[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
STATUS OF THE PROCESSING OF THE CAMP ASHRAF RESIDENTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 16, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-160
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
74-237 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey--
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California deceased 3/6/12 deg.
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio BRAD SHERMAN, California
RON PAUL, Texas ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
JOE WILSON, South Carolina RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
CONNIE MACK, Florida ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
DAVID RIVERA, Florida CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas KAREN BASS, California
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
ROBERT TURNER, New York
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
DANA ROHRABACHER, California, Chairman
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
RON PAUL, Texas DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California
DAVID RIVERA, Florida
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESS
The Honorable Daniel Fried, Special Advisor on Ashraf, U.S.
Department of State............................................ 7
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher, a Representative in Congress from
the State of California, and chairman, Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations: Prepared statement............... 3
The Honorable Daniel Fried: Prepared statement................... 10
The Honorable Ted Poe, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas: Material submitted for the record.............. 19
The Honorable Brad Sherman, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California: Letter to the Honorable Hillary Rodham
Clinton dated April 19, 2012................................... 27
The Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Texas: The Wall Street Journal article,
``Iran Excite Group Nears U.S. Rebirth,'' dated May 15, 2012... 39
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 46
Hearing minutes.................................................. 47
Questions for the record submitted to the Honorable Daniel Fried
by the Honorable Brad Sherman.................................. 48
STATUS OF THE PROCESSING OF THE CAMP ASHRAF RESIDENTS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 16, 2012
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
room 2200 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dana Rohrabacher
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Rohrabacher. This hearing is called to order, the
Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Foreign
Affairs Committee.
And on February 17th, the first 400 Ashraf MEK members
began to relocate to Camp Liberty, which is also now called
Camp Hurriya, a former U.S. military base near Baghdad
International Airport. This was in accordance with an agreement
between the United States and Iraq signed on Christmas Day. The
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was formally
recognized, and has formally recognized the residents of Ashraf
as a asylum seekers and persons of concern which entitles them
to protection and humane treatment. Since February, over half
of the Camp Ashraf residents have been shifted to Camp Liberty
for UNHCR processing with the aim of moving them out of Iraq to
safety in other countries.
At a court hearing here in the District of Columbia on May
8th, a State Department lawyer trying to defend the continued
listing of the MEK as a terrorist organization, claimed that
Camp Ashraf had never been inspected by U.S. forces. His
implication is that the MEK might not have lived up to its part
of the 2003 bargain by which it disarmed in exchange for U.S.
protection. The reaction at Camp Ashraf has been for the MEK to
halt movement to Camp Liberty and demand an inspection to prove
that they are not armed. If the inspection does not take place
until after Camp Ashraf is evacuated, false evidence can be
planted in the empty camp by Iraqi authorities or Iranian
agents. So it would have to take place now while the camp is
still in MEK hands.
I would like to know whether the State Department
understood the possible effects of their lawyer's argument.
Earlier reports implied that matters might be improving and
might actually be moving in the right direction toward a
delisting of the MEK, but now the whole issue is up in the air
for no good reason.
As to the movement that has already taken place, the MEK
members have complained that water is in short supply at Camp
Liberty, electricity is also a problem as the camp is not
connected to the national grid and the residents rely on small
generators. And there are reports that their personal
possessions are being looted by Iraqi troops who have not
allowed them to move everything to Camp Liberty. Severe
restrictions have been placed on the ability of those at Camp
Liberty to communicate with the outside world or to see their
lawyers. Living conditions are austere, and Iraqi security
forces have deployed armored vehicles and heavy weapons around
and in the camp.
As of May 10th, only 323 MEK members have been interviewed
by the UNHCR, and will Iraq allow such a slow pace to continue
and will Iran allow that? If this slow pace continues MEK
people will be put in jeopardy. Iraqi hostility and Iranian
plotting must be taken seriously in the wake of the April 8th,
2011, attack on Camp Ashraf by Iraqi forces that murdered 34
unarmed civilians and wounded over 300 others. Iraq may have
promised the UNHCR that there would be no forced return of the
MEK members to Iran, but can the Maliki Government be trusted
given its bloody record?
For the record, I have been denied permission to hold
investigative hearings on the massacre at Camp Ashraf and to
explore why the MEK is still designated as a terrorist
organization. It is of great concern that roadblocks have been
placed to prevent this Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee from doing its job when it comes to this aspect of
American foreign policy.
Here to give us an update on the situation in Iraq is
Ambassador Daniel Fried and the State Department's Special
Advisor on Camp Ashraf. Before assuming this position, he was
special envoy for the closure of Guantanamo detainee facility.
