your heart. After all which logic tells Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son. Or Mary to trust an unknown person as angel of God to surrender herself to him. To understand Maryam you have to prepare yourselves to give up everything. Our slogan from now on will be ‘either everything or nothing’. To stay as a freedom fighter either you are going to give up everything you have, or leave the struggle and give nothing. Either you will have your ‘ideological revolution’ or you leave the organisation and become a simple supporter of the Mojahedin. You have to leave your sexuality grave, and born again, this time not from your biological mother but from your ideological mother, Maryam. Then you can fly with her and reach to the sky of Monotheism. To understand Maryam, you should fight with her with all your might, with all weapons you have from your present ideology that has many things in common with Khomieni’s ideology. You should accuse her as people accused Mary. You should insult her as many insulted Mohammed. And you should doubt her, as followers of Moses did. After all these fights you should be judge of yourselves, who was the winner of the fight? Your ideology or Maryam’s.”

            Then it was Maryam turn to give her sermon. She said: “Many of you think you have understood Masoud and have accepted him as your leader. But I am telling that you are wrong. Your relation with him either is emotional or logical or both but not ideological. Normally sister’s relations are emotional one and brother’s one logical one. You have seen him in many difficult situations and have seen him how he has been able to solve many political problems. So logically or politically or even emotionally you cannot find any body more capable than him for being your leader. So you think you have understood him ideologically. Not understanding him, you have changed into an ordinary man and woman, without any serious frontier with Khomieni’s ideology. Till understanding him ideologically, you haven’t chosen the struggle seriously, and still are thinking about your ordinary life and ordinary needs. To keep you in the struggle, up to now Masoud has done and paid every thing. You all have been the receiver, but from now on you have to pay as well. You have to learn to be a giver not a receiver. Even sisters who naturally are giver, were not giving any thing to him or organisation but to their husbands.”

            Then she gave us a long lecture about a subject under title of ‘signature for sins’. Which its essence was that we have to understand that, the era of having a sinless leader as our prophets or Imams has passed and human kind has reached to the era that people have to choose their leader from among themselves. We have to understand Masoud as our leader and accept him as one. When we answered all our doubts and questions about him, then we have to give the signature of sin to him. Means we have to accept all his sins, except leaving the struggle against Khomieni. In another word after accepting him as our leader we should not doubt him any more and have to give him the right of deciding right from wrong for us. Giving him priority in thinking and decision making over us, in all maters of life, even in our own private life. From then on our relation with every body and everything should not be like the relation of two individuals with each other, but it has to be like a triangle. In another word our relation with any body and any thing has to pass from our leader. For example our love for our supporters and our people is because they are supporting Masoud and they are people who are going to be led by Masoud. Our country because that is Masoud’s country and from there he can materialise his Monotheism society. … After understanding this concept, no other love can play as barrier between our leader and us, hence from then on we can love any body except those who oppose him, which we have to hate them. We learned departing from this triangle of love and hate is like killing our leader or selling him. At this point Masoud in Jesus like manner, said: “Do everything but don’t kill me or sell Me.” Then again Maryam continued her talking by drawing a line on the board as ‘Fraction line’, on numerator she wrote: ‘Masoul Aval’, and in denominator wrote ‘signature for sins’. At this point she said: “Now every body has to pass from this fraction.” She meant: every body has to accept and understand Maryam as Masoul aval and Masoud as ‘ideological leader’ with new definition. From then on that was called in simple term as ‘fraction’, ‘numerator’, and ‘denominator’, or first and second articles of the new stage of the ‘ideological revolution. Accordingly, the question from any body was if they have passed from them or not and why and how. Masoud said, “whoever who revolt and change into a Mojahed, his or her bones and flesh are for Maryam and his heart and souls are mine. You have to be frank with Maryam, not hiding anything from her, no lie, no holding of any contradictions from her. She should be your closest person, the one who can be trusted more than any one in any thing. And I have to have priority in your heart, soul and mind over you yourself; my place should be deep down in your heart. This is going to be your ideological relations with us, your leadership. This will make you united with us. In our ideology whoever who has taken the ‘fraction’ more seriously and is more bound to it, is closer to us and is higher in rank. This is completely opposite to Khomieni, where those who believed in him more than any body else, were those who were furthest from him in rank, simple revolutionary guards mostly young children, walking on mine fields for him.”

            We were told any ideology creates some sort of protective or defensive shield around us to protect us from attack of other ideologies. To get rid of our old ideology, perhaps the Khomieni one, this shield had to be broken. Then after finding our new ideology, which later was called ‘ideology of Maryam’ we are going to find new protective shield to protect us from other ones. To break our old ‘protecting shield’ there were many helping hands around us in the meeting room and later in more private meetings that we had. Teasing, insulting, abusing, dishonouring us for different reason in different occasions were helps, each one of us before our revolution were getting from every where, especially from our old masouls such as sister Tahereh, or old members of the organisation especially Abrishamchii, and in many occasions from Masoud himself. Many women who had strong femininity were attacked and teased some how because of that, and many men because of their male-superior feelings. When it was some body’s turn to talk about himself, he was going to be like a prey among many dogs all barking at him. Poor prey in many occasions had no choice except sitting with eyes full of tears.

            In first few days many of us, members from political section were sitting besides each other, soon we realised we are the best target for all those who had their revolution. Almost all of them could find at least something in any one of us to tease him, and after that all attention was going to be directed against us, and then it was others turn to get ‘helping hand’ from this or that member. I was sitting beside one of the members from United States, he was rather hand some, to tease his male sexuality, he was called by Masoud as ‘Alien Dillon’, thanks to him, immediately I became Masoud’s prey as well. He called me ‘yoghurt’, as I had no revolutionary roughness and was like yoghurt soft with every body. Many to tease me, were not calling me as usual, by my first name which was similar to Rajavi, but with my family name, to remind me my tie with ‘Banisadr’ and his Ideology.

            Everyday after having in average twelve hours meeting with Masoud and Maryam, we were going to have our private meeting for another five or six hours, with the head of our section, Mohadessin So rarely we had much time for eating or sleeping or thinking privately to see what should we do. Apart from mental pressure, after first few days, I was under immense physical pressure too. As a result of taking my plaster off and having high activities in Venezuela and Malta, my back problem was worse than ever, and now with sitting every day up to seventeen hours without any proper rest, back pain was killing me. By now it was moved from my back to my legs and feet, which could not be killed even with strongest painkillers. Hardly I could walk and when I was walking for going to have lunch or for bathrooms, which were far from the place where we were sleeping, I was walking like lame person, and it was getting worse day. Fortunately mental pressure and pain were as much as I was not able to feel much my physical pain. By then I became believer of those who were saying mental torture is the worst kind of tortures in prison. Against all advice we were receiving not to think but feel, I was trying hard to solve my dilemma with my mind. More I was thinking less I was getting any result. Some times I was trying to cheat, by copying other people’s experiences for describing my emotions and feelings. But more often not only it was difficult, but was impossible. Many to describe their feelings for the leadership were calling their spouse as ‘monster’ and ‘demon’ and saying to return to them is like eating some body’s ‘dry vomiting’ or sleeping with rotten death in the same bed. They were explaining how much they hate their spouse, as they see for long time they have been separated from love of our dear leader because of their petty material love. However hard I was trying, I could not accept and see Anna as the root of my ‘ideological separation’ from the leadership. So unlike many I was not able by creating hate produce love for the leadership. By now I was trying to hide myself among people as much as I could, by sitting among those who were not from our section or didn’t know me personally, somewhere in the back raw. So could be save from teasing, especially from Masoud himself.


Love instead of hate.

            At last, one day I could overcome my fear. Perhaps I let my protective shell be broken. This time I let myself not to think what others are saying or doing and start thinking about Maryam and what I thought of her. I forgot about Anna and finding some kind of hate for her, and start thinking about love. I remembered deep down in my heart when I heard news of marriage of Maryam with Masoud, I felt love has no value in the organisation, so for any reason it can be sold or be forgotten. I accused Maryam of not knowing the meaning of love; love for her husband or for her child. But what was the meaning of love? Did I love any body?

            While others were talking and arguing about a poor person’s revolution, who was explaining himself, I was thinking, and thinking. He failed, as only few could persuade every body in first round that they have had successful revolution. Still I was thinking, now I had something serious to think about, something equally important for myself. What is love and whom did I love and what did I do for them? I start remembering those I loved most around myself, I remembered my mother and her love for myself. What was it? How could I define it? The only thing I could remember was that she was always ‘giving’. Yes her character could be explained as a ‘giving person’. Could I explain Love as ‘giving’? Yes I could, and I did. I start remembering my mother and start crying for her, the cry I never had for fear of being labelled as one who is attached to his mother. Now I was free to cry, to do anything and say anything, as I was not afraid of losing anything any more. Suddenly I heard Masoud who was talking about Fahieme’a, the sister who replaced me in my job in the department. The only thing I was remembering about her was her smile. She was smiling to any problem and any difficult situation. Once when I was in Swiss, she came to our base with few of people under her responsibility, by then we were in the same rank, I remember while she was to busy with her people and her work, but could still was able to think about us who had a conference next day and had no time to prepare food for ourselves. She did her job and start cooking for us and soon we were surprised by her kindness. Now Masoud was asking if any one has anything against her. No body had anything against her. By then I didn’t know, but her revolution was recognised as the first among all sisters and as a result later she was named the deputy of ‘Masoul Aval’. For the first time I showed my hand to talk against somebody. I didn’t have any intention to say anything against her, but wanted to say what did I think when in our department’s meeting Mohadessin asked people about her, who had replaced me in my job. It was so strange, among all those people; I was showing my hand as opposition toward her revolution. Suddenly Masoud saw my hand and said. “Silence, Silence. A very dead man, deep down from his grave, wants to talk.” By then they used to say those who have not had their revolution are living in their grave. Masoud asked me to talk. I explained what passed from my mind when I heard she has replaced me in my job. As She had neither experience nor any proper education to replace me in a job which needed some basic ability. Then unexpectedly I start crying as I remembered her kind face, her smile, her care for others, and especially when I thought she has been asked not to divorce her husband legally who was not in the organisation but divorce him Ideologically. “How could she? How painful it is going to be for her? To be with somebody as wife, but not being permitted to love him.” More I was thinking, more I was crying, crying for her pain and suffering. I felt this kind of marriage for her should be more like prostitution than ordinary marriage. She had a child as well, again she was not permitted to leave her child, but at the same time had to stop loving her as before.

            No body was expecting to see me crying like that not even myself, especially for somebody else. Then Masoud stopped me and asked me about my revolution. I said: “I didn’t want to talk about my revolution, still I am fighting with Maryam.” He asked me about my fight? I said: “I accused her of not knowing the meaning of love, love for her child and love for her husband. Sacrificing her emotions for the organisation. Later I felt no woman is capable of real love as long time ago my own spouse left me easily while before that, she used to claim she loves me very much. (Referring to Anna after accident we had, when she left me for another guy) So I presume I differentiate men from women by saying that men are more capable of long lasting love than women. which in my view is symbol of humanity” He asked me how do I define Love? I said: “I think love is giving.” Then again unintentionally I start crying, He asked me, why am I crying? I said: “When I define love like this, I can see myself. I feel I have not given anything to any body, I cannot name any giving in whole my life, while when I think of her, or Fahieme’a, I can see they are all ‘giving’. Then everything changes for me completely. I see women more capable of love than men; I see my mother and other women around me who were all the time giving and we men all the time were receiving. Then I feel who am I to judge them.” Then I start talking more and more about love; while few hours before then I was not able to talk for few seconds in front of those people. Now I could feel, I am able to talk for hours. At last I had been able to find my own source of energy and incentives, I could feed on love and get incentive from love. By then Maryam as symbol and main source of love changed into my Gods. Masoud stopped me and said: “Wait, Wait, Is this the same yoghurt Masoud we knew? Is he the same person lying in his grave? It seems he has changed into a philosopher?! He is giving us a lecture and new definition for love? I think he has had his revolution.” He asked Maryam the same thing? Now she start talking with me and asked me about ‘denominator of fraction’, Normally she was asking about denominator, which in reply we had to talk about Masoud and Masoud was asking us about numerator, which meant we had to talk about Maryam. She asked me: what do I think about Masoud’s sins. Here instead of using the word of ‘accepting’ all his sins, I said: “I forgive all his sins.” At this time both of them were jumped from their chair as ‘forgiving any body’ was not for us but for them or for God. I soon realised my mistake and start explaining myself by saying: “Before I became member of the organisation, I was considering all members of the Mojahedin as ‘sinless’. Not only Masoud but all of them, I never could see and feel their sins as compare to me they were and are purest and cleanest people in the world, so how could I see their sin?! Yes I accept his sins as mine, as he is the purest person known by me.” Still Maryam had some doubt about my revolution and ‘signature for sins’, but Masoud stopped her and wrote my name in green on the board and asked Maryam to say congratulation to me, which she did. I was so lucky, without claiming anything, or being attacked by anybody, I had my revolution.

            After that meeting I couldn’t attend nightly meetings any more as every day I was having a painkiller injection and organisation’s doctor asked my masoul to stop me from attending those meetings. Soon as I was not able to walk any more I was moved to another base and doctors asked the organisation to move me as quickly as possible to abroad for having back operation.


Living among clouds.

