Activities - Iranian-American Community of Northern California

Switch to desktop

Video Capitol Hill Conference - “Iran Rising for Freedom - U.S. Policy Prospects,"

march17

Congressman "Judge" Ted Poe (R-TX) and Honorable Michael Mukasey, Attorney General of the United States (2007-2009)

General Hugh Shelton, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (1997-2001)

Congressman David Scott (D-GA) and Mr. Louis Freeh - Former Director of the FBI (1993-2001)

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Congressman Hank Johnson (D-GA)

The Honorable Tom Ridge, former Secretary of Homeland Security (2003-2005)

Congresswoman Judy Chu (D-CA), Howard Dean, former Governor of Vermont, former Democratic National Committee (2005-2009) and General James Jones, National Security Advisor (2009-2010)

Congressman Sherman (D-CA), Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, Congressman John Lewis (D-GA) and Ambassador Paula Dobriansky, former Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs (2001-2009)

Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Ambassador Dell Dailey, Coordinator for Counterterrorism, State Dept. (2007-2009)

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FA), Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs

Last Updated on Sunday, 29 April 2012 09:46

IACNC Sponsers Capitol Hill Conference: "Iran Rising for Freedom—U.S. Policy Prospects,"

sam 0129-1024x768

Transcript of event

WASHINGTON, March 19, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- On 17 March 2011, in a bi-partisan conference on Capitol Hill, titled, "Iran Rising for Freedom—U.S. Policy Prospects," former top officials of the Obama as well as Clinton andBush administrations joined senior Members of Congress. They urged the Obama Administration to adopt a new policy in support of Iranians who are demanding change in Iran and remove Iran's principal opposition, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) from the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. They also called for the protection of Camp Ashraf, Iraq, home to the 3,400 members (including 1,000 women) of MEK.

General James Jones, National Security Advisor to President Obama (2009-2010); Governor Howard Dean, Presidential Candidate and Chairman of the Democratic National Committee (2005-2009); Judge Michael Mukasey, Attorney General of the United States (2007-2009); General Hugh Shelton, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (1997-2001); Governor Tom Ridge, Secretary of Homeland Security (2003-2005); Honorable Paula Dobriansky, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs (2001-2009); Honorable Louis Freeh, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation (1993-2001); and Ambassador Dell Dailey, Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Department of State (2007-2009) were among the speakers.

In addition, Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Ted "Judge" Poe (R-TX); John Lewis (D-GA); Darrell Issa (R-CA); Brad Sherman (D-CA); Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX); Judi Chu (D-CA); David Scott (D-GA); and Hank Johnson (D-GA) spoke at the conference.

On the occasion of the Iranian New Year, Nowrouz, General James Jones had the following for the Iranian people: "I propose three gifts. The first one is successfully delisting the MEK, the second one ...is insuring the security of the people of Camp Ashraf and the third is to support the popular movement for freedom as expressed by Iranians both inside and outside of Iran." General Jones concluded, "We should remove all shackles that currently impede the human potential that exists to bring about democratic change with regard to the regime that currently governs Iran. We should give the people of Iran the opportunity to get control of their destinies and experience freedom not in ten years or 20 years but beginning this Iranian New Year."

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee (R-Fl), spoke of the need to protect the "wonderful residents of Camp Ashraf." She added, "They deserve our full protection, they've not gotten that from the Iraqi forces, and it is up to us to make sure that the Iraqi Government complies with all of the accords that they have signed; shame on us if we don't hold them accountable." She also reminded everyone that the House Foreign Affairs Committee is "carefully" studying the "important topic of de-listing the MEK."

Governor Dean stated that, "The Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, (MEK) is not a terrorist group, and we need to delist them immediately. The MEK is a movement for freedom and democracy in Iran... The MEK has 3,400 brave people who believe in democracy just as firmly as those people in Benghazi, Libya as well as the people in Tahrir Square, Egypt did; hence, we cannot abandon its members in Camp Ashraf, Iraq. If we remove the MEK from the U.S. terrorist list, it will be possible to protect the people of Ashraf."

Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade said, "In 1997, our State Department was desperate to find a way to create peace and harmony and love between the people of the United States and the mullahs running things in Tehran. So the State Department decided to list the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran [MEK] as a foreign terrorist organization. I have to ask the State Department, how is that peace, love, and harmony thing working out? Have the centrifuges [to enrich uranium] stopped spinning? Have we heard reasonable comments from Ahmadinejad, or instead has this [terrorist designation] been a manifest failure of our foreign policy?...It is about time that we examine what the European Union did in 2009, and that was to remove the MEK from its terrorist list."

