The Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran distributed a statement, of which we received a copy in the form of an article or an analytical topic, in which it said, “The speakers at one of the sessions of the “Free Iran” conference that was held recently in Paris criticized the US policy towards Iran, demanded to change its foundations, and take away many facts related to it. Take into account, in particular, the danger posed by the clerical regime.
The session, chaired by former US Deputy Secretary of State Lincoln Bloomfield, was attended by former US Attorney General Michael Mukezi, former US Deputy Secretary of State Robert Joseph, former Deputy Commander of US Forces in Europe Chuck Wald, and Director of Policy at the US State Department Mitchell Reese.
In his intervention, Mukizi said that the US State Department included the People's Mojahedin in the list of terrorist organizations in 1997, indicating that the decision was political, aimed at appeasing the mullahs, and was not preceded by an investigation on the organization and the National Council of Resistance, or taking into account that it is a democratic organization that upholds human rights, and continued The unfair listing took place 15 years ago, then was canceled by court order. The former US official described the policy of appeasement as shameful, stressing the mistake of the US strategy that seeks to reach an agreement with the mullahs’ regime, which cannot be trusted and does not abide by any agreement.
For his part, General Chuck Wald stressed the absurdity of the nuclear agreement with the Iranian regime, warning of the mullahs' regime obtaining an atomic bomb, and stressing that the stupidity of the policy of appeasement cannot be ignored.
In their interventions, the speakers touched on the illegality of the rule of the Wali al-Faqih. Ambassador Reis warned of the danger of the Iranian regime to the world, pointing to its lack of popular legitimacy, as the Iranian people demonstrate against it every day. He focused on the absurdity of the idea of the mullahs’ regime gradually becoming moderate, especially since the regime It does not enjoy popular legitimacy, and takes the turn of brutality day after day, while Joseph stressed that the Iranian people are the greatest threat to the regime, and stressed the failure of the policy of appeasement, whether in the field of dealing with the regime's terrorism or aggression in the region, the principle of obtaining the atomic bomb, and its violation of human rights, expressing Regarding his belief that the regime is unstable and its end is imminent, Joseph criticized the lack of correct information about Iran, saying that “in 2002 I got to know the People’s Mojahedin Organization and the National Council of Resistance, at that time, I was in the White House, responsible for nuclear disarmament., He explained to me My head of office details the organization’s conferences. I asked how the Mujahideen know more than me about the nuclear program of this regime, how could a so-called terrorist group take a few steps after the White House press conference and reveal such reports, then I realized the size of the sacrifices made by the members of this movement and learned that a lot has been lost. Among them are brothers or fathers, they did not stingy to achieve the ideal of freedom, and I learned that the elected president of the resistance, Maryam Rajavi, presented an alternative to the Iranian regime by proposing the ten-point program.
Emphasizing the need to adopt information and facts as a basis for correct policy and principles, General Chuck Wald said that “the People’s Mujahedin and the Iranian Resistance are considered an effective alternative,” calling for support for this alternative instead of indifference, and not giving way to the regime with a fake nuclear agreement, “while Robert Joseph stressed the need” Supporting the democratic opposition” on the one hand and restricting the regime on the other hand so that it does not take a chance to breathe, while placing human rights at the heart of politics.
Once again, the American speakers hung the bell, by affirming their rejection of the reckless and sterile policy pursued by the United States in Iran, represented by appeasement, and their development of appropriate perceptions to confront the danger of the mullahs' approach that threatens global stability and peace, and thus provided a way out of the political impasse faced by those involved in keeping up with the rule of the Wali al-Faqih.