            When we reached to Paris for operation, I almost had lost all feelings in my legs, and with last action to help me to pass the urine, I lost it totally. By then I could not feel anything from waist downward. The same night I was moved to the operating room and had my operation.

            The first person, next to doctors whom I saw after gaining conscience was Dr. Saleh Rajavi, a very capable physician, another Masoud’s brother. He was as usual very kind and welcomed me with his smile, and said “you must be very dear for Masoud and Maryam, as they personally called me few times and asked me to do every thing to help you to be cured as good as new.” Then he asked me, how did I bare the pain till that stage, and why did I ask for the operation as late as that? I replied: “be honest most of the time I could not feel the pain, as I was in heaven with angels.” Then without realising the situation and presence of others, I start talking about Maryam and what have I seen in her.

            I think by all different accounts, I was right, In normal situation, in no-way, I was able to bare that amount of pain during all those days. The only time I could see and feel the pain was after the end of daily meetings when I had to walk from meeting Salon, to our room, or dinning hall. Before the operation, I could see, that I am going to be paralysed, but it was not very important for me. I could feel that I have gained something that works for me many times more than any feet or legs. Even after the operation, though part of my legs and feet were numb and some how paralysed, and I had lost ability of controlling my urine, still my concern was not what had happened to me or is happening. My mind was in the meeting room and I was with Maryam. I could feel that I have found something lost for many years, new reason, new incentive, new direction, not only for the resistance against the regime, but even for life and existence. Yes I could feel I have the answer for many of my old questions. “Why am I alive and why should I be alive.” Love was something, which pushed me into politic and forced me to forget everything else. But for many years was lost among waves of hate. During previous years, our entire mind, our work and our word, were directed, and concentrated towards what the regime was doing and finding new reasons to hate them more. As a result, we had no time to think about ourselves and what do we want instead. I was attracted to Mojahedin, not because of hate for Shah or Khomieni but because of love for what they were saying and their promises for the future. For love of people, to see them happy, to see them healthy, and without any hunger, to see an end to injustice, end of exploitation, end of misery.

            Now Maryam had new message for me, ‘love’. Even hate had new meaning, hate not because of hate, but hate because of ‘love’. We were not hating the regime because of our losses, because of our suffering, because of our tortures in the prisons, because of loss of our families and friends or not having a happy ordinary family life. But because the regime did stand against our love for people and what we wanted to give them. Because of betrayal of people. Promises they gave and forgot and denied and later act against them. Because of rise of injustice, because of increase in numbers of poor, because of those children who were bought and sold in Iranian cities as their families could not support them. Because of those poor women and men who were going to be stoned in Iranian cities with charge of Adultery or Sodomy. Because of return of our country to middle ages, implementing the most barbaric, ancient Arabic traditions.

            During all those days stronger than any morphine or painkiller was Maryam’s smile and word of ‘love’. By now I had found something, which, while was not new, but in a sense it was new in different dimension. Years before when I had LSD for the first and the last time, I saw and felt something which was new and completely moving. I learned how forgetting oneself, and thinking about others one could forget pains and miseries. I always was thinking that was the effect of narcotic, and can last only for few minutes or hours as long as narcotic has its effects on our mind. But now I could see that Maryam has down the same thing, without having any narcotic, I had the same feelings. But this time not for few hours but for life. I could feel as long as I have Maryam and her ideology, I can live in that condition. In ‘pain free zone’. I could feel, see, and hear word by words, which she said in the meeting. I could see how miserable I was as long as I was thinking about myself and saving myself from my personal pains. While, when I forgot about them, suddenly I changed into a happy and free person. Now after understanding Maryam and finding the answer for personal happiness and freedom, I was anxious, not anxious, I have to find stronger word to explain it, I was dying to feed every body with this magic medicine, to save them from all their misery. I was thinking if our people in Iran were feed by this medicine, what is going to happen, yes we could explode; we could jump to the point, which nobody could imagine it. I was not able to hold and hide my happiness. I don’t know what other patients in the hospital could think of me, seeing me smiling and sometimes laughing loudly with myself.

            Next day I received a phone call. Strangely it was Masoud’s voice. I was going to jump from my bed from happiness. He asked me how am I and if I need anything. Then he gave the phone to Maryam and I could talk to her. Both knew my feelings and could feel me. She said you have to be cured soon and return; we have a lot of work that has to be down. I told her I am cured already, when I heard your first word, what should I do, tell me to move the earth and I do it. She starts laughing loudly and said, “No we don’t want to move the earth, but want to free our people.” Then told me: “Look you have had your revolution and understandably cannot feel pain and problems which you are facing at the moment, but you are more useful for us walking on your feet rather than being pushed on wheel-chair. So from now on your responsibility is to get your health back as soon as possible.”


A theory as a present.

            For a month I was in the hospital, through exercise and medical help, I could gain part of my health back, and asked to return to Baghdad as soon as possible. During my stay I wrote many report about myself and my feelings, but more than any thing I thought I have to do something for Maryam, The only thing which I could think of was to work on my old theory about how our mind works and what are connections between feelings, and thinking and . . .

            It was something, which always used to make my mind very busy since my study in Iran. It was concept of consciences and life. With four dimensions like time or space, which we knew, we could define all lifeless objects around ourselves completely and differentiate them from each other. But it was not the same for alive beings. So I set a theory and called life as fifth dimension. A phenomenon, which could not be defined by previous four known dimensions. Now I had to find an instrument for measurement of this so-called fifth dimension, and find its shared characteristic with the previous ones. And a mathematical base for this theory. In my view the main characteristic of life was thinking in its most general form, which could be seen in simplest form of life. A thought or incentive of a single cell which wants to be alive as an individual and wants to reproduce, till the most progressive and complex form of it as thought of human beings. To begin with, I forgot about the rest of beings and concentrated my work on the most progressive known form of life. I could feel and see that there is some kind of mathematical relationship between ‘life ‘, ‘thought’, ‘feelings’ and ‘emotions’. And I wanted to find this relation. I could see, as much as we think about something we find as much feeling for that thing and if some how there is a sharp increase or decrease in our feelings in one direction, suddenly we find emotions, anger, sadness, happiness . . . then with assistance of will power we show those emotions to those around us.

            With some initial assumptions I set a mathematical model to relate these phenomena, ‘life’, ‘thought’, ‘feelings’, ‘emotions’, and will power to each other. As there was some kind of relationship between different emotions and feelings this simple mathematical model became more and more complex. When I was in university in Iran, I showed my work to one of my lecturer. He looked at my equations and asked me two questions. One mathematical question and another a philosophical one. How do I intend to solve this high degree of differential equations and if I want to define the whole beings with these five dimensions, how do I intend to define God in mathematical form? With benefit of set theory, I answered his latter question but I didn’t have any answer for the former one. During my study in university of reading, I learned how differential equations could be solved numerically. When I finished my MSc. course my supervisor suggested me to continue my study in this subject, which was my interest as well. I had an interview with one of the lecturer of Imperial college and he showed interest in supervising me for PhD course which unfortunately because of financial problem, I couldn’t accept that offer and I had to go to Newcastle university for continuation of my study.

            During my organisational life, I had to forget this personal hobby too as it was considered as waste of time and eventually in 1983 when we had to burn all our writing materials, I burned all my work in this subject along my stories, my academic works, etc.

            Now while I was in hospital I start remembering all those ideas again, and wrote everything including many mathematical theorem and equations. I sent it to Maryam as a present. With a letter. In that letter I wrote her: “. A poet can write a poem to describe his feelings for you and what you have given us. A painter can draw a painting, and a musician, can write a piece of music. I am neither of them, but I know a little about mathematics and want to explain my feelings and my thought for you and your revolution in this way. You told us that Ideological leader is at the point of conjunction of mind with heart, when mind thinks what heart feels, and vice versa. This is why I want to show you that, there is no contradiction between logic, thought, science and understanding with our feeling for you and your revolution. I wish you accept it as an unworthy gift of mine . . . “


Another ‘deals’, this time on the issue of ‘human rights’.

            During those days, again all our members in Europe and America were in hunger strike. The reason this time was the trip to Iran of Mr. Reynaldo Galindo Pohl, the United Nations Special Representative on the situation of human rights in Iran. For almost eight years United Nations was asking Iranian regime to let him to visit Iran to give a report about the situation of human rights in Iran, but they were refusing to invite him to go there. But now after some negotiations, in the wave of improving their relation with the west, Iranian regime had accepted to let him to visit the country and give the report about the situation. After American deal with regime on hostages which was called ‘Iran-Contra’ affair and French ones which ended in expulsion of our members to Gabon. We were sensing new deal between the west and the regime on the issue of hostages, which was the main political concern of many western countries at the time. In many western countries there was election time and as usual ruling parties wanted to achieve something in this area to help them to win the elections. On the other hand, Iranian regime after the end of the war, not having any more excuses for the miserable situation people were in, had to improve the devastated situation of economy, build destroyed cities and villages, find job for hundreds of thousands unemployed revolutionary guards and soldiers leaving war fronts. Hence to solve these problems they had to get help from the west and could see the main obstacle is world’s attitude toward situation of human rights in Iran. At the time, violation of human rights in Iran was an alarming signal for merchants, capitalist, and bankers, it could imply that the regime is not a stable. Hence their capital might not be safe in Iran. As a result, Iranian regime was prepared to exchange hostages for the issue of human right. To achieve this, they had to get a good report from the representative of the United Nations. As we succeed in neutralising French deal with the hunger strike, we were thinking that we would be able to do the same thing this time too. While the situation was completely different and even if few of our members were going to die because of strike, we could not do any thing about outcome of Pohl’s trip to Iran. In French situation we were facing with a single government, with opposition inside and outside of the country. A government with obvious wrongdoing and an open deal. So our cause for everybody was legitimate and we had strong allies in Politic, Media and among people. While in this case we were not able to prove existence of any deal, we were not facing any government, but a poor man representing United Nation. As matter of fact we had to show happy face as supposedly one of our wishes written in all United Nations resolutions and in many of our own communiqués was taking place. ‘Permission of Iranian regime for trip of Pohl to Iran’. It was so funny to listen to our own radio those days, while we were worried so much about that trip, and its outcome and knew how beneficial it is going to be for the regime. We had to announce messages of congratulation in our radio for surrender of the regime to our wish. Obviously in our propaganda toward Iran we were provoking the ‘hard-line’ faction of the regime against ‘Pragmatic’ one. We were giving them a tool to stand against ‘Moderate’ by arguing: “how can this trip be good for us and our enemy (i.e. Mojahedin) at the same time.” Perhaps the funniest part of the story was the repeat of our propaganda for Iran in our news bulletins for our supporters out side of the country. Poor supporters didn’t know and understand why should they go to hunger strike for celebration of a victory!?

            Parallel to our supporter’s hunger strike, our political department was mobilised to do everything, to stop publication of any report favourable to the regime. Several different documents containing many reports about mass graves and hidden prisons in Iran, names and particulars of prisoner, and torturer, was published and was handed to the representative. We even for the first time gave him names of some of our political prisoners; those whom we were sure are not going to betray us. We asked the representative to see them when he is in Iran. Also we asked our supporters to write letters to him and ask him to give report about their beloved ones killed or put in prison in Iran. In this way we made sure that the representative has received apart from our documentation, thousands of individual letters, which could not be ignored easily. In my return to Baghdad, there was no time for talking about the revolution and my feelings. Even when I talked with new masoul of our department who was my old masoul ‘sister Tahereh’? I found out that my report to Maryam was not welcomed and was considered as some sort of ‘show off’. I was told that in this revolution we have to realise we are empty handed without the leadership and have to get every thing from them, not from our personal ability or personal talent. The expression was that we have to walk on their feet not ours. So it seemed against all their expectations from my revolution and how noble and rare they thought it had been, they found out still I am receiving my incentives from within and not without.

            Any way, I had to return back to the reality and leave the sky for the angels. Every body in our department was running and working hard to neutralise what was going to happen. After all, the issue of human rights was the only legitimate toll, which we had against the regime in our political activities and for our arm resistance. Without that issue, we could not legitimise our resistance and we were going to be named as another ‘terrorist organisation’. Every day we were monitoring the representative’s activities in Iran and were issuing different related communiqués about it to neutralise any deal. Eventually few weeks after his return from Iran we received the copy of his report. After reading it, I received a phone call from Masoud; He asked me what do I think about the report. I told him more than ninety percent of the report is in the advantage of the regime. Even in those parts, which have some reference to the violation of human rights, there is no mention about us. He asked me to write a statement about it, which could be issued when the report is coming out officially. And later, to write a book about it.

            Luckily I found few obvious contradictions in the report, especially in conclusion sections, few misinformation and clear mistakes. So I wrote a statement, which was showing clearly that, the report has no value and has written intentionally to help the regime. So, when the report came out, our statement was published at the same time. Rajavi in his statement called it a ‘shameful report for white washing bloody hands of Mullahs.’ and add that this report is part of ‘a dirty new deal with the regime’. Our statement and especially contradictions were so strong, which the representative had to admit there has been some mistakes in the report, but denied strongly existence of any deal. In his press conference, in response to questions of many reporters he said angrily: “My report has noting to do with hostages, this is absolutely wrong and lie.”