Prior to that he served from 2005 to 2009 as assistant
secretary for the State for European and Eurasian Affairs. A
career member of the Foreign Service, which he joined in 1977,
he has served on the National Security Council's of President
Obama and Clinton, and was Ambassador to Poland from November
1977 to May 2000, not a calm period in Polish history. So we
have with us today a real troubleshooter, proving that they all
don't look like John Wayne.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rohrabacher follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Rohrabacher. And with that, Mr. Carnahan, would you
have an opening statement as well?
Mr. Carnahan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I apologize I
didn't bring any good jokes to start off with.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I thought I would get a laugh out of that
John Wayne one.
Mr. Carnahan. Anyway, seriously I do want to say thank you
to the chairman for his persistence on this issue, and this is
the third hearing in the past year on Camp Ashraf. Ambassador
Fried, thank you for testifying again in front of this
subcommittee. This hearing provides a timely opportunity for us
to check on the processing status of the residents at the camp.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank many of my
constituents from back home in St. Louis, Missouri, for their
work on this important issue. They are a great example of
citizens being involved to make a difference for those in need.
In 2003, the residents of Camp Ashraf were granted
protective status under the Geneva Convention pursuant to the
Status of Forces Agreement between the U.S. and Iraqi
Governments. However, jurisdiction of the camp has been under
the jurisdiction of the Iraqi Government since 2009. Then,
since late December 2011, the agreement allowing the residents
to be moved to Camp Liberty, approximately two-thirds of all
residents have been relocated.
Ambassador, I will be especially interested to hear about
the progress that has been made through our bilateral and
multilateral efforts to move the remaining residents as well as
an update on the interviews and Refugee Status Determinations
by the UNHCR. Reports suggest that UNHCR's process of
conducting individual interviews is going slowly as are the
Refugee Status Determinations that need to be made in order to
provide for their permanent relocation. It has become clear
this process is going to take longer than expected and longer
than most RSDs conducted by UNHCR. It is imperative that there
is sufficient time to ensure that this is done in an orderly
manner and that it also guarantees the safety of the residents.
I am interested to hear what discussions are being
undertaken to ensure that this process will be allowed to
continue beyond any predetermined time deadlines. Certainly a
long-term solution for the residents is, of course, needed once
UNHCR completes its interviews and Refugee Status
Determinations. It would be beneficial to hear some of the
long-term possibilities including what conversations have been
had with the residents. I would also be interested to hear
about what Camp Ashraf in the broader context of U.S. policy
toward Iraq.
While the safety of the residents of Camp Ashraf pose
immediate concern, I would also like to hear the witness
discuss how our relationship with Iraq has been affected as
well as how it has impacted the Camp Ashraf issue. I look
forward to hearing from you today. Thank you again for being
here, Ambassador.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you. Another member of the
committee, Judge Poe, from Texas. You are welcome to make as
long of remarks, opening remarks as you would choose.
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this
hearing. Ambassador Fried, thank you for being here. I also
want to thank many friends from Texas and other parts of the
country that are here today who are concerned about their
families, their loved ones and other patriots in Camp Ashraf
and Camp Liberty.
Four years ago, the MEK filed their petition against the
State Department to delist them as a foreign terrorist
organization. It has been 2 years since the DC Circuit Court of
Appeals ruled the State Department violated the MEK's due
process rights. And so since 2011, June the 6th, the ball has
been in the State Department's court. The State Department's
only reason for disregarding the law is that they apparently
are too busy with other things. The latest excuse is that the
Secretary is waiting for Camp Ashraf to close. I wonder what
difference that makes. Now we here a new excuse that there are
worries from the State Department about alleged weapons in the
camp.
But on June 18th, 2003, U.S. General Ray Odierno said that
``the MEK has been completely disarmed,'' I further quote,
``and we have taken up all small arms and heavy equipment.''
That was our own U.S. military general stating he was
completely confident there were no weapons in Camp Ashraf. And
just yesterday, U.S. Brigadier General David Phillips said he
``systematically searched every square kilometer of the 36-
square kilometer facility with American troops in 2003 and
found no weapons.'' Two generals are on record that they
completely searched the camp, so why is the State Department
now alleging that there are weapons in the camp? Produce one of
those weapons, any weapon that has allegedly been found in that
camp. But yet they don't appear probably because they don't
exist.
Does the State Department believe the residents rearmed
while they were under U.S. control from 2003 to 2008 or that
they rearmed after we left? That is, of course, unlikely and
absurd given twice when the camp was attacked by the Iraqis
with automatic weapons and dozens of residents in Camp Ashraf
were killed and murdered, no weapons were ever used by those
residents to defend themselves. All they had were rocks, and
they threw rocks when they could to protect themselves and
their families. So are the rocks the weapons the State
Department is concerned about? We don't know.
And once the camp is closed will the State Department be
given permission by the Government of Iraq to inspect the camp?