In part of his remarks, Judge Michael Mukasey stated that, "There is simply no basis in law or in fact for continuing MEK on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations. There are many reasons, including MEK's close cooperation with the United States in exposing Iran's nuclear program for removing MEK from that list. The MEK was kept on the terrorist list, in part, out of fear that Iran would provide Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and other deadly devices to Iraqi insurgents fighting and killing U.S. troops, and of course the Iranian regime has done that even as MEK has continued to be on the list."

General Hugh Shelton specified that, "The largest organized resistance to Iran's current regime has been declared a foreign terrorist organization by the Department of State. That designation in my opinion was a mistake, one that we should rectify not tomorrow, but immediately." General Shelton added, "To add insult to injury we have Camp Ashraf where [Iraqi Forces] stand by today as the 210 loudspeakers shout out obscenities heard by women and children and just the idea of living with that is something that says we need to take action right now... I would submit today the U.S. should add our leadership to an international effort to go in and protect the people of Camp Ashraf, since a recognized international principle is to protect."

In celebration of the Iranian New Year, Representative John Lewis (D-GA), who is called "the conscience of the U.S. Congress," wished a, "Happy New Year to Iranians in Camp Ashraf and the people in Iran committed to peace and to change," and concluded: "Time is always right to do right. The time is now. Not next week, not next month, not next year, but now."

Governor Tom Ridge stated that, "All the UN resolutions combined would not have the same impact as one decision made by the Obama administration, removal of the MEK from the terrorist list, pure and simple. The MEK is not asking for creation of a no-fly zone or other military intervention on its behalf. It is not asking us to assault the fortress at Normandy. The MEK is only asking to be removed from the terrorist list."

Congressman Ted Poe who has sponsored H.Res.60, "Urging the Secretary of State to remove the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran from the Department of State's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations," said, "It's time for the UNAMI team under the protection of the United States to be set up permanently in Camp Ashraf to monitor the situation and ensure further violations don't occur against the human dignity."

Ambassador Dell Dailey called on Secretary Clinton "to revoke the designation" of the MEK. "All of the Middle East is erupting and crying for democracy. We must not stand in the way. Immediate revocation [of designation] is essential," he concluded that delisting, "Will tell the people of Iran that the United States is with them."

Ambassador Paula Dobriansky stated that, "The recent uprisings in North Africa drew inspiration from the 2009 democratic protests in Iran... Women and youth are indispensable agents of change; their leadership needs to be recognized and their efforts supported... Maryam Rajavi ... recognizes in her Ten-Point Plan for a future Iran that there would be complete political and social gender equality, including equal participation in elections and the abolition of discrimination against women. We must support these women activists. This platform is one that underscores the basic rights not only of women but of all Iranians."

Director Louis Freeh called into question the evidence on the basis of which the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq was designated. "There is absolutely no credible evidence, we think even on a classified basis, which justifies the maintenance of the MEK on the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list. In fact, all the evidence militates against maintaining the terrorist designation. What Secretary Clinton needs to do is delist the MEK, protect the heroes in Camp Ashraf, and make sure that we support freedom in Iran as opposed to standing silent, and by our silence facilitating the murderous persecution of the Iranian regime."

SOURCE Iranian American Community of Northern California

Last Updated on Sunday, 29 April 2012 12:42

COUNTERING IRAN'S NUCLEAR & TERRORISM THREATS: WHAT ARE THE US POLICY OPTIONS?

jan20 jones panel

COUNTERING IRAN'S NUCLEAR & TERRORISM THREATS: WHAT ARE THE US POLICY OPTIONS? WILLARD INTERCONTINENTAL HOTEL, WASHINGTON, DC; DECEMBER 17, 2010

MR.TOM RIDGE, THE FIRST SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES

MS. FRANCES TOWNSEND, FORMER ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT FOR HOMELAND SECURITY AND COUNTER TERRORISM