            By then I was transferred to newly established department called the secretary of the organisation, under the responsibility of Mohadessin, ‘our so called shadow foreign minister and spokesman’. By then I was told, I should write a book in answer to that report of Galindo Pohl from Iran. In my view Pohl in his report for any reason, deal or no deal, followed several clear lines, optimistically for getting permission to visit the country again and help for improving the Human rights condition gradually, or pessimistically as it was described by us then, as part of a deal with the regime for freeing the western hostages held in Lebanon. Firstly he wanted to show that violations which has occurred in Iran are from past and had happened as a result of the up and downs of the first few years of the revolution, many of them were due to the wrong doings of junior officials. Secondly, documents of violations mainly produced by the Mojahedin are not valuable and have many mistakes. Thirdly and the most important one of them: claiming that Mojahedin are a terrorist organisation and have killed and tortured many people including their own members. Hence if any of them has been executed, is because of their terrorist activities, which is punishable in any country. I answered first and second arguments without any problem as there were enough documents to show that all officials of the Iranian regime had approved all those crimes and some personally were involved in executions and tortures. To prove our documents are not reliable, fortunately regime had picked few cases, which were announced killed by their own media, and we claimed them with the reference to those media, including official announcements from Iranian radio. Hence even if those people were alive, it was not our mistake but another trick of the regime. After neutralising the regime’s claim, I wrote: “After all we never claimed all our documents are correct, as matter of fact it is almost impossible in Iranian situation one produce documents without any mistake, but we are very happy for any mistake, as it could imply that one of our brothers or sisters against our expectation is not death but alive. This is the duty of the representative to answer back for correctness or wrong of any individual case. If not for all of them, at least, for many thousands of them, whom their executions were officially announced by the regime.”

            My main problem was the third argument, ‘Allegations against us, especially allegation of terrorism’. From the beginning I had problem with Mohadessin on this issue, as I wanted to concentrate more and more on this issue and elaborate about it. While he wanted a brief and quick book against the representative. At last I could work, perhaps not as much as I wanted but as far as I could, on third issue and could add few chapters related to that one. Firstly I argued that it was not part of the representative’s mandate to investigate or say anything about this subject and if it was, he had to listen and write, what we had to say in response to them. Secondly according to the definition of the ‘Terrorism’, none of the facts mentioned in the report have been proved that have been acts of terrorism. Thirdly and most importantly, “it is for sometimes that our fight with the regime is on the basis of the laws and conditions of regular warfare, which fortunately is admitted by the regime as well by producing certain documents for the representative, mentioned in his report.” I claimed and then asked what has he done to save prisoners of war captured and claimed by the regime: I wrote: “The special Representative could also have realised that the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, applies to the Mojahedin’s military forces . . . He could have cited these internationally recognised rules to save the lives of numerous POWs from definite death . . . “ Then I add another chapter to prove why we had no choice except implying arm resistance against the regime. And if because of arm resistance one want to say we are terrorists, they have to call American freedom fighters in their revolution and those who resisted against fascists in Italy and Hitler in Germany should be called terrorists too.


Assassination of a great person.

            That year we had our weakest resolution in the commission of human rights of the United Nations ever. I think by now it was hard liners turn, within the regime to do something to neutralise ‘pragmatist’s success’. One day we all were shocked by the news of assassination of Dr. Kazam Rajavi, near his house, in Geneva. When I heard the news, I was so shocked that part of my forehead swallowed immediately; it happened just once, and it was then. I liked him very much, for several years we were working together and were going to different conferences. I think what ever I learned in politic was from him; he was my teacher in this subject. Though never while he was alive his help to us and improvement of our image in international scene was appreciated and recognised, after his death he was praised by everybody and even was called by Maryam as a ‘Mojahed’, which I think was his wish, while he was alive.

            Dr., his sister Monyra’h and her husband Asghar who used to live in Newcastle during the Iranian revolution were all killed by the regime just as revenge against Rajavi. None of them, even according to the norms of the Regime’s ‘justice’ had done anything to be punishable by death. Perhaps this was the reason which death of each one of them hurt me even more than death of my close friends, as death for us was part of our life accepted and expected, while for them was just because of their family ties with Rajavi. I was not asked to attend his funeral, perhaps because of my back problem which I have to admit my masoul was very thought full of that. But personally I didn’t want to attend it, as I knew it is going to be fully formal for the benefit of the cameras. I cried alone in my room and later, once when I was in Karbela I could be alone with him for minutes and say things, which I had in my heart.

            After his assassination, I add another chapter to the book about aftermath of the report. A blank check, which that report gave to the regime for its terrorists activities. As whatever was written in that book was part of things, which I learned from Dr., I suggested that it be named after him, which was accepted by Rajavi. I think Dr.’s assassination and perhaps logic of that book had the greatest effect on the representative as his next report was completely opposite to the pervious one and was mostly in favour of us. When a year later I had a meeting with him, he kissed me and said, “Should we forget the past, past is past yes?” I said: “yes but we paid our highest price with blood of one of our dearest.” He sighed and said: “yes you are right, but what can one do?” By then it was announced by Swiss authorities that thirteen people with Iranian diplomatic passports were responsible for his assassination. From then on all of the representative’s reports had a section dedicated to the case of Dr.’s assassination and question from the regime concerning that act.

            Learning more about ‘logic’ and ‘analysing methods’ of Masoud.

            Our main responsibilities in our new department, called ‘the secretary office of the organisation’ were to research and giving proper advice and analysis to our political departments including Diplomacy and media departments. We were supposed to direct them in their activities and actions. After the Ideological revolution, I was more courage full and more often was able to stand against things I felt were wrong. When I was writing the book as answer to Galindo Pohl’s report, which was called ‘Human Rights Betrayed’, I was under pressure from my masoul to write it in the same manner with the same language as other organisational books. With many accusations mostly petty ones without any proper or logical proof. For example, he was asking me to mention that his interpreter was related to Abrahamian, who is an Iranian-American scholar, recently had written a book about the Mojahedin which the organisation didn’t like it at all, and was accusing him as being mercenary of the Regime. They wanted to say that she got a present, a carpet from the regime to work in favour of them. In my view, even if our accusation was true, which we could not prove it easily, was not very important as we were claiming that Regime had deal with Governments and perhaps with the United Nations. On the other hand, giving present was and is very common in the politic, and in no way is equal to bribe. If we say whoever who has received a present is at service of the one who has given the present, by then there were many high ranking people in politic, all at our service. I resisted and didn’t write that point and avoid to use the common language of the organisation as much as I could and didn’t accuse him to anything which I could not have any logical proof for that. At the same time Faried, mastermind of our propaganda in our media was writing a book as an answer to Abrahamian’s book about the organisation, later it was published under the name of one of the ‘organisations’ member of the NCR. I never did like that book and felt it had many mistakes and petty accusations without proper proof. Nobody asked my view about that book and I read it when it was published and was distributed, but I think if I was asked before it’s publishing I had enough courage to show my disagreement toward it.

            Though by then, I was showing my disagreements without any hesitations or reservations, soon I learned about my limits. Once I was called to go and see Masoud, when I was with him, he showed me the letter of condolence of the deputy Secretary General of the United Nations toward himself, and asked me about my view and how should we respond to it. I gave my view. Then he asked me to write the responding letter, which, he was going to dictate it to me. When I was writing whatever he was dictating, I noticed some part of it is not proper and contradictory to the intentions of the sender of the letter. I stopped writing and gave him my view. He didn’t say anything and pretended that he has not heard me at all, after few seconds’ silence, start dictating me in the same line as before. I felt very ashamed and learned that in front of him one has to talk when he has asked to, otherwise whatever he says is not welcomed. Later the same letter that obviously was a private letter, against my opposition, was published in our publications and inflicted some damages in our relation with the United Nations office in Geneva. I learned, I have the same limitations in our own department too, and not any arguments or views are welcomed. Later I learned all political departments have their aims, directions and lines, chosen and dictated by the Rajavi himself, nobody could say anything in opposition to those lines but could say anything parallel to them or in favour of them or for speeding them.

            Apart from Mohadessin, the head of our department who was my masoul and I, who both of us were from diplomatic department, the rest of people in our new department’s council, were from the Media department, responsible for our Radio and Television and our publications. Every day we had a meeting discussing news and analysing them. Among those present in those meetings, I was mostly like schoolboy sitting beside university professors. All of them old members of the organisation, close associates of Rajavi. Though I was feeling that I have to learn a lot from them to be able to say anything from my own mind. Soon I found I could see something is wrong in their logic, and in analysing the events. I had to admit, they were very sharp in recognising important and decisive news from unimportant ones, much sharper than me. But in analysing, there were some shortcomings, which while I was there, either couldn’t formalise it or didn’t dare to say anything about it, as it was the same logic used by Rajavi himself and I believe all were his students in this subject. For example when they wanted to predict what is going to happen as a result of an event, soon they were drawing, as they used to say different ‘Tableau’, meant writing different alternatives which could, and rejecting one by one of them, reaching to the ‘most probable one’. There were two problems in this kind of logic, firstly the numbers of alternatives always were limited, while in reality we were facing cases, which were not among our alternatives. For example when they were discussing about contradictions existed between different factions within the regime always cases, were either this faction will get rid of the other one or vice versa. While in reality we could see neither of them happens and they start working with each other or suddenly another faction was coming into surface. Most of the times these kind of analysis and predictions, were announced in our media and were going to be repeated in our political meetings. Predictions like Ahmed son of Khomieni is going to be in charge after Khomieni’s death or Hard-liners will wipe out the moderates within the regime . . . About war and peace between Iran and Iraq, after any minor news and conflict, they were drawing cases, which always were limited to two or three alternatives. Either regime is going to attack Iraq, or Iraq will start the war, or their conflict reaches to the point that Iraq does not mind if we cross the border toward Iran. While in all those years neither of this cases occurred. The main problem in this kind of reasoning apart from unrealistic limitation in different alternatives was that every body was free to argue against the cases not favourable to us, but rarely any body had any incentives or courage to say anything against the favourite one. As a result always our prediction was that our favourite case is going to happen and unfortunately most of the time many departments were going to be mobilised for facing that prediction. Hence many times a lot of energy and money was going to be wasted for wrong prediction.

            Another problem in our arguments mostly with devastated affects on the organisation were Masoud’s simple examples for explaining things. Usually in his examples and his analysis all complexity of the real problems could be forgotten very easily, hence the favourite conclusions could be achieved and everything else was going to be directed accordingly. Worse than of all, was the comparing Iranian politics with ‘magnetic field’ with two poles. In this kind of analysing all Iranian politician and later all world’s politician either were in negative pole, with the regime, or in positive pole with us. As a result we lost many friends between Iranian and foreigners who perhaps had some reservations about our analysis or in supporting us vehemently, or perhaps they could not see the regime as total black as we were projecting it.


Devastating results of the ‘ideological revolution’.

            While still I was very in love of Maryam’s messages in her revolution, I could see some of its destructive effects on people around myself. Mehdi, one of our top army commanders, now retired in our section, as could not have his ideological revolution; he didn’t have any knowledge to do anything in our department. I was feeling very much pity for him; rarely anybody was talking to him as nobody in those days was prepared to show any sympathy towards those who didn’t have their revolution. He was walking alone, sitting alone, always with sad face, or dead smile. He was on the edge of losing his mind. Or perhaps he did and we didn’t notice it?! By then, in many departments, there were few people in the same situation as Mehdi.

            Situation of some of the married couple was worse than others; couples, with one of them not having his or her revolution while the other side had one. Organisation’s order for these couples was that they have to live with each other. But the partner who had his or her revolution had to be careful not to have any love or affection for his or her spouse. One of them a sister who was under my responsibility, many days was crying and all the time was miserable, once she told me without love, she feels she is prostitute living with her husband. Most of the people who could not have their revolution were send to different department far from where they were working, to avoid their embarrassment, but in any department soon they could be recognised and were becoming like people with leprosy, nobody prepared to talk to them or show any sympathy toward them. These people had two alternatives, either leave the organisation, which for some high ranking members like Mehdi was impossible or do their best, or even pretend that they have had their revolution or are trying to do so. Husband of the sister under my responsibility, eventually left the organisation and after long struggle, that family was transferred to France. I don’t know exactly why, but later I heard she killed herself when they were living in Belgium.

            In the beginning only high ranking members had to have revolution, but later it was decided that all members should have it and in few months time they said all combatants of the army have to have their revolution, other wise, they are not able to fight against the regime when it comes. Hence compulsory meetings of the revolution with presence of Masoud and Maryam were taking place in Ashraf fort every day. Compare to the Ideological revolution every thing else was secondary. There was no real work anywhere, except in the kitchens of the bases. For us who had our revolution, attending these meetings was optional, while we were strongly advised to attend them, saying that revolution never end and always there is danger of return of us to anti-revolutionary situation. I rarely was able to attend those meetings, as my back was not permitting me to sit for long time or travel from one base to another one. Though my revolution was accepted, I knew deep down, I only had understood and accepted the numerator, means Maryam side of the revolution. I don’t think accepting and understanding this side of the revolution ever was very difficult for me, but I don’t think I ever could accept the Denominator, means accepting Masoud as Ideological leader. To put him first in my mind and my soul, prior to my conscience, my logic and believes and my moral and my principals. I think I tried very hard, and I did my best to change myself to what they were expecting me to be. But I couldn’t and perhaps this is the main reason why I am where I am and I am writing these words. Fortunately during those days as Masoud’s position for long was accepted by everybody, not many people had problem about him and ‘accepting his sins’. Almost all who were not able to have the revolution had problem in accepting Maryam as masoul aval or divorcing their spouses. So rarely anybody was noticing my problem or teasing me where my problem lied. Organisation’s epidemic as usual was ‘generalisation’ especially those days, so rarely anybody was considering somebody as especial case and usually all were beaten with the same stick. So even if anybody wanted to tease me about my revolution, and ask me for progress of it, still, they were asking about issue of accepting Maryam or our women masouls.

