People's Mujahedin of Iran - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
IRAN April 2000
COUNTRY ASSESSMENT - IRAN April 2000 Country Information and Policy Unit I. SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 This assessment has been produced by the Country Information & Policy Unit, Immigration & Nationality Directorate, Home Office, from information obtained from a variety of sources. 1.2 The assessment has been prepared for background purposes for those involved in the asylum determination process. The information it contains is not exhaustive, nor is it intended to catalogue all human rights violations. It concentrates on the issues most commonly raised in asylum claims made in the United Kingdom. 1.3 The assessment is sourced throughout. It is intended to be used by caseworkers as a signpost to the source material, which has been made available to them. The vast majority of the source material is readily available in the public domain. 1.4 It is intended to revise the assessment on a 6-monthly basis while the country remains within the top 35 asylum producing countries in the United Kingdom. 1.5 The assessment will be placed on the Internet (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/cipu1.htm). An electronic copy of the assessment has been made available to the following organisations: Amnesty International UK Immigration Advisory Service Immigration Appellate Authority Immigration Law Practitioners' Association Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants JUSTICE Medical Foundation for the care of Victims of Torture Refugee Council Refugee Legal Centre UN High Commissioner for Refugees CONTENTS I SCOPE OF DOCUMENT 1.1 - 1.6 II GEOGRAPHY 2.1 - 2.2 -
Mujahideen-E Khalq (MEK) Dossier
Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) Dossier CENTER FOR POLICING TERRORISM “CPT” March 15, 2005 PREPARED BY: NICOLE CAFARELLA FOR THE CENTER FOR POLICING TERRORISM Executive Summary Led by husband and wife Massoud and Maryam Rajavi, the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK) is the primary opposition to the Islamic Republic of Iran; its military wing is the National Liberation Army (NLA), and its political arm is the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). The US State Department designated the MEK as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997, based upon its killing of civilians, although the organization’s opposition to Iran and its democratic leanings have earned it support among some American and European officials. A group of college-educated Iranians who were opposed to the pro-Western Shah in Iran founded the MEK in the 1960s, but the Khomeini excluded the MEK from the new Iranian government due to the organization’s philosophy, a mixture of Marxism and Islamism. The leadership of the MEK fled to France in 1981, and their military infrastructure was transferred to Iraq, where the MEK/NLA began to provide internal security services for Saddam Hussein and the MEK received assistance from Hussein. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, however, Coalition forces bombed the MEK bases in Iraq, in early April of 2003, forcing the MEK to surrender by the middle of April of the same year. Approximately 3,800 members of the MEK, the majority of the organization in Iraq, are confined to Camp Ashraf, their main compound near Baghdad, under the control of the US-led Coalition forces. -
Rising up for Freedom
IRAN RISING UP FOR FREEDOM 1,000 International Dignitaries, Iranians, in 30,000 locations from 102 countries join Free Iran Global Summit at Ashraf 3, Albania, online. Maryam Rajavi #FreeIran2020 Special Report Sponsored The by Alliance Public for Awareness Iranian dissidents rally for regime change in Tehran BY BEN WOLFGANG oppressive government that has ruled Iran from both political parties participating has proven it can’t deliver for its people. tHe WasHInGtOn tImes since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Leaders represented a who’s who list of American “The Iranian people want change, to of the NCRI, which is comprised of multiple “formers,” including former Sen. Joseph I. have democracy, finally to have human Iran’s theocracy is at the weakest point other organizations, say the council has seen Lieberman of Connecticut, former Penn- rights, to finally have economic wealth, of its four-decade history and facing un- its stature grow to the point that Iranian sylvania Gov. Tom Ridge, former Attorney no more hunger. The will of the people precedented challenges from a courageous officials can no longer deny its influence. General Michael Mukasey, retired Marine is much stronger than any oppressive citizenry hungry for freedom, Iranian dis- The NCRI has many American support- Commandant James T. Conway and others. measure of an Iranian regime,” said Martin sidents and prominent U.S. and European ers, including some with close relationships Several current U.S. officials also delivered Patzelt, a member of German Parliament. politicians said Friday at a major interna- to Mr. Trump, such as former New York remarks, including Sen. -
Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy
Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy Kenneth Katzman Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs August 14, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL32048 Iran, Gulf Security, and U.S. Policy Summary Since the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, a priority of U.S. policy has been to reduce the perceived threat posed by Iran to a broad range of U.S. interests, including the security of the Persian Gulf region. In 2014, a common adversary emerged in the form of the Islamic State organization, reducing gaps in U.S. and Iranian regional interests, although the two countries have often differing approaches over how to try to defeat the group. The finalization on July 14, 2015, of a “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA) between Iran and six negotiating powers could enhance Iran’s ability to counter the United States and its allies in the region, but could also pave the way for cooperation to resolve some of the region’s several conflicts. During the 1980s and 1990s, U.S. officials identified Iran’s support for militant Middle East groups as a significant threat to U.S. interests and allies. A perceived potential threat from Iran’s nuclear program emerged in 2002, and the United States orchestrated broad international economic pressure on Iran to try to ensure that the program is verifiably confined to purely peaceful purposes. The international pressure contributed to the June 2013 election as president of Iran of the relatively moderate Hassan Rouhani, who campaigned as an advocate of ending Iran’s international isolation. -
Iran March 2009
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION REPORT IRAN 17 MARCH 2009 UK Border Agency COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION SERVICE IRAN 17 MARCH 2009 Contents Preface Latest News EVENTS IN IRAN, FROM 2 FEBRUARY 2009 TO 16 MARCH 2009 REPORTS ON IRAN PUBLISHED OR ACCESSED BETWEEN 2 FEBRUARY 2009 TO 16 MARCH 2009 Paragraphs Background Information 1. GEOGRAPHY ......................................................................................... 1.01 Maps .............................................................................................. 1.03 Iran............................................................................................. 1.03 Tehran ....................................................................................... 1.04 2. ECONOMY ............................................................................................ 2.01 Sanctions ...................................................................................... 2.13 3. HISTORY ............................................................................................... 3.01 Calendar ........................................................................................ 3.02 Pre 1979......................................................................................... 3.03 1979 to 1999 .................................................................................. 3.05 2000 to date................................................................................... 3.16 Student unrest ............................................................................. -
44 Pays Disposent Des Capacités Techniques Pour Développer Un Armement Atomique
44 pays disposent des capacités techniques pour développer un armement atomique Extrait du Démocratie & Socialisme http://www.democratie-socialisme.fr Un livre de Dominique Lorentz : "Affaires atomiques". Histoire d'une prolifération. 44 pays disposent des capacités techniques pour développer un armement atomique - Livres, films... - Date de mise en ligne : samedi 5 juillet 2003 Démocratie & Socialisme Copyright © Démocratie & Socialisme Page 1/6 44 pays disposent des capacités techniques pour développer un armement atomique À l'heure des menaces de guerre biologique, chimique, bactériologique, le plus grand des risques demeure toujours celui de la guerre nucléaire. "À la question : " Combien de pays détiennent-ils aujourd'hui la bombe atomique ? " les citoyens du monde croient pouvoir obtenir une réponse précise. Ils se trompent. Cinq pays appartiennent au club des puissances nucléaires reconnues. Il s'agit des Etats-unis, de la Russie, de la Chine, de la Grande Bretagne et de la France, par ailleurs seuls membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU. Deux autres Etats, l'Inde et le Pakistan ont démontré qu'ils détenaient le savoir-faire de l'arme atomique. L'Inde a pratiqué un essai nucléaire en 1974, puis une véritable campagne de tests en 1998.Le Pakistan lui a emboîté le pas cette année-là en effectuant lui-même une série de tirs. Pour autant, New Delhi et Islamabad n'appartiennent pas au club des puissances nucléaires. Les cinq grands ont en effet décrété que "malgré leurs essais nucléaires, l'Inde et le Pakistan n'avaient pas le statut d'Etats dotés d'armes nucléaires..." Ces deux pays sont affublés de l'identité hybride "d'Etats qui possèdent la bombe atomique mais ne sont pas des puissances nucléaires". -
One Revolution Or Two? the Iranian Revolution and the Islamic Republic