And who is to say, as the chairman pointed out, that the Iraqis
or the Iranians even, wouldn't actually plant weapons in the
camp when the camp is vacated? There are lots of questions and
problems with the State Department's latest excuse not to make
a decision on the FTO status of the MEK. Four years later the
State Department is still denying the due process rights of the
MEK. It is time for the decision. The time for delay, delay,
delay is over. No pistols, no rifles, no bazookas, no BB gun,
no slingshot has been found in Camp Ashraf. Where are the
weapons that they say exist?
It appears to me the State Department is playing into the
politics of the Iranian mullahs and the Iraqi Prime Minister
Maliki. The State must pick a horse and ride it. Hopefully they
will pick the side of the citizens of Camp Ashraf, Camp
Liberty, and not the side of the little fellow from the desert,
Ahmadinejad.
And I yield back to the chairman.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Your Honor. And let
me note that Ambassador Fried will give his opening remarks. We
will then have questions and answers from the panel here from
our committee members, after which at the adjournment of this
hearing--we were not permitted to have a second panel of
witnesses. So what we will do, we will adjourn immediately
after this testimony. This subcommittee will be adjourned at
that moment, and at that moment after adjournment, General
David Phillips, who was assigned to have duty in overseeing
Camp Ashraf while he was in the military, will be here taking
that seat and offering us a briefing on the information that he
knows about and was permitted to testify yesterday before
another committee.
So with that said we will proceed, and Mr. Ambassador, you
may take what time you find appropriate.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DANIEL FRIED, SPECIAL ADVISOR ON
ASHRAF, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Ambassador Fried. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman
Rohrabacher, Ranking Member Carnahan, Judge Poe, thank you for
the opportunity to testify. I wish to report to you on progress
in the administration's efforts to support a humane, peaceful
and durable solution for the residents of Camp Ashraf as well
on challenges that remain.
When I appeared before this subcommittee last December, a
humanitarian crisis appeared imminent. The Government of Iraq
had announced its intention to close Camp Ashraf by December
31, and there were valid concerns that this could result in
bloodshed. Members of this committee appeared to share such
concerns. It was under these circumstances that Secretary
Clinton instructed me to work with Ambassador Jeffrey and the
United Nations to avert a humanitarian catastrophe. I am
relieved to report significant progress while recognizing that
the job is not yet done.
On December 25th, the Government of Iraq and the United
Nations signed a Memorandum of Understanding that provides a
way forward for the safe relocation of Ashraf residents out of
Iraq. Secretary Clinton quickly announced support for this MOU.
We called upon the Iraqi Government to respect the terms of the
MOU and upon the residents of Camp Ashraf to cooperate in its
implementation. With the signature of the MOU, the Iraqi
Government lifted the December 31st deadline for Ashraf's
closure.
Under the terms of the MOU, the residents of Camp Ashraf
gained a temporary transit facility, Camp Hurriya, formerly
Camp Liberty, adjacent to the Baghdad International Airport, to
which to relocate under guarantees of security. The MOU also
provides for in-person monitoring by the U.N. Assistance
Mission in Iraq, UNAMI, headed by the able and energetic
Ambassador Martin Kobler, and Refugee Status Determination
process undertaken by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees.
That is UNHCR. Additionally, through the MOU, the Iraqi
Goverment made a commmitment to the principle of non-
refoulement. These were important steps forward by the Iraqi
Government.
The first convoy to Hurriya took place on February 17-18,
with nearly 400 people. A second and similar convoy occurred on
March 8th, followed by a third convoy on March 19th, a fourth
on April 16th, and a fifth convoy on May 5. Nearly 2,000
residents have moved to Camp Hurriya, over half the total. Each
convoy has been a significant logistic undertaking. The Iraqi
Government has provided dozens of coach buses and cargo trucks,
and thousands of Iraqi security forces have provided for convoy
security on the road. The preparation of each convoy is
lengthy, and disagreements, sometimes heated, have occurred
between the Iraqi authorities and the residents about cargo
screening procedures and other issues. U.S. Embassy and the
Department of State follow the progress of each convoy closely.
The progress to date is remarkable especially given the history
and emotions involved, but patience and compromise have been
required and will still be required as the last convoys to
close Camp Ashraf are organized.
Living conditions at Camp Hurriya have also had challenges.
There were early issues with water, sewage and electric power,
though many have been resolved since. There were early concerns
about the location and size of Iraqi police units at Camp
Hurriya, though here too a resolution was worked out. Both
Camps Ashraf and Hurriya have internet connectivity to the
world.