            I was trying very hard to overcome my illness and attend ideological meetings to learn and understand about my weakness and solve my problem. Once when I was in one of those meetings, I saw few members who were under my responsibility in the past, almost all of them wanted to talk to me and get advice about their revolution. As it was common those days, I tried to help them as much as I could. One of them in the past very close to me, asked about my personal feeling about that fiasco, which I told him happily. Then I felt he does want to tell me his feeling, which I could be sure they were not in favour of the Revolution. I stopped him and told him, “Look whatever I told you, from my feelings, good or bad, should be reported to your masoul by you. And I don’t mind, as this is the rule of the organisation. But let me warn you as a friend not to tell me anything, which you don’t want any body knows about it, as I am obliged to do the same thing.” He stopped talking, but I felt with that comment of mine, a friendship died immediately. This was the first time which I felt the hurting side of the revolution. Up to then whenever I was seeing miserable people in the middle of their revolution, I was not feeling pity for them as could see those are signs of pains before long-lasting happiness waiting for them.

            Against all goods I used to feel that has been achieved due to the ideological revolution, now and then I could see the dark side of it. Once in one of the meetings, a member originally from United States, in his explaining his revolution, claimed he understood Masoud’s position in 1985, and accepted his ‘ideological leadership’ by then. Well for me there was nothing strange or wrong in this claim. Perhaps even he had to be praised for his understanding and his love for Masoud. But against my expectation, suddenly many, especially sisters were burst into anger. All their hands went up to talk. And later they start insulting and swearing at him without having permission to talk. Masoud and Maryam tried to stop sisters’ anger and show of hatred, by saying that, he has described himself wrongly, let him to talk and explain himself more. But when he talked again, he repeats almost the same thing. This time for the first time, I saw the anger of Masoud. He stood up from his seat, insulting the poor guy, crying with anger. Suddenly few brothers who by now realised what is going on, jumped from their seat toward him to beat him or perhaps if they could kill him. Maryam stood up as well and start calming down Masoud, by saying “please you should not make yourself angry, let us to handle it.” Then she starts stopping those men to beat the guy, and asked others to take him out of the meeting room. After he left the room, Masoud who was still very angry, asked who is his masoul and why has he been brought into that meeting. Then there were long speeches from different people against that guy. By now I was realising what was going on. He with his claim that he had realised Masoud’s ideological position by 1985, had put himself in the same status as Maryam, as it was said, up to 1989, and new stage of the revolution, no body except Maryam could realise Masoud’s position. Only those who accept Maryam’s position can get help from her to start understanding Masoud. Poor guy lost his ranks and for several months had no responsibility, worse punishment in the organisation, and then sent abroad to work as a sympathiser.

            During those days to prove their revolution many sisters were asked if they are prepared to marry and love the ugliest and the most bad tempered man on the earth, if the organisation asks them. This was one of the ways they could prove that they have divorced their husbands ideologically, and there is no more bound between them and their spouse. Men were not asked this question as it was claimed that their love for their wives is just for sex and can love any women, how ever ugly, or with bad behaviour, as long as they could have sex with them. I heard in another meeting, which I was not present, another poor guy not knowing how he can prove his revolution, copied from sisters instead of brothers and claimed he is prepared to marry any body, organisation asks too. Then while every body was laughing to him for his foolishness, he went one step forward and said, “I think, to show my revolution I have to marry Maryam.” This was like having a suicide. As again all start showing their anger, including Masoud and if he was not saved by Maryam perhaps could be killed in the meeting. Some times during that era, I could feel those with personal problem in the revolution are showing more aggressive behaviour toward others to prove their own revolution, their attacks against others which was encouraged by the organisation, was the main reason of anxiety and misery of many during those era ended in some successful and unsuccessful suicides of people under attack.

            High ranking members who couldn’t have the revolution, were not allowed to leave the organisation so in some cases they had no alternative except killing themselves. While they were living among us, they were forbidden to do anything, even helping in the kitchen was denied to them. Perhaps for somebody, who has not been in the Mojahedin and don’t know them, this punishment doesn’t look very harsh. But one has to consider that whoever was with us was for doing something, our work, our job was our being, our personality, our reason for existence, so if we were not feeling useful it was worse than being dead. Especially among people who were not free for a second and always were moving and working. Once we were called to Masoud’s office. By now I was told my rank is ‘M’, the deputy of executive committee member. The only people who were in that meeting were those who were either like me ‘M’ or ‘HE’, executive committee members. In that meeting Masoud asked one of the guys present to tell us his news. He told us: “Nasser one of our army commanders has killed himself with a blade given to him for shaving” Apparently he was one of those who couldn’t have ‘revolution’, and was for several weeks in the state were he had to do nothing except thinking and writing. The person who was in this situation was called ‘Bangalli’, it meant that he or she has to live in bungalow, do nothing, only think and write report, once few years later for few days I was in this situation and could feel the pressure that exist on a person in this situation. I felt suffering any kind of physical torture is easier than suffering of being called ‘Bangalli’ in the organisation. He told us when he took some food for Nasser to his Bungalow, found him sank in his blood. Masoud was very angry. He asked us what should he do? And told Maryam, “I think we have to stop the ‘Ideological Revolution’. Apparently these people don’t want it?!” Then he starts looking at us and said: “I suggest to all of you to take your spouse back and go to your home, we should carry on our struggle as we used to. You are not worthy of the Maryam’s revolution.” Then he asked the one who was giving us the news, what have they done? He said: “we told Iraqis and their coroner physician came and saw him and wrote report of his death” He asked him where did they bury him? He said: “some where, we could not bury him close to our martyrs.” Then Masoud told us: “do whatever you want to do, but not suicide, it is worse than anything else, is not even like killing somebody. With suicide you are killing our ideology, our belief. …” Then Maryam in response to his earlier question said: “this is nothing to do to the revolution, anybody doesn’t want the revolution is free to go. We have to carry on as we cannot overthrow the regime without the Ideological revolution and if we leave that, it is better to forget about the overthrow of the regime as well.” In another case Mussa, whose rank was M as well, to escape from the Organisation pretend after an accident has lost his mental balance, and after was transferred to France for medical treatment escaped from the organisation.

            Later in another meeting I heard from Rajavi that Eshagh who was working with me in New York has gone to dry hunger strike because his revolution has not been accepted, few years later, after I left the organisation, I heard he hanged himself about the same time, but we were not told then, so I presume there were some more suicides which we didn’t hear about them.


Every body has to prepare himself for the ‘crucifixion’.

            While we were deep sunk in our ‘ideological revolution’, on second of August 1990, we heard the worse news of all, ‘the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq’. I think most of us when we heard this news from anger start laughing. There was no room for sadness, or sigh, one of our masouls said: “Look in whole world, we have a friend and he is a mad man.” This action of Iraq had significant and direct effect in all our activities, military and political one. From week before by following the news we could sense something is going on and Iraq tries to build more friendly relation with Iran. We couldn’t guess what is their intention but certainly in no way we could predict an action like that. Next day after meeting of Masoud with Iraqi officials he announced shut down of our Radio and Television and stop on all our political work. He told us that Iraqis didn’t ask for that, but he presumed this would be their wish, as they want to improve their relation with the Iranian regime. He said: “I told them that I am sure you never can find Iranian regime as good partner in your objectives, nor you can make long-lasting peace with them, but we want to emphasis that we are not going to be any obstacle in your effort toward making peace with them. This is why we are closing down our Radio and Television as we know that this would be their first demand from you.” Apparently Iraqis thanked him for understanding and told him that they are aware of the facts mentioned by him but have to do their best to solve that old problem in anyway they could. In the same conversation Rajavi told them that: “whenever you think, we are not welcome here any more, please let us know and we leave your country immediately, the only thing we take with ourselves is our rifles and we are asking you to let us to cross the border back to our country.”

            As a result of United Nations embargo on Iraqis we found life is getting more and more difficult day by day. In the beginning we couldn’t feel the hardship very much but by November and December 1990 we could feel shortage of everything. Our food was half or perhaps third of our usual meal, rarely with meat. Cleaning materials were rare and rationed. Later finding proper bread was impossible, date and bread were our basic meal when we could not fill our stomach with small amount of food we were receiving every day. With news of probable attack of allied forces, and tendency of Iraq toward Iranian regime, we were ordered to prepare ourselves for the worst. Close to any building we had to dig trenches and have different manoeuvres for cooping with different situations. Learn using different weapon to be able to defend ourselves. In this way after years I could learn how to handle different weapons and use them. Every now and then we were receiving orders to move from one building or even one base to another one they were thinking is safer than the old one; any moves meant a lot of packaging and carrying. The most evident reaction to the situation was the interest of every body on news, some how show of interest in news was interpreted as fear and worry about future. The level of worry among personnel reached to the level that Masoud felt, he has to do something about it. One day we all were called for a general meeting. In that meeting later called ‘the crucifixion meeting’. Masoud gave us the news about what is happening, and as usual draw some tableau, first the worse one, a peace between Iran and Iraq against western world. With pre-condition of surrounding us to the regime. He stopped at this point and said: “Yes you all have to prepare yourselves for this case, crucifixion of all of us from here to Tehran like Spartacus, my only wish is to be crucified as the last person by Teheran’s gate. So I can suffer more than all of you by seeing you all killed.” Then he continued: “Like before again it is decision time, you have to check yourselves and see if you are prepared for this case or not. If not leave this room and we do whatever we can to help you out of Iraq; but those who remain have to prepare themselves for fighting till last drop of our blood, it is going to be confusing war as we don’t know who are we going to face. Were we going to be killed by an American bomb or Iranian one or Iraqis?!” I wished he was letting us to decide as Imam Hussein did in Karbela, I was sure none of us were going to leave that room as no body was afraid of death or torture any more. We were thirsty of frankness and trust. But it seemed he was not so sure of us, as before waiting to see our proper reaction after he heard few speeches by few people, start drawing optimistic Tableau, with prediction of our freedom to move to Iran. He said it is possible while there is war between Iraq and American, the border between Iran and Iraq be opened and we be able to cross it to our homeland. Then there were facts after facts about this case and soon before we know it, he reached to this conclusion that we have to prepare ourselves for final offensive. That meeting as usual was ended with jubilation and slogans, from next day the mod in all bases changed and all efforts was directed toward preparation for final offensive toward Iran.

            One day in January 1991, I was called by Mohadessin, he told me I have to pack my things and go to Geneva, He said: “we don’t know what is going to happen, but we have to be present in political scene and defend our case. There is going to be the session of the commission of human rights in Geneva and you have to represent us there.”

            Change of array of friends and enemies.

            In Geneva, I found myself in totally different atmosphere. Up to then Western countries, Iraqis, and us were in the same front, against fundamentalism and terrorism of Khomieni’s regime. While now everything was confusing. We were against the regime, while both Iraqis and Western countries wanted to establish good relation with them. We had to have friendly relation with Iraqis as all our bases were situated there and at the same time wanted to have good relation with the western countries, while they were preparing themselves to fight against Iraqis. Apart from political difficulties and confusions, I was very sad and angry to find out that whatever friendly relations we built during years of working in the United Nations all were gone. Our ‘international organisation’s files’ were gone as well and nobody knew where they are, so I had no record of what has been done, during years I was not responsible of that section. I found out that we have lost most of our connections and friends in the United Nations office and in many NGO’s, not because of change of political situation, but because of narrow minded tendency existed in the organisation. The idea that ‘we are going to overthrow the regime, next month or next year; so we don’t need any long-term plan for the future and we have to use and take advantage of any facilities exist around us in any form till last drop of it. This was what happened when I left Newcastle, whatever was built in years, was gone in matter of months. In Geneva, I found almost none of the people who were our friends in the United Nations office prepared to see us. Those who were helping us in different fields, giving us, passing badges, different reports before their official distributions, . . . At last one of them prepared to see me not as the representative of Mojahedin, but as old friend. She said: “Some times I cannot understand you at all. We were helping you here a lot, as friend, as we knew Dr. or you. You know the risk that we were taking by helping you and then your friends were prepared to destroy everything for some petty benefits. Your friends used their passing badge for taking some ‘free’ photocopies in the office of one of our employee, Unfortunately they were seen by one of the Iranian, working in the embassy, as they always follow you and you know it perfectly well. Then there was complain of Iranian embassy to deputy secretary general, they handed tick file to the deputy, including his letter to Rajavi, which I couldn’t understand, why did you published it. Hence we all were warned strongly against helping you in any form.” Apart from our loss in the UN office, I found out that we have lost many friends in NGO’s as well, perhaps mostly because of change of politics as many of them were very dependent to the west and very hesitant to do anything to jeopardise their relation with them. But again, I think some of our actions intensified it.