ONE REVOLUTION OR TWO? THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION AND THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC By Val Moghadam Introduction The bicentennial of the French Revolution happens to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the Iranian Revolution. While the first has been widely regarded as the quintessential social and transformative revolution, the sec- ond is problematical both theoretically and politically. Whereas the October Revolution was in many ways the vanguard revolution par excellence, the Iranian Revolution appears retrograde. In the Marxist view, revolution is an essential part of the forward march of history, a progressive step creating new social-productive relations as well as a new political system, consciousness and values. In this context, how might events in Iran be termed 'revolutionary'? Precisely what kind of a revolution transpired between 1977 and 1979 (and afterward)? Surely clerical rule cannot be regarded as progressive? In what sense, then, can we regard the Iranian Revolution as a step forward in the struggle for emancipation of the Iranian working classes? Clearly the Iranian Revolution presents itself as an anomaly. The major revolutions that have been observed and theorized are catego- rized by Marxists as bourgeois or socialist revolutions.1 This is determined by the revolution's ideology, leadership, programme, class base and orientation, and by changes in the social structure following the change of regime. Fur- ther, there is a relationship between modernity and revolution, as discussed by Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto, suggested by Marshall Berman in his engaging All That Is Solid Melts Into Air, and elaborated by Perry Anderson in a recent essay .2 Some academic theorists of revolution and social change (Banington Moore, Theda Skocpol, Charles Tilly, Ellen Kay Trimberger, Susan Eckstein, taking their cue from Marx) have stressed the modernizing role played by revolutions. -
1. Scope of Document
IRAN COUNTRY REPORT October 2004 Country Information & Policy Unit IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY DIRECTORATE HOME OFFICE, UNITED KINGDOM Iran Country Report October 2004 CONTENTS 1 Scope of Document 1.1 - 1.10 2 Geography 2.1 - 2.2 3 Economy 3.1 - 3.10 4 History 4.1 Pre - 1979 4.2 - 4.3 1979 - 1989 4.4 - 4.6 1990 - 1996 4.7 - 4.9 1997 - 1999 4.10 - 4.14 2000 4.15 - 4.17 2001 onwards 4.18 - 4.23 Student Unrest - June 2003 4.24 - 4.29 Parliamentary Elections - February 2004 4.30 - 4.33 5 State Structures The Constitution 5.1 Citizenship and Nationality 5.2 - 5.4 Political System 5.5 - 5.7 Political Parties 5.8 - 5.13 Judiciary 5.14 - 5.31 Court Documentation 5.32 - 5.34 Legal Rights and Detention 5.35 - 5.41 Death Penalty 5.42 - 5.45 Internal Security 5.46 - 5.52 Prisons and Prison Conditions 5.53 - 5.59 Military Service 5.60 - 5.62 Medical Services 5.63 Drugs 5.64 Drug Addiction 5.65 - 5.66 Psychiatric Treatment 5.67 - 5.69 HIV/AIDS 5.70 - 5.72 People with Disabilities 5.73 Educational System 5.74 - 5.77 6 Human Rights 6.A Human Rights issues General 6.1 - 6.14 Freedom of Speech and the Media 6.15 - 6.25 Press Law 6.26 - 6.40 Internet and Satellite 6.41 - 6.45 Freedom of Religion 6.46 - 6.52 Legal Framework 6.53 - 6.54 Sunni Muslims 6.55 Christians 6.56 - 6.58 Apostasy/Conversions 6.59 - 6.62 Jews 6.63 - 6.65 Zoroastrians 6.66 - 6.67 Sabeans (Mandeans) 6.68 Baha'is 6.69 - 6.82 Freedom of Assembly and Association 6.83 - 6.90 Employment Rights 6.91 - 6.95 People Trafficking 6.96 Freedom of Movement 6.97 - 6.106 Refugees in Iran 6.107 - 6.112 -
IPC: US Policy Options for Iran and Iranian Political
Iran Policy Committee ________________________________________________ 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20004 202- 742 - 6517 (o); 202-742-6501 (f); [email protected] www.iranpolicy.org White Paper U.S. Policy Options for Iran and Iranian Political Opposition 13 September 2005 Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter One: Iran in the Global War on Terrorism and Proliferation Introduction Role in the War on Terrorism and Proliferation Globalists vs. Regionalists in the War for Washington Islamist Export of Revolution via Terrorism Iraq Al Qaeda Regional Instability: Israel, Iraq, Levant, Gulf MEK Capabilities in Comparison with those of Other Groups Active Proliferator of Weapons of Mass Destruction Conclusions Chapter Two: The Case for Removal of the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MEK) from the U.S. State Department Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) List Introduction Legal Criteria for FTO Designation Allegations against the MEK Killing of Americans Support for the U.S. Embassy Takeover Suppression of Kurds Cross-Border Attacks and Assassinations Terrorist Capability and/or Intent Accusation of “Cult” Conclusions: Legal Allegations Background on the MEK The MEK’s Relationship with the U.S. Military in Iraq The MEK relationship with Iraqis MEK Capabilities Delisting the MEK Serves U.S. National Security Interests Conclusions 2 Appendix Documents Appendix A: Methodology and Content Analysis of Iranian Opposition Groups Appendix B: US-MEK Interaction After the 2003 War in Iraq A) US says Iran opposition in Iraq agrees -
The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)