December 17, 2010

At one point in time, we talked about and we put the MEK on the terrorist list because we thought it might enhance and improve the dialogue, change the dialogue… and I think history concludes so far in the past several years since we put that organization, which by the way disarmed itself, consolidated itself and has been a source of some very important intelligence for this country’s use and the rest of the world’s knowledge. If the goal was to improve engagement and to solicit a different response from the Iranian government, that hasn’t worked out very well either…What happens if they become even further emboldened by having nuclear capability? One, we know what it says about Iran—if you think that part of the world is unstable now, we can only imagine what the consequences will be then…Think about that, ten years ago we were worried and trying to figure out how we could make sure that didn't’t happen and now we have some pundits and some analysts in the international community saying, it’s almost a fait- accompli, “now what are we going to do?” Let’s just pause for a moment and think what that means to the rest of the world vis-a-vis America. What does it say about our ability to influence geopolitical events? What does it say about how our allies and friends in that region look to us, and our ability to affect change that affects their lives and the security of that particular region…? So how do we go forward? What do we do next? I think the Attorney General very clearly identified probably one of the most significant things we can do and that is delist as the UK has done, and the European Union has done, MEK. They did consolidate. They did disarm. They were a source of considerable intelligence for us, and if we are to look for peaceful means of encouraging a regime change, it seems to me that one of the first and most significant steps we could take, I guess it’s under review right now by the State Department, but as you well know in January of this year I think the DC Circuit Court of Appeals said that, based on the information you presented in this court right now…the court said preliminarily, the information that you’ve at least shared with us in court today doesn't’t warrant them being listed as a terrorist organization. I think the consequences of that particular decision, the State Department as I understand it and perhaps others on this panel can give us a more enlightened and more recent point of view that they’re actually honestly and actively considering that outcome. What’s the benefit of that outcome? First of all it’s the strongest possible signal that our approach toward Iran is changing. It’s saying that 30 years of peaceful engagement hasn’t been effective, and I think everybody around the world knows that…I’ve always thought that, if America was considered to be a product that we look to sell around the world then our brand is based on our value system… We are our strongest allies; we’re also our strongest critics. We know what we believe in and when we seem to deviate...we take a close look at ourselves in the mirror and ask ourselves “What are we doing?” Well, part of that American brand I think is being consistent with our values overseas as well. And when we see a repressive theocracy, day in and day out, imprisoning, torturing, executing men, women, entire families because they’ve been brave enough, courageous enough to stand in opposition to the theocracy. In their hearts, not necessarily looking to the institutions of government like America but looking to the value system of freedom and liberty, speech, assembly, peaceful opposition. Delist the People’s Mujahedin of Iran. It’s not a terrorist organization. And after that… with the hope of convincing the rest of the world that the loyal opposition, those pro-democracy warriors, individuals and families in Iran can at least look to the United States not with casual and occasional criticism of the Iranian government and how it treats its citizens, but a sustained clamor for change, aggressive diplomatic efforts to at least pull some of our friends and allies into the chorus of opposition to this regime. Time is running out. There aren’t too many options left.

December 17, 2010

Our policy goals in this country really must be a reflection of our values. It must be consistent and it must be fundamental to how we build a policy process. It struck me, when you go back and look at the current, when we heard Tom Ridge and others talk about the sanctions regime, we can debate its efficacy we can debate its impact, but the statement of the goal right now as we sit here today in Washington the goal of the sanctions, which have not been yet successful, is to get the regime to the bargaining table. Is that really all? To describe that is as humble and modest in terms of an objective, that’ s not enough. So, when you look at all the other things we’ve talked about just so far this morning that the MEK is still listed as an FTO all of that stems from “what are you trying to achieve.” If you’re not clear, and you’ re not ambitious, and your goals don’t represent your values, you are doomed to failure. .. The FTO designations, as you can imagine during my time in the government (I was in the Justice Department for many years and then in the White House), monitoring the FTO process, the Foreign Terrorist Organizations designation process, working with the State Department was among my responsibilities. I must tell you that having traveled throughout the Middle East and around the world, talking to our allies, the FTO designation process (we should just be honest) is disrespected by our allies. It is ineffective. It is corrupted by politics, and I don’t mean, “corrupted” in the criminal sense, but it has been pervaded by political debate, which is part and parcel of a foreign policy discussion when you’re setting foreign policy goals. The fact that we permit domestic politics in foreign policy concerns to come into what is supposed to be an objective process, that is the designation of a foreign terrorist organization, undermines US credibility. .. Not only, having disarmed, and renounced violence and assisted the United States, should the MEK come off the list, the US Congress should abolish the list because I frankly think in many respects because of how it’s operated, it does more to undermine our credibility on these subjects. So, I would both take MEK off the list and I would ask Congress to abolish it… The other thing that I would say and hasn’t been spoken about, again I’m sensitive to this because of my responsibilities in the White House is, I frankly think, as part of the de listing process one of the things that would enable or open the potential for is permitting MEK leaders who are outside of Iran to get visas and come to the United States. That’s an entirely, again, separate process. It would be treated separately. De listing does not necessarily mean that those leaders would be able to apply and get such a visa that ought to be part of this process. Those people ought to be able to come here and speak about the atrocities, they ought to be able to speak about the human rights abuses and what’s happening inside Iran to those advocates for democracy and freedom. And they ought to be able to be their own advocates. Right now, we are their advocates, but they are entitled to make their own case both before the American Congress and the American people, to raise money, to raise support, and to raise awareness. So, for me, it’s: take them off the list, abolish the list and grant visas to expatriates and exiled MEK leaders so that they can come and make their own case.

Last Updated on Monday, 30 April 2012 09:01

Top Desktop version