            Fortunately with help of Dr. even when he was not alive anymore, we could revive many facilities that we used to have before. With help of few NGOs we organised a luncheon in the UN building in memory of Dr. After several meetings with embassies of different countries, we could have representatives of many western countries in our luncheon. As well as them some high officials of UN were there. So with that luncheon we could take ourselves out of the isolation which we were in, and could revive our relations with NGOs and UN officials.


Feeling alone, as a Mojahed in wild world.

            Very early morning on seventieth of January we heard news of start of Allied missiles and planes attacking Iraq. Though for a month or two, there were many news about probable start of attack, our optimistic view about everything didn’t let us to take it serious enough. So when it came, it shocked us as an unexpected event. We were listening to different radio stations for news, without daring to give any comment about them. All our hope, desire, past and future was there in a condensed area close to Iraqis military base, which easily could be one of the allied targets. Only one of their missiles could kill all our hopes and all our beloved ones living there. While they were giving news, about their capability of destroying heavy concrete made shelters, how could we be sure of our people’s safety in our hand made trenches?! Apart from our worry for our people there, deep down we were worried about ourselves as well. What kind of future are we going to have after destruction of everything? By then we were educated with this idea that ‘even if one Mojahed survive, he or she has to stand against all odds and resist. The survived one has to recruit and start the struggle from the beginning. So in our mind there was no room for surrendering to the situation, and accepting our destiny. We were thinking about difficulties that we were going to face. Perhaps for the first time I really thought about the value of having a secure and reliable leader, a leader accepted by everybody, unquestionable, undeniable. “If we were losing our leader what were we going to do?” For previous few years, we were told that ‘our leader can see and understand things which we might be able to realise after years and perhaps hundred years.’ I don’t think from one hand any of us had enough self-confidence to replace him. And from other hand, no body was prepared to see any body else as capable, or near enough capable as Rajavi to accept her or him as new leader. We never had a democratic process and experience in our organisation, and as matter of fact, for us to consider western democracy for internal organisational relations was just a joke, which sometimes we had to pretend to it for the benefits of our propaganda machine, aiming to portray us as strong believers of democracy. So there was no chance for having a democratically elected leader. We used to accept any masoul nominated for us, without any arguments or objections and were prepared to accept their authorities without any doubt. But this entire acceptance was only because of existence of organisational hierarchy, which was based on vehement acceptance of our leader. Without them, this hierarchy was not going to work for a minute, as most of the masouls were in their positions not because of their expertise, but because of their ‘ideological ranks’. For long we were told daily and by then it was part of our conscience that: ‘our most valuable capital is our organisation and our organisational relations, without them we are ‘bunch of individuals, not capable of doing anything.’ Perhaps I was deep in these thoughts when sister Badrie from Germany called and told me while we have no connection with our office in Baghdad, she is in charge and if we need anything, I should ask her. Though her news about safety of our people in Iraq, and self assurance that allied forces are well aware of our bases and are not going to bomb them, made us very happy, but I think my confidence and courage for start of work with the same stamina as before came, when I felt somebody is in charge if anything happens to our people there. Her word, her smile, her promises were strong and full of confidence which immediately moved me from misery I was in.

            That year we had to work very hard to have any resolution at all, as suddenly all western countries and even Arab and third world countries were concentrated in condemning Iraqis for the first time and were less keen in using strong words against Iran. At the same time foolishly Iraqis threatened west with terrorist activities and revenge, while for sure we knew they are, neither willing nor capable of such actions. But all the same, it creates many problems for us. Many countries were looking at us as close allies of Iraqis and perhaps the only organisation capable of any terrorist activities in their favour. We could feel and see that all our telephone lines are bugged; representative of some countries were hesitant to meet us in their embassies and when they did, we faced high security surveillance. Perhaps the worse one of them was meeting with Canadian ambassador, though he apologised and asked us to understand it, still it was difficult to forget the humiliation inflicted on us over there.

            As a result of one of these bugged conversations, we heard that police in Austria has attacked our base and has arrested few of our people. Apparently our masoul there was talking with one of the supporters, promising that we are going to destroy the regime. While in translation, it came like a plan for a terrorist activity there. Following those arrests we had to see Austrian representatives there and their members in Council of Europe to try solving this problem, fortunately after few weeks everything was cleared and they were freed. Full story was written in Austria media, which later we could benefit from it as well. To avoid happening of the same thing in Swiss, I asked to meet the responsible person in Switzerland foreign ministry. He assured me that they are well aware of our activities and are not worried about us at all. At this point I asked him about the regime’s activities and the assassination of Dr. He said well it was unfortunate, but we have made sure nothing like that is going to happen again. When I accused them for showing favour toward the regime, he said, I think we have been fare toward you as well after all we are well aware of the amount of money you gather in your daily work here. I think you know that we have shown blind eyes to many of your wrong doings. (I.e. SW work of our people, in Swiss where the amount of money gathered there was more than any other country).

            That year, though weak, but at least we had a resolution, condemning the violations of human rights in Iran. I think our presence there, our regular meetings with the representatives of western countries in front of everybody, helped us a lot. Apart from having a resolution, we could establish an independent image for ourselves from Iraqis. After all we could prove that Iraqis enemies are not necessarily our enemy and their friends might not be ours.

            By the end of the Gulf war, we received another moving news, this time ‘Iranian’ attacks to our bases with cover-up or help of Iraqi-Kurdish forces. At least this was the way we received the news from our organisation. While Iraqi-Kurdish group, ‘Talabani’ group who were previously responsible for the murder of few of our combatants, gave the news in another form, as ‘our attack to their villages and killing, innocent poor women and children’. When I am looking back, I think neither side was fully correct. We were claiming attack of little Iranian-guard’s battalion to our bases for surrendering and destroying us. The only valuable evidences we produced were six Iranian children surrendering themselves to us, and some armaments with Iranian tags, which could be shown at anytime, from what already we had. Mojahedin claimed: “After the end of the Gulf war, the Iranian regime, under the pretext of an Islamic Revolution in Iraq, sought to realise Khomieni’s dream of exporting fundamentalism and seizing power in Iraq, and at the same time destroy Iranian Resistance’s military wing, the National Liberation Army of Iran. Frustrating the Khomieni regime’s fantasies, the NLA crushed all the attacks, from March 10 to April 2, by the regime’s invading forces. NLA units dealt the enemy a heavy military blow in a series of operations code-named Pearl after the Morvarid Mountains where they took place.” We claimed Iranian forces to cover up their attack, had Kurdish dresses, and took many of their death bodies after the attack by helicopters back to Teheran. These facts never could make sense. On the other hand Iraqi-Kurdish group were claiming, we have attacked their villages, this claim could not make sense either. There was no point in attacking them. At that juncture we were very careful not to do anything to upset allied forces, we wanted to show our independence from Iraqis, even when the same Kurdish group attacked us few years back and killed few of our people we did nothing in revenge. I think the truth is that when Iraqi-Kurds start their progress in Iraq after the Gulf war, they reached to our bases. For different reason they wanted to wipe up us from their area, I guess the war between us started, as we didn’t follow their wish and start resisting. If there were some Iranian forces helping them or they were using Iranian armaments, is not very unusual as there were some Iraqis who were helping us, and we were using Iraqis armaments as well. I think by then Mojahedin over-reacted toward this events. They start fighting with the Kurds with full force, which I am sure in this kind of fighting many innocent people will be killed as well. Once few years later when it was announced by Kurdish groups that we saved the Iraqi forces in that area and put a stop on their progress. Masoud said: “yes we did it and did it good. We could not let them have our bases without any resistance.” After those fights we mobilised all our political forces to face any political offensive of the regime or Kurds. While even if there was any truth in Kurdish group’s claims or Iranian one, still they were very weak in their political activities to face us. At the same time still west was not totally happy with Iranian regime to let them to destroy the image of only serious known opposition existed against them. After all they didn’t want to repeat the same mistake that they committed in Iraq, not having any alternative for Iraqi’s regime, when they wanted to get rid of it. Any way after this operation we were told to see all representatives of western countries and media and explain to them what has happened. I rarely found any politician or reporters aware of the case or interested enough about it.


Love, but not love! - An impossible expectation!

            A year earlier, while still I was in Iraq, I was called by Masoud, he told me he want to name me as his representative in International organisations and Swiss instead of Dr. In this case I had to have two faces, one as a Mojahed, representing Mojahedin and do my organisational responsibilities, another one as representative of NCR, nothing to do with Mojahedin. He told me as my wife is not a member of Mojahedin, I cannot divorce her officially, as long as she has not asked for. So we can live in Geneva as ordinary married couple, which is very desirable for the organisation. I was watching him with astonishment and dazzling look, thinking “is he serious or is he teasing and testing me?” After sometimes I felt he is teasing me, so I start smiling, but soon I felt he is serious. I told him, but I am divorced, I have given my marriage ring to my masoul, how can I live with my wife? He looked at Maryam, who was present and asked her, if it is the case. She replied: “yes it is true, but we were going to talk to him and returning his ring back.” Then she told me: “You see, you have to realise, we should not pay the price for your revolution, its price is very high politically, the revolution for people like you is harder than others. You have to divorce your wife ideologically, but not legally.” Then she told me she is going to ask my masoul to tell me more about that subject. Few days later I was called by Mohadessin, my masoul and he repeat what I was heard from Maryam, with more explanation. What I understood from their talking was that I had to see my wife and my children, and show my love and kindness, without having any real personal love or affection for them, especially for my wife. This was something that I was not able to do and I said so. To ease things more for me and perhaps others in the same situation, next time I was called in to a meeting arranged for few brothers all in my situation, some of them already were seeing their wives as they were in the army but didn’t have the revolution. They were talking about their problem, and how they are trying to solve this dilemma. Their talk didn’t help me at all but persuade me even more to reject to do what they were asking me. It was for few months that I had no arguments with any of my masouls over my marriage situation. After my last discussion with Mohadessin, every now and then, my masouls, whomever they were used to argue with me for long, about this subject. Never I was able to figure out what was their intention, did they want to test my commitment to the ‘revolution’? Did they have political objective or another problems? I think, mostly they were worried if Anna begin asking about me and create any political problem for them. By then the story of divorces within the organisation still was not out, Mojahedin were worried if it goes out, it could become beneficial for the Regime? While still I was in Iraq Once I was called by my masoul and she insisted that I call Anna, as she was worried about my health. My masoul said this is Maryam’s order and you have to obey it. I did call her but I was very careful not to give her any promises and wrong impression. By then I knew the organisation enough not to jeopardise my family’s life with irrational and short-live decisions of the organisation.

            Now after sometimes again I was under pressure, this time from my new masoul, sister Badrie to go to London and see my family. At the end she called me to Germany and after long discussion persuade me to go and see them. For the first time she gave me some money, about hundred pounds to buy some present for them. It was very strange and difficult for me to accept that money, as we believed we should not spend any money for our personal interest. My family as others had understood this logic and were not expecting anything from me. I don’t think up to then, while I was in the organisation, I did buy them any present at all. Not because I didn’t care or wanted too, but I didn’t dare to spend ‘people’s money’ for my family.

            My main problem and dilemma as one can guess was, how can I see them and show my affections and love, but not love them in my heart as all my love had to be for our leader. When I saw them after almost a year, I could not hold myself loving them with my whole heart. During those days there was a movie shown in the organisation several times on Thursdays, when they were showing some movies. The name of movie was: ‘Operation Day Break’ Directed by Lewis Gilbert made 1975. Story of three Czech freedom fighters during Nazi occupation of Czech republic. They were sent by British to assassinate the German commander in their country. After landing, one of them, who saw his wife and his newborn child, could not leave them and later for their love, he betrayed his colleagues. This movie had great effect on all of us. Each time we were seeing it we hated more and more that kind of love that ends in betraying others and result in death of other individuals. While my situation was nothing like that movie, but as a result of long time repeats in the Mojahedin for hating any love except those recognised by the organisation, I was feeling guilty whenever I could see my love for my family. Hence in my return to Germany I had to write long report about myself and my feelings and criticising myself for my affections toward my family. The only respond I got from that report was that “next time when I see my family I should be more careful not to free my emotions and should be more in control of them.” After few weeks I was asked again to return to London for getting visa for going to America. I was told I have chosen by Masoud to represent him and NCR in America.

            Next time when I was in London, Anna had to leave me alone with children, as she wanted to go to Germany. This time I felt less pressure as love for children and showing any affection toward them still was not forbidden in the organisation. While all couples were separated in the organisation still all of them had their rights over children and were seeing them almost equally. Even during Gulf war when organisation decided to move few hundred children out, from Iraq to Europe, Masoud discussed the move equally with all mothers and fathers at the same time. It was one of the biggest and most heart rendering operation of the organisation. For several months we were trying to find refugee for children in European countries and America with little success. At last all of them were moved to Jordan and later gradually they were smuggled in to Europe and America. Stories of those children and what happened for each one of them, those who were sent to Iran, those who were adopted by our supporters and those who were sent to their relatives outside the country, is a moving story which rarely any body could hear them and stop crying for what happened to them. Some of them were lucky enough to find caring adopted parents, but majority had bad luck and eventually after few years’ homelessness, suffering many miseries and bad adventures, had to be gathered from different countries and live in especial bases in Germany and Paris.

            Any way, compare to those children, I could see how happy and comfortable, thanks to their mother, my children are, in no way I was prepared to destroy the calm, which they had. My stay with my children, which was my happiest time for long time, didn’t last long and after few days, I had to leave them for America. That was the last time I saw them or heard from them, for many years to come.