$Siy»M ' '-'''• • : " ; '-' : *:''/';• ffi-'•.'• LIBRARY, NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CA 93940 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California THESIS A RACE FOR MARTYRDOM: THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTIONARY GUARDS CORPS (IRGC) by Susan E. Merdinger December 1982 Thesis Advisor: Jc)hn W. Amos Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. T208045 ucuwty classification or twh ^m fgMw Cm a»ta»a«n REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ INSTRUCTIONS nTT BEFORE COMPLETINC FORM a. oovt accession no » RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER 4 T iT_C ar»<* Sua»/il») S TYPE OF REPORT » PER. 00 COVERC A Race for Martyrdom: The Islamic Master's Thesis; Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) December 1982 • • PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMKR ?. auTnOr.«> » CONTRACT OH SRANTmt number^*; Susan E. Merdinger t PERFORMING OGOANlZATlON NAME ANO AOORESS to. program element project task AREA • WORK UNIT NUMBERS Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California 93940 I < CONTDOLLINC D" Ct NAME tuO AOORESS 12 REPORT DATE Naval Postgraduate School December 1982 Monterey, California 93940 IS. NUMBER OF PAGES 122 n mOniTqPinG AGENCY NAME * AOOREtSCIf aYfferanf trmm Cantralflna Offlca) >• security class. r«< >M a ra>er Jnclassif ied i§«. OECLASSlFI CATION/ DOWN GRAOING SCHEDULE « DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT '•/ rN/» *•••.•<) Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. <7 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT at th» aaarracf »nr»« fit J(oe* 30. If dlflmttM horn Rmporl) • SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES i> *EY VOROt Cmiikui an r»« • Ha if • arr an« Hapfffr *r Mae* nuaiaar; Revolutionary Guards Pasdaran Pasdars Islamic Fundamentalists 20 ABSTRACT 'Canilmja an >•»•»•• .(«• If nacaaaarr •"« laawiflfr »r alaeA .•«) The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) is often referred to in Western press but still, little is known about these uniformed zealots. This thesis is an attempt to show that the IRGC is not a haphazard army but one that is striv- ing to organize while, at the same time, attempting to deal with Iran's internal security, as well as external threats. -
Texto Completo
NOTAS ASUNTOS ATÓMICOS ANGELO BARACCA Affaires Atomiques Dominique Lorentz Les ArInes, Parigi, 2001, 33, rue Linné, 75005, Paris iEste es un libro para leer! La autora reinterpreta la historia del ŭltimo medio siglo a la luz de los negocios nucleares, gestionados por grupos de presión políticos estadounidenses mediante tráfico de influencias, chantajes y otras maniobras oscuras, entre ellas, la eclosión del terrorismo islámico. Toda la historiografía existente, incluyendo la más acreditada, ha reconstruido la historia de la Guerra Fría a partir del Tratado de No-Proliferación (TNP): Dominique Lorentz propone una interpretación más convincente de esos acontecimientos interna- cionales consiguiendo una perspectiva mucho más diáfana, si es que pueden considerar- se didfanos los juegos sucios tramados durante estas ŭltimas décadas por la Casa Blanca junto con sus aliados y clientes, in primis, Israel y Francia, pero en segundo lugar Alemania Federal, Argentina, Canadá, África del Sur, China, Brasil, India, Pakistán... El libro proporcionará una interpretación de acontecimientos cuyo contenido no va a encajar bien con la versión oficial vigente. El eje conductor de las relaciones mundiales de la segunda post-guerra llega a ser así la proliferación nuclear y el TNP la cobertura forrnal para estos programas. Los benévolos y cómplices controles de la Agencia para la Energía Atómica jugarían el papel, segŭn el autor, de avalar conscientemente tales asuntos turbios, haciendo uso de su autoridad legal (pp. 37-38). Por otra parte, es conocido que las tecnologías nucleares —por ser precisamente tecnologías— son duales, o sea, adecuadas para usos tanto civi- les como militares y es imposible trazar una distinción neta entre ambas utilidades. -
The Impending Nuclear Wars1
1 The Impending Nuclear Wars by Angelo Baracca2 The US is performing an alarming escalation towards a nuclear war. It is completely renovating its strategic nuclear arsenal, actively preparing to launch a “preventive attack”, and developing biological and chemical waepons, while the anti-missile shield will complete an impressive offensive system. A “Fourth Generation” of low-yeld, highly penetrating nuclear warheads have probably been developed and already used: they erase the distinction between “nuclear” and “conventional” weapons and make a nuclear war feasible without formally violating the existing treaties THE XXIth CENTURY (US, NUCLEAR) WARS The hope of eliminating nuclear and mass destruction weapons from the surface of the earth seems actually more far than ever: On the contrary, the danger of their effective use is presently more concrete than during all the decades of the Cold War. The US, in the framework of an unprecedented arms race, in spite of a consistent numerical reduction of its redundant strategic stockpile, is performing the biggest effort of every time to renovate it with completely new nuclear warheads, while is concretely preparing to launch a “preventive attack”. Moreover, with the deployment of the antimissile shield it is building a tremendous offensive system. Washington is also developing chemical and biological weapons, while is boycotting verifications and inspections that would implement the Conventions for the prohibition of these arms. As a matter of fact, the use of nuclear warheads is becoming increasingly convenient in the wars Washington is planning and will fight in the future. In fact, the war operations of the last decade have shown that the cost-effect ratio of conventional explosives delivered by precision-guided munitions resulted exceedingly high (some targets require the expenditure of several delivery systems): this pushed the search for new more effective nuclear weapons that could be politically accepted for their low yield and residual radioactivity.