Representing the NCR in America.

            To be transferred to America was the worst news one could give me. From my previous experience from America, I had very bad memories and at the same time I was horrified of our diplomacy in America. I didn’t know anything about it; even while in Political department I was in charge of most of our activities in Europe, hardly I was aware of what are we doing in America. Always news of our activities there was mixed with secrecy and mystery. Some how in our propaganda, we were pretending that we do have a lot of support there, while in reality I knew, situation is not like that at all. As matter of fact, few years back we had to move few of our members as they were on the edge of being arrested. Also a year before, our masoul in America was arrested and put in jail. By then, we thought it is part of new deal between American and the regime, but later when he was expelled to France, we found out that, it was not political after all and was only due to his fake name in his passport. Any way I had no alternative and had to accept what I was ordered to do and had to show happy face to my unknown future.

            My masoul in America was my old colleague from London Sister Meherafroz. She told me, I am going to be in charge of our diplomacy in America and had to start learning about it immediately.

            Our diplomacy there though was much more complicated than Europe, in a sense, was more quantitative than qualitative. Opposite to Europe, rarely we had any relation with members of congress, themselves; instead all our relation was with their aids. Soon I found out, they were almost all ignorant toward what was happening in Iran and the only things perhaps they knew about Iran was that ‘they are bad boys.’ Their aides, in many cases were as unaware of the situation in Iran as their bosses. As rich as the country was, so was its politic, it was like a virgin land, which we could cultivate anything and grow anything in it. Also as vast and massive was the country so was the work in its politic. We had to have some sort of relation with almost two hundred aides of different members of House of Representative and Senate. Then we had a section called: ‘Personalities’, responsible for relation with any politician or political researcher except those in the Congress. Different people in different researching institutes, different departments of American government who were prepared to have relation with us, departments like NSC, (National Security Council), Army-Pentagon, or very rarely junior officers of the State department, Voice of America, retired personalities from different department, and later some people from FBI. Our media section there, as one can expect was more active and consistent than other sections. They had relation with many columnist, reporters, and even editors of different media.

            Though there are two major parties in America, but they are nothing like parties in Europe. Perhaps they are more than anything ‘a gathering of people with close political tendency’. Those with ‘Liberal tendency’ have gathered in Democratic Party, and those with right conservative tendency in Republican one. Some how I found American system more ‘democratic’ and more beneficial to the voters than European one. In Europe, people usually choose the parties rather than individual MPs. So MPs are really elected by their parties rather than their constituent. Perhaps every four or five year, during election time, in some extent they have to worry about vote of their constituent, then the rest of the time they are generally dependent to their parties line in different issues rather than tendency and wish of their constituent. While in America they are very dependent to their voters. This is why having strong lobby, is essential for forwarding in American politic. This was completely opposite to European politic, where having good relation with parties could guarantee the support of related MPs in the parliament. As a result in our diplomacy there, we had a section for ‘Public Relation’ or as it was called ‘Lobby’. As matter of fact most of our work there was through ‘lobby’ than our political relations and meetings. Most of the ‘representatives’ were prepared to sign anything asked by their constituent, as long as there was not any strong objection from anywhere else.

            As in our politics we were mostly looking for propaganda and having big noise, and nothing substantial. Hence usually we needed to have declarations with as many signatures as possible, as we could get those signatures, with few phone calls. Hence there was no need for building strong base of support there. What we did need was to have two members from two existing tendencies who were prepared to sponsor our declarations. We had one Democrat and for the Republican one while was variable, but usually, easily we could find one.

            My first real task came, when I was told that Mohadessin, (Mohadessin) as head of our diplomacy or our ‘Shadow foreign minister’ is going for the first time, to come to America. In arranging meetings for him with members of congress or senators we were not very successful, we could arrange only few meetings and a luncheon in his honour was sponsored only by one of the members who even couldn’t be present in the meeting himself. As matter of fact only one member of the house showed up, and when he faced the situation, that he is the only representative present, wanted to leave, but after few minutes struggle with one of our member, he agreed to stay. In Senate we found nobody prepared to sponsor the luncheon, or have meeting with our ‘foreign minister’. At this point I found out, against all our propaganda, how weak and fragile is our diplomacy in America. Suddenly I felt we have nothing except our propaganda machine which in many cases can fool everybody, not only our oppositions, especially the Regime and the Monarchist, our supporters and members of NCR, members of parliaments in Europe, especially those who could be impressed by American easily, but we are fooling ourselves more than anybody else. Our slogans of increase in our achievements by ten or hundred times after any stage of ‘ideological revolution’ had changed our optimistic views into naiveté. In all different departments, and all different countries and area, numbers had to increase with any cost. So people in charge of different responsibilities, had to search and find easy ways, for having more quantitative success than qualitative and long term ones. Increase in number of signatures for different declaration and number of coverage in the media was the objective, which had to be fulfilled with any price.

            While only once I talked with Meherafroz about my concerns and feelings for our diplomacy there. I felt my concerns are not something which organisation really cares about it, as they think next year they are going to be in Iran and by then they can build any kind of relation from strong position. Even once later when I talked with Masoud himself about my concerns, I found him less interested than any body else. While sometimes he was spending hours for few pence expense for something, he showed no interest in whatever I told him and passed me to Fahieme’a the deputy of Maryam to deal with whatever I told him. Some how even she was not interested and only wanted to persuade me that they have heard me. So I decided by myself to put all my energy and concern in finding few members in both houses of Congress to be our real supporters. The objective, which I set for myself, was to find at least ten sponsors for our next letter of support in House of representative where for sure we had only one. And two in Senate where we had none. I was in the beginning of my work, which as usual, where we could not guess what would be our next day job; I was called to go to Paris and then Geneva immediately. I was told we are on the edge of new huge political mobilisation.


Facing Iranian regime in the court!

            The story was that on September 1990 Iranian regime had complained to Swiss authorities and justice system against a reporter of La suise newspaper for accusing Rafsanjani, president of Iran as mastermind of assassination of Dr. Rajavi. Apparently the Regime’s objective was to benefit from one of the Swiss law against those reporters accusing foreign countries, to stop any reporter to reveal the facts concerning that assassination. At the same time as they were sure, that they are going to win in the related court, they wanted to change it into a trail of Mojahedin’s claims everywhere, for everything. They wanted to prove that he has been killed in internal conflict for power struggle, especially as by then there were some rumours that Rajavi has lost the power to his wife, and is under control and surveillance of Iraqis authorities.

            Our objective was, firstly defensive one, secondly offensive one to prove Regime’s terrorist activities everywhere including in Swiss. Our main problem was that, we, ourselves were not on trial and while every thing was about us, but it was not our case. Hence everything had to pass from the reporter’s case and her lawyers. And they were not easily prepared to surrender themselves to our propaganda machine. I was nominated to deal with lawyers and the reporter, persuade them to benefit from our help and later call different people introduced by us as their witnesses and follow the line wished and asked by us. Lawyer’s strategy was simple, as they only wanted to prove innocence of their client. They just wanted to prove that whatever has been mentioned by her was claimed by Rajavi’s family in their press conference. Thanks to my research for writing my previous book, my job was not so difficult in persuading the lawyers to follow our line. I had all documents to show to the lawyers that they can prove there is sufficient evidence, to indicate the regime’s interest and stamina to kill all members of Mojahedin everywhere around the world. So whatever the reporter mentioned was not baseless and she had enough reason to repeat whatever heard by her. Soon we prepared almost two huge briefcases full of related documents for the lawyers, to prove anything and reverse any claim of poor regime’s lawyers. As there was no way, which the lawyers could learn about all those documents in short time, in courtroom I had to sit beside them ready to find any related documents they needed. Long and moving speeches of Dr. ‘s widow, and his brother as witnesses of the reporter paved our way toward victory. After few manoeuvres from the regime’s side who were going to lose the case, including postponing the next sessions of court for another month, they came forward for negotiation, to withdraw the case. It was very delegate situation as the reporter could accept their offer and return to her normal life. But we were on the edge of a major victory. I had to persuade them not to accept the regime’s offer, elaborating and explaining how beneficial the victory could mean for her. In next stage of trial as the organisation wanted to gain full advantage of the court, almost fifty high ranking members of our organisation including Mohadessin the head of our diplomacy, with many members of the NCR were there, many supporters from Germany and Swiss were there to have demonstration and gathering against the regime. We were fully prepared for anything; we had many of our members who were tortured to testify against witnesses of the regime. Even we had some members of parliaments from other countries, one from Britain and another from Canada to give testimony in the court. By now there was no more disagreement or argument between us and the lawyers of the reporter, we both had the same objective to defeat the regime with all our might, and benefit from the propaganda as much as possible as the case was fully covered not only in Swiss but in other country’s media too. Unlike us, the regime had no representative there; their witnesses were very weak, not prepared for questions asked from them. Even when one of our members gave evidence that she has been tortured by one of them, he lost his balance and start saying things fully in our advantage. At the end the judgement of the court was obvious. Le Matin one of the papers of the Geneva wrote: “L’ IRAN ATTAQUE UNE JOURNALISTE: C’EST LUI QUE LE TRIBUNAL CONDAMENE!” (Iran was attacked (accused) a journalist: court tribunal condemned them. (The accuser.)).

            This victory was called our political Morvarid. With reference to Regime’s attacks in Morvarid mountains with the objective of destroying us while they lost many of their Guards and had to retreat. There was jubilation everywhere for this victory even in the streets of the Geneva. By now I could return to my job, back to America.


New friends among old ‘foes’.

            Even after twelve years being with Mojahedin, still I was able to like and care for people outside of the organisation and show my sincerity and frankness, hence I was able to find friends among those who I was working with. For long we used to hate American politician for their crime in our country and other third world countries, now I was in the same country responsible for many of our miseries, among most ‘hated’ ones, their politician. But still I could find many of them, very kind, sensitive, humble and humane. Soon I found many friends not only among junior aids of the representatives and Senators, but even among more senior ones and even representatives themselves. About our past I was as honest as I could, not denying our previous hate for their policies in our country. Our presence in Iraq, and our arm-struggle policy. These were our weak points, which were making us vulnerable against any attack by our enemies. Soon I gathered whatever our enemies were reviling against us with their answers, so whenever I had any new meetings, I used to repeat whatever they were going to hear about us from our enemies. With our reasoning and arguments. So whenever they were facing any letter from state department or lobby of Iranian regime or remnant of Shah’s regime, those letters had nothing new for them, they already knew everything and our response as well. In this way sometimes I was shocking some of the younger and less experienced aids, which were hesitant to meet us again, but I knew we were going to lose them any way; the way to attract them was through gaining support of more senior members of the house. I knew any support that we obtain after their awareness is more long lasting and valuable than gaining more short live support, just by using our lobby muscle. I called this discussion as ‘Vaccination’; vaccination of them against poisons information of our enemies. Though in the beginning, my masouls and members of our diplomacy department were not fully agree with me in this kind of discussions, but eventually they accepted it and let me to carry on with my own method. Some of the friends who I found there, were very close to me and soon could trust me fully, they even were letting me to draft the letters that I wanted them to write for us. Those days almost every day we did need some kind of letter, letter for obtaining the visa for one of our colleague, letter of condemnation or support for many events against or in favour of us around the world, such as arrest or expulsion of our members in different countries. Some times they were trusting me to sign on their behalf and send telegrams and telex to different people. Even few of them let us to use their office for our work. One of them even showed me how I can work with the instrument, which was making the signature of the representative and asked me to do it myself. I never misused their trust and as far as I was in charge, with many problems, I didn’t let any body in our organisation to do so. I think, they knew this as well and this was the reason for the continuation of their trust. Through their friendship, we were always informed about activities of our enemies in the congress and could prepare ourselves to respond to them. By then I knew for sure that American and their politician are not as black as we were portraying them before. They were human not black or white solid objects.

            By the end of the summer we increased, number of our real sponsors from one to ten, many of them among senior members of the house of representative. Soon we could gain support of majority of members of the House of Representatives. Even letter of state department against us and many meetings and letters of our enemy’s lobbies could not reverse their support except for few. When next time in the beginning of the October Mohadessin came to America, we could organise a luncheon for him without any problem sponsored by few members. Also we arranged many meetings with senior members of the House of Representatives for him.

            Rightly or wrongly, I was true believer of our ability for establishing genuine, good relation with American based on the interest of both side, in equal term. Perhaps it was my naiveté, to think we could have relation with the only superpower existing, in equal term. But I could see Israelis who had their independence and good relation with American through their strong lobby in America and understanding the American political system. I could not see why what they have, we cannot have. We had two million Iranian-American living there, many of them rich and educated. Why couldn’t we have strong lobby and strong relation in both houses? This was my hope to achieve as long as I was in charge. And at the same time this was my point of difference with our department and the organisation. Much later I realised why we couldn’t, not because of American and their superiority, but because of ourselves and our duality.

            From the second set of meetings of Mohadessin in America, till few years later, I was thinking that my difference of view and my conflict with the organisation is because of him and his way of directing our diplomacy. Only when I realised that he was only following the lines directed by Masoud himself that I was making my decision to leave the organisation. I could see his method as opportunistic and only good for propaganda. Once one of the senior aid of the Middle eastern committee, told me as a friend the weaknesses he had seen in Mohadessin and asked me to report them back, he told me: “I think you are doing your job much better, many times members are expecting to see a person more able than you as your foreign minister and when they face him, they will be disappointed.” I never report this conversion as he praised me in his talking and I was terrified of being accused of ‘self worshipping’. Once when nobody was prepared, to sponsor a press conference for him, we had to organise it, under the name of NCR. I had to introduce Mohadessin and sit beside him. There were only two or three, unimportant reporters present in the room and we had to fill all the seats with our own members and supporters. His talking was so boring and meaning less, which I was trying very hard to keep myself awake. At the end of the conference, I was so bored and angry which couldn’t find any word to say and said: “OK Meeting is finished” It was very funny for our comrades in our department when they made a lot of jokes about it and reason to laugh, while that conference was one of my saddest memories of our diplomacy. I knew Mohadessin is intelligent enough to realise his weakness in the meetings, but I could not see why he is repeating his mistakes in all meetings. Once or twice I told him, what I think, he just shook his head and said nothing. Now I know he was just a ‘good member of Mojahedin’ and as a ‘good member’ his responsibility was just to repeat like a tape recorder whatever he was told to say. To gain the support of personalities met and produce substantial achievements in his return to Baghdad, where I am sure as usual, Rajavi had set a number for poor guy to achieve, he was very hesitant to be as blunt as he had to be and was expected to be. Have his imitative in the meetings and response accordingly to the situation we were in and questions and interests of those whom we had meetings with.

            Any way after finding strong feet in the house of representative, I was going to start my real work in the Senate, which I was called back to Iraq.


‘Article J’ - Free from sexuality.

            In Iraq, I was asked to see few video tape, about new stage of the ‘Ideological Revolution’ called ‘Article J’, J for ‘Jensieat’, (Sexuality), The idea behind this article was that we had to learn to look at opposite sex as our own equal and not as a sex object. Masoud in his introduction about this article, said: “ . . . Male sexuality is aggressive; it should be called ‘savage male sexuality’. Men wherever they look see women as objects of sexuality; first they judge them as a sex object then perhaps as human. … After last stage of our revolution, your sexuality that is losing the ground has attacked you, and as a result now you see everything as a sex object. Men among us are even more aggressive than before, now is time to push your sexuality to the defensive and retreating position . . . ” In this set of meetings men and women were separated and had to go through different stages and directions. The only woman present in meetings for men was Maryam, who by now was considered as our ‘ideological mother’. Later I learned as much as we, men were accused of raise in our sexuality. Women were accused of trying to show more their femininity, do things and behave in a way to attract men more than before.

            To pass this stage and overcome our sexuality, we had to get help by reporting all our sexual feelings and thought to our masouls. Of course in this case certain brothers were introduced to us to write our reports to them and not to our immediate masoul, who in many cases were women. We were told that we have to capture our moments, those tiny moments, which we lose our control and look around for sex. We had to remember, what did we think and felt and report them back. In this way every body had to write a weekly report of all his or her ‘lost moments’. Following the first video, were several more videos contained talks and speeches of different brothers about their feelings and their thoughts of sex. I was shocked when in one of them, immediately after entrance into the meeting room, in front of Maryam; Masoud asked our brothers if they have had ‘masturbation’, in past few months? I could see those who showed their hand were looking down not to face eye to eye with Maryam or Masoud. Then there was long talk of each individual about his sexuality, their feelings, and the way they have looked at women around themselves. In another meeting Abrishamchii was describing sex as touch of two pieces of meat and was asking people present there if that is worth for sacrificing all our ideological goals for? . . . By the end of watching that set of videos, I learned why the behaviour of many brothers and sisters towards each other has changed, why they are more like enemies rather than brothers and sisters. Few of us, including me, who didn’t know about the situation and were just returned from abroad, were behaving as before, saying hello to our brothers and sisters alike, talking to both of them equally as before, passing usual smile of friendship and kindness, without knowing that all these behaviours now are interpreted as signs of sexuality for attracting opposite sex. By now to be cheerful and warm, friendly and kind, even clever and thought full, were all signs of our effort for attracting opposite sex. Then I could understand why men and women are more serious and have bitter face when they face each other. Why they don’t look at each other’s face. Why in meeting rooms, and in dinning hall many seats in the border between seats designated for brothers and sisters are deserted, while other seats are condensed. By now not only we had to give report about ourselves, and our thought, but as we were told that we have to be safeguard of each other, and report back misbehaviour of each other, brothers were showing animosity face to each other as well. God knows how many people gave such reports about us from abroad that didn’t know about this new situation. Some times I could not believe my ear when I could hear some facts people were giving about themselves or others. In a meeting, a brother was accusing another brother who sat on a seat occupied before be a sister. He was accused of wanting to touch a seat, already touched by a woman. Or another one was telling us about his dream and criticising himself because of his dream. By now I could see how far people have gone to protect themselves from any accusation. They were not prepared to pass anything to opposite sex, even a pencil or a book, the way to do it was to leave it on the desk, so the opposite sex could take it from the table. If a sister was falling in front of a brother, he was not prepared to help her to stand up. By now I could remember those fanatic Moslems whom we were friend of, those who were not prepared to look in the eyes of women or talk to them. I heard from one of the people who was working in our Television department that even children cartons and movies produced in Iran had to be censored by a sister before being showed in the army. Still, though I could see where we are heading to, I was not able to see the depth of the disaster waiting for us. Till a few months later, when we all were shocked, while we were having a meeting with Masoud. We heard news of murder of one of the sisters by one of the brothers. Story was like this: The boy had fallen in love with the girl, and was watching here whenever he could, and was hoping to tell her about his feelings. Then, that night as every body was in Thursdays gathering, he finds out that his beloved one, has not gone with others, resting in sister’s hall because of sickness. So he goes there and tries to tell her, but she who was shocked of seeing a man in sister’s sleeping room, start shouting for help. And by crying for help lose her life. The boy horrified of what is going to happen tries to silence her and in this struggle kills her. The sad part of the story is that by then few brothers were guarding the area and had been able to hear her cry for help, but as it was coming from ‘Sister’s hall’ they didn’t dare to go there, instead of that, they went for search of finding a sister who could go there and check what has happened, by then poor girl was death. Apparently she was choked to death; there was no sign of rape.

            This amount of talk and meeting about sex, hearing confession and self-criticise of different people, even hearing about their dream, watching ourselves for ‘capturing our moments’, our responsibility to write weekly reports about our sex thoughts. I believe by itself was the main reason of increase in our sexual thoughts and feelings. By then I was not hesitant to admire beauty of a human beings in my mind as I could admire beauty of an animal or scenery. From my child hood, I was able to see many drawings of beautiful women and men mostly nude hanged in our house. So for me it was quite natural to admire the beauty of human beings, without thinking of sex. At the same time in our family we used to shake hands and even kiss the opposite sex as show of kindness or friendship, and still we could not feel any sexual affection towards them. But by now as any look or any word had to be defined in sexual terms, I could find new tendencies in my self which were completely new and some how shocking. And of course they were clear confirmation and demonstration of rightness of our ideological revolution. Even once, I felt some affection toward one of the sisters. It was shocking for me, as I was always thinking that I am only attracted to my wife and have feeling for her and nobody else. I wrote a full report about that feeling of mine.

            Any way this stage of our ‘revolution’ was carried on and day-by-day became deeper and deeper. There was no way out of it. Most of the times by the end of the week when we had to write our weekly report about ‘capturing our moments’, when we had nothing to write, or at least not remembering proper thing to write about, we had to lie and write stories, instead of facts. I had to invent different things against myself, to write. Later I learned, it was not only I who was thinking and searching and inventing something to write about, but most of the brothers around me were doing the same thing. It was much better to use our imagination and accuse ourselves for something imaginary than being criticised of hiding our feelings and our emotions from the organisation, as it was not acceptable that we have not had those moments in our daily work. For these reports not only we were not going to be criticised, but as they were sign of correctness and verification of our leader’s thoughts, and at the same time, as they were sign of our honesty with the organisation, we could be flattered as well.


Changing from a ‘Mojahed’ into a ‘member’ of NCR.

            While I was deep in thinking about ‘Article J’ and seeing those videotapes in Iraq, I was called by my masoul. She told me to write a letter to Masoud as the president of the NCR, and ask for membership of the NCR. By then I had enough problem with being the representative of the NCR, which didn’t want to face any new duality, and contradiction. For any shacking hands with female political meeting partner, any talking with our female supporters I had to write a report and express my feelings. So this was the last thing, which I was prepared to be drawn into. To become like those members and supporters who had to pretend that they are not a Mojahed and are individual members of the NCR. So when I heard her order, instead of saying any thing without any intention, I start crying and told her: “no please, not this one, please” I think she was impressed as told me: “OK, OK, let me see what can I do. Forget about it for times being.” Next time when she saw me told me that “it is going to be different from what I imagined as it is going to be as ‘a NCR resolution’, according to that all representatives of the NCR and secretary of it had to became members of the NCR and as a result had to resign from membership of the organisation they are belonged to.” In this case Mohsan (Reza’i), my previous masoul, also the representative of the NCR in Britain and I had to ‘resign’ from membership of the Mojahedin and become members of the NCR. What did these resignation meant? Nothing not for us or for Mojahedin or even for non-Mojahedin members of the NCR. I think it was only to prove that NCR is growing and has more non-Mojahedin members. The same night when we were with Masoud, he elaborates more about advantages of this resolution. He said: “We cannot accept request of any body who want to become member of the NCR as they will bring with themselves new problems and new expectations for us. On the other hand with limited number of the members at the moment, any body in the NCR is ‘some body’, we can be blackmailed easily as we are so worried to lose any of them. Resignation or expulsion of any of them however not important or not significant, is a blow and catastrophic for us. Our enemies will benefit from that and portray it as another split in the NCR . . . To solve this, we have to increase our number of NCR members by adding some of our own members and trusted supporters as individual and independent members. Even we can accept few people, introduced by other members of the NCR as, still we have enough members in the NCR which losing any new or old members is not going to be significant or noticed at all. Our eventual plan should be to increase the number of the members to 600, one member representing 100,000 Iranian. … “

            In the following NCR meeting, on October 1991, we three along two non-Mojahedin representatives of the NCR, and five other Mojahedin members became as new ‘independent’ members of the NCR. By November 1992 the number of the members rose from 21 to 109, and by September 1993 to 235 and so on.

            In the same week, again to show our democracy to outside world, the organisation organised another so-called central committee meeting for choosing new deputy ‘Masoul Aval’, and approving new members of the committee. For us present in the meeting it was funniest meeting we ever had, as we all knew this meeting is solely for our propaganda machine. We showed our hands for more than hundred times as show of ‘yes’ sign without listening to things which were said in the meeting. Perhaps funniest event was when we found one of the members dumb enough to show some opposition toward membership of few people and nominate another sister except Fahieme’a for deputy masoul aval of the organisation. By then it was almost a year that Fahieme’a was acting as third person in the organisation, and for long she was introduced to all of us as deputy of Maryam. Personally even if there was genuine voting for her, I was going to vote for her, as I could see nobody more capable than her for that job. But there were many while showing their happiness for her nomination, were not happy at all as she was new comer and there were many old members from Shah’s time whom they were expecting to be the deputy.

            One of the immediate effects of this election, which made me very happy, was Masoud’s order, that from then on we should not put his picture on our desk and only pictures of Maryam and Fahieme’a were allowed to be put there. This was the ‘sign of his modesty’, unfortunately this rule, was stopped to our desks and didn’t go any further. Still every room, every base were, covered by many pictures of him, any meetings, any demonstration, and even press conferences, had to have many of his photographs.

            The next show in the same week was show of our strength. We had our biggest and most impressive military parade ever. To organise that show most of our supporters and members from America and Europe, were called there, for weeks or perhaps months all combatants were preparing themselves for that parade. All armaments, vehicles, were painted, new flags and new emblem were made for the army, Road were rebuild and even many trees were removed from different part of the Fort and placed around parading roads. Many reporters from different media were invited to be there. To keep them happy, we import luxury food and drinks from abroad, though some of the reporters teased us with their comments, as there was shortage of everything in Iraq. For almost five hours different vehicles, tanks, Guns and combatants in different shinning uniforms paraded in front of our leaders who were copying Shah and Farah (his wife) in different way. For years after this parade we had to answer questions of people and even some of our own supporters for why our leaders, came to the parading area with the most expensive car, or why Abrishamchii bowed in front of them. Why those three, (Masoud, Maryam and Fahieme’a) were sitting in the ‘imperial pavilion’. Why we spend so much money for that ceremony . . . Whatever were the accusations and complaints, we were happy from that parade and were proud of it, most of the times crying from happiness. We were sure of our leaders that they are nothing like Shah and other selfish rulers. We were saying that all those things were necessary to show our strength and our readiness, to show to outside world that we are not, small leftist guerrilla organisation. And to white wash any rumour against internal conflicts and doubts about position of Rajavi.

            Few weeks later, very tick, fully colourful paper of ours in many languages was published to show our achievements and victories in different scene after passing hard time of the Gulf war. Including many photographs of Mohadessin and us in different meetings in America, to show, though we are in Iraq, we do have a lot of support in America, the first enemy of Iraq. This photographs were clear proof of our political strength and our independence from Iraqis and American at the same time. Show of our political strength, how ever superficial, were very important, for giving hope to our supporters, our combatants, and especially Iraqis, as it could assure them that, by supporting us, they are not capitalising on a ‘dead sheep’.

            In the same magazines there were impressing pictures of the parade to show our military strength and might. Some photographs from our ‘central committee meeting, with show of our hand, to show our internal democracy, and impressing list of names of members of central committee with rank of every body. In this way we could show how open and honest we are with outside world. We were claiming that we are the first revolutionary organisation, which has announced the names and ranks of all its top members, while still we are in fight with the regime and at any minute, our members could be assassinated by the regime around the world. In front of my name and two other members there was an explanation that we had to resign according to the new resolution of the NCR. Then there was Photograph of the meeting of the NCR and news of the increase in the number of the NCR members.



            Facing the Mojahedin’s past history

            In my return to America, I had to face new problem; as we left the country almost at the same time when we gained some support from the Senate, we couldn’t neutralize attacks of our enemies or answer them back, especially strong opposition from the state department. There was strong letter against us sent to all Senators from one of them, very close to oil companies and Iranian regime. At the same time the Republican head of the committee for foreign relation of the Senate was very against us, supportive of that letter. Our main problem was that our main supporter in the Senate was a Republican as well. Though few months earlier we managed to arrange a meeting for Mohadessin to meet him, we couldn’t vaccinate him against activities of our enemies, as Mohadessin was as cautious as usual repeating usual daily analysis of the organisation. In the meeting I found out how ignorant he is about the Iranian situation as in the beginning of the meeting he thought, Mohadessin is foreign minister of Iran, and it took sometimes for his aide with benefiting from some sign language to tell him that we are from opposition and there is no relation between America and Iran. By now they were under strong attack from their own party members in the Senate. Though the aide of that Senator, was very friendly with me and we had many meetings with long discussion about everything, but by now, I had to call him several times for making appointment to see him. This was the same with other Senator’s aides especially Republican ones. We had no choice, if we wanted to do anything there; we had to go throw that fighting. I made an appointment to see the Administrative aid of the Senator who was heading the Republicans in the foreign relation committee. In the meeting, she start repeating all accusation against us, showing different letters and documents with facts that we have been responsible for killing of American during Shah’s time and support for ‘hostage taking’ in Iran, . . . I told her: “well we have an answer for all these accusations which is going to be published soon in the congressional record. But let me say that whatever our people did during Shah’s time, they did it as patriotic Iranian, and if you were Iranian perhaps you were doing the same or were supporting the same actions. After all you cannot deny what you did against British when you were fighting for your independence. At that time you were supporting Shah’s executions and murder of our people. But just because once you were in war with British, and you killed from each other’s, didn’t mean that you have to be each other’s enemy to the end of the history. This is the same in our case. We are the sole democratic opposition against the regime. You cannot name any other alternative and at the same time you have seen that you cannot live with that regime either. We want to establish good relation with you and we think it is beneficial for both of us. As Islamic fundamentalism is the next thing that can put international peace in danger and we are the only solution that you have against this new threat. Our advice is not to repeat your mistake by the beginning of the Iranian revolution, start listening to the Iranian voices instead of imprisoning yourselves in the past and animosity of your old pro Shah officers of the state department.” I don’t know how successful I was in changing her from an enemy to a friend, but at the end of the meeting, she promised me not to support any action against us or in support of us. By then we had written a response to all accusations against ourselves and had asked the head of the subcommittee for Middle East to send it to the State Department and publish it as well as the State Department response, in the Congressional Record. These letters were published in the ‘Record no 55 dated April 28, 1992’. Hence we start sending it to the different Senators’ offices. As our official response to all accusations. Even in response of State department, there were some points beneficial for us, for example they had accepted, against their previous claims that we are not a communist organisation, but a Moslem one. Some how, partly they accepted our argument about assassination of Americans during Shah’s time. In our argument, we mentioned that during those days our leader was in jail under torture and later there was a coup in the organisation, so the leader ship of the organisation and almost all our Central committee which by then even were not member of the Mojahedin could not be responsible for those actions. Fortunately in the state department’s response, there was no mention of our claims after the revolution for the same assassinations, our long articles, our posters, and our songs, . . . about Mojahedin’s struggle against American. Fortunately after few months work, meeting with hundred of people, eventually we could overcome the problem and could start having normal relation with many offices again.

            By now I had reached to this conclusion that our problem with American and especially the State Department is not because of our past or our bases in Iraq. But is because of ourselves, we had to prove that we are democratic, not because they were very keen of democracy for our country, but in modern world they knew perfectly well this is the only way they can guarantee the peace and stability of the world and even their own interest around the globe. Unfortunately with our behaviour and our actions we were not able to prove ourselves as a democratic force. Our so called voting though could fool some people, but certainly not the State Department and not those real politician who themselves were god of these kind of tricks. We were claiming that our NCR has many non-Mojahed members, but we were very hesitant even letting Dr. Matin Daftary, one of real non-Mojahedin members of the council have meeting with American, because our organisation was afraid of losing him to American. Or establishment of some kind of relation between them and some members of our council?! When that spring he and his wife and another member of the council were our guest, I was told to take them every where, from Disney land in California, to sight seeing in Washington, but not any meeting with one of the American politician. As Bazargan few years back said, we were as monopolist as the regime itself, even as opposition we were not prepared to share any thing with any body not fully committed to our cause and our leader.

            Even I was not trusted to be myself and always I had to be reminded that I am a Mojahed and have to act like one. I was introduced in American politic, as non-Mojahed member and the representative of the council. It was a real dilemma for me to be as what I was expected politically, and at the same time, what was expected to be ideologically. After new stage of the ‘Ideological Revolution’ I was more concern about what am I going to write as my report by the end of the week, instead of my concern for my work and how am I going to look after my relation with friends in politic, whom many of them were female. By then I wrote many reports complaining that I am not right person for that job, and it is wise to have a real non-Mojahed member of the council as our representative there to be free to have normal relation with people and show that not all of us are from Mojahedin and we really believe in a pluralist society.

            Instead of receiving proper response to my demand, as always I was advised and asked for more propaganda materials. By then as there was Presidential convention of different parties; we were asked to try to have a photo with the Democratic candidate, Clinton. For several days we had to run in New York’s streets, not for real political work, while there were many opportunity for us. But to find a way to fulfil expectation of Rajavi, for having a joint photograph with the next president of the United States. Next to ourselves who could be easily fooled by our propaganda, was the regime, I think after publication of that paper of ours, which included American supports for us, the regime, became so worried that they felt they have to do something against us. Well I guess this was an achievement for the State department who sometimes used to leave us free to achieve something to agitate Iranian for gaining the something. I guess their strategy was to let us to gain as much as it was beneficial for this purpose, and stop us when they could feel we might gain permanent credibility. To neutralize our support in America, Iranian regime established its own lobby firm and start expending money in the congress, later through one of the Senators very close to them, in the Senate they introduced a resolution against us and eventually few years later they could move us back to the black list of State department among ‘terrorist organisations’.



            Change of a victory into a failure as a result of an irrational decision

            Regime’s answer to our parade was their attack to our bases in Iraq. By the end of March 1992, few of Iranian planes attacked our main base in Iraq, ‘the Ashraf fort’. Though one of our combatants was killed and some of our buildings were damaged, but as one of the planes was shut down ‘by us’, and two pilots of it were captured, we could benefit from this attack more than the regime. There were many confusion facts and questions about this attack, which never was answered, even for us. How could they fly from ‘no fly zone’ set by allied forces, after the end of the Gulf war, without American blessing? How come they didn’t do more destruction, while their planes were capable of destroying the whole fort killing all our members? Iraqis and we claimed the shut down of the Iranian plane simultaneously; none of us retreated from our claim. Iranian regime claimed that, this operation was in retaliation against our attack to one of the Iranian villages in the border, killing people and destroying the village. This was not true as by then still we had not started our guerrilla attacks in Iran. Fortunately the UN inspecting team sent there after complain of the regime confirmed the same thing.

            Immediately after the attack all our branches around the world were told to attack Iranian embassies to retaliate for that attack. Suddenly in single day our supporters in 13 cities of many European countries, Australia, Canada and America attacked Iranian embassies and captured some who were working in the embassies. They were so excited about their action, which unlike our similar activity in the past did whatever they liked. In few cities they set fire on the building, burning it completely, in Australia, they invited the reporters to be present there, before the action takes place, so Australian Television showed the whole process in front of surprised police of that country. They beat the personal of the embassy and took its film to be shown in the Television. In America, I found out about the action when I found my masoul who was ordering our people in the embassy what to do. She was so confident that was talking from our phone in our base, which we were sure it was tapped. Then to make sure, she called our office in Paris and then made conference call with the embassy to see what should they do. In embassy they were so jubilant that they were asking if they should through the embassy personal down from the building. As a result of these foolish attacks, ordered from our centre, at the end of this story, we were the main loser.

            During those days I was in New York, persuading member countries of the Security Council of the UN to pass a resolution condemning the Iranian regime for its action. For the first time, I even met Chinese, who were hesitant to meet us as well as us. They told me they accepted to meet us as before this attack they didn’t know about our strength. But when Iranian regime prepared to violate all international norms to attack us, they felt they have to meet us. They told me that their conclusion why Iranian plane were not able to damage our base as much as they were capable of, was that either we were fully prepared before the attack, which could show our intelligence strength, or can be interpreted as a sign of our defensive strength, or Iranian pilots were not prepared to be as active as they could, which is sign of our popularity among army personal. In either of cases we were worth to be met and be known. Apart from them we were welcomed by all member countries even Russian, who were always favourable toward Iranian regime. We had all the chances for obtaining that resolution, but this attack of us to the embassies ruined all our hope and in final declaration of the UN, as our attacks were condemned as well, it was balanced some how in advantage of the regime. In many countries like Canada, we lost the ground totally to the regime. Poor our representative in that country, who was one of the successful ones having best relation possible with the government, went totally into the isolation. In a press conference which I had in Washington, it was very difficult for me to deny our involvement in that action and defending so called ‘angry Iranian around the globe’, who could be so organised and in touch with each other, attacking Iranian embassies simultaneously every where. In Sweden, our masoul was expelled to France. Funny was the way we gave news of this expulsion. It was written in our news bulletin that: “Defeat of anti-human regime of Khomieni in Sweden . . . Against the wish of Iranian regime Mrs. Sarvenaz . . . was sent to Paris with a private charter, paid by Swedish government.” In many other countries where we even didn’t have a successful occupation, we lost all our credibility, our official relation with the governments wherever we had one. In our real diplomacy, we went backward to where we were few years back. In many countries our bases were put under total surveillance, and we were put under pressure for our different activities. Even in our SW work, which was the only source of our income we found many problems. Apart from political and financial damages of this action, was human suffering of it. Many of our supporters had to go to prison, many families suffered as a result of their imprisonment. When in one of the meeting one of the members of the NCR asked if this action was a wise one? He was answered: Iranian regime wanted to attack and kill Masoud, our leader who is all our capital, all our being and existence. For him we had to pay any price possible, we had to teach Iranian regime what is going to be the price of their action against our leader. Compare to what we had to pay, what we paid was a peanut. This was not the final attack of Iranian regime against our bases in Iraq, after that few more times they attacked by their plane and many more time, by their agents in Baghdad, resulting in death of few of our members.

            By the beginning of summer as we were going through new phase of ‘ideological revolution’ we were called to go back to Iraq. This article of the revolution was called ‘article D’; it was about superiority of women over men in all our organisational relations and activities.


Photos of the chapter  Back to the top


Letter from congress



با تشكر از شما بخاطر ورود به این وب سایت  در معرفی آن باید بگویم که آنرا به تشویق دوستانم با اهداف و ملاحظات زیر طراحی و ایجاد کردم:

  • با توجه به چاپ خلاصه خاطرات زندگیم به انگلیسی  و ترجمه آن به فارسی اینجا محلی است برای مشتافان تا اصل آنرا ملاحظه نمایند.

  • از آنجا که کتاب تنها داستان زندگی من بدون جهت گیری و نتیجه گیری خاص و جامع سیاسی و فلسفی است. اینجا محلی است جهت پاسخ به سئوالات و بیان نقطه نظرات من.

  •  امیدوارم در آینده این سایت محل برخورد آرا و عقاید افرادی شود که انسانها را سیاه و سفید ندیده و طرفدار تحمل پذیری میباشند. همچنین محلی برای ارائه آرا و عقاید دوستداران و کاوشگران فهم آزادی و دموکراسی در ایران و اسلام شود.

  • در این وب سایت و در مقالات نوشته شده بوسیله من، از بکار گیری وذکر القاب، تیتر و عنوان افراد که میتواند بکارگیری آنها حمل بر تأئید و عدم بکارگیریشان حمل بر رد و مخالفت با آنها شود معذورم مگر در مواردی که عنوان بخشی از نام فرد شده مثل "ستار خان" و یا " باقر خان" و یا "ملا صدرا" و..

  • در فاکت آوری از دیگران و در مقالات ارائه شده توسط دیگران کلمات و صفات توهین آمیز حذف میگردد.

  • استفاده از مطالب اين وب سايت با ذکر ماخذ و نام وب سايت بلامانع است.

For problems or questions regarding this web contact [].
Last updated: 12/31/07. x