There are issues that remain. For example, the Government
of Iraq needs to pay greater attention to the repair or
provision of air conditioning units and other basic welfare
needs such as accommodations for the disabled. With the onset
of hot weather and new arrivals, electric power and water needs
will increase and the number of required utility vehicles will
grow. The Iraqi Government can work with the U.N. to address
these concerns. The residents need to engage the Iraqi
Government, the U.N. and others on these issues in a focused
manner. It is important that the final convoys from Ahsraf take
place and that Camp Ashraf be closed.
Our efforts do not end, however, with Camp Ashraf's
closure. Indeed, we must not lose sight of our purpose. The
relocation of Camp Ashraf's residents out of Iraq and the way
for those residents out of Iraq lies through the UNHCR process.
With start-up issues being resolved, the UNHCR has intensified
its efforts and increased resources to interview and review
residents for refugee status eligibility.
The next great task in this effort requires continued
participation of the residents in the UNHCR process and the
diplomatic work of relocating residents out of Iraq. The United
States has informed the UNHCR and our international partners
that we will receive UNHCR's referrals of some individuals.
These referrals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis
consistent with applicable U.S. law. Other governments have
stated their intention to take similar actions, and some have
begun the process of reviewing residents themselves.
Let me be clear. Mr. Chairman, it will be critical for the
United States to demonstrate leadership in this area. Our doing
so will be essential to finding a solution. We hope to have the
support the the Congress and of all those who have expressed
concern for the residents of Camp Ashraf. We will also need the
continued cooperation of remaining Ashraf residents to relocate
swiftly to Hurriya, and continued cooperation of the residents
of Camp Hurriya with the UNHCR.
The next stage of this process will be challenging. Some in
Camp Hurriya may choose to return voluntarily to Iran. Others
may find that they have credentials and connections to European
or other nations and can resettle there. Still others will
require resettlement as refugees or other permission to reside
in third countries through the UNHCR's goodo offices. Some of
our European partners have indicated that they will interview
residents to determine eligibility for resettlement within
their respective countries. The United States will encourage
prompt and secure relocation of the residents of Hurriya, and
again we must be prepared to do our part, hopefully with the
support of the Congress.
I want to commend the extraordinary work being done by
UNAMI and UNHCR missions in Iraq, and the intense engagement of
U.S. Ambassador Jeffrey and his dedicated team. Their
diligence, creativity and commitment have been essential to the
progress so far.
Mr. Chairman, Judge Poe, this is in the nature of an
interim report. Much has been achieved since we met last
December. Much remains to be done. But at last we are on a road
to resolve this problem through the relocation of Ashraf
residents out of Iraq.
Thank you for this opportunity, and I welcome your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Fried follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Rohrabacher. All right. Thank you very much for your
testimony. The ranking member will be returning, but we will
proceed with his permission. And let me get down to the first
issue about weapons in Camp Ashraf.
Does the United States Government in any way question that
there are no weapons and have been no weapons in Camp Ashraf
since the agreement that was made by the residents, by the MEK,
back in 2003?
Ambassador Fried. Mr. Chairman, this issue, that is, the
issue of Camp Ashraf and inspections came up, as you said
earlier, and I believe Judge Poe said, in the context of
litigation in court, in DC court, Federal court, and because it
came up in the progress of active litigation, I have to be
extraordinarily careful in getting into this area. It is my
understanding that the Department of Justice has sent a letter
to the court, which has now been filed, and I believe it is
therefore available, which answers some of the questions that
have arisen. And it is my understanding then that letter
addresses the question you just asked.
Mr. Rohrabacher. So you should be able to just tell us
right out what it is then.
Ambassador Fried. Yes. I have to be extraordinarily
careful, but I can say the following. The mandate of my office
and my charge from the Secretary is to support the process of
having people move from Ashraf to Liberty, and then from
Liberty out of Iraq in safety and security. That process needs
to move forward as fast as we can. Time is not necessarily on
our side. I don't want to lose time and opportunity. I think I
understand, or some of the concerns that have been raised
recently as a result of these court proceedings are unfounded.
My Government and this administration are determined to move
ahead. I hope that the residents of Ashraf will continue to
cooperate.
I read in an ad that appeared in the Washington Post that
an inspection of Ashraf is an essential condition, I'm quoting,
``to continue the relocation of Ashraf residents to Liberty.''
I hope this does not reflect a considered opinion. The
cooperation of the residents of Ashraf and cooperation of the
Iraqi Government with the MOU has brought us this far. We are
not there, but it is farther than many thought we would get,
and we are doing all right considering where we thought we
would be in December and where we feared we could end up. We
want to move ahead quickly. We have large tasks before us, and
it is on those tasks that we are focused.
I don't know how the issue came up or why. This issue was
filled with misunderstandings. But my focus is moving forward,
and it is my strong recommendation to the residents of Ashraf
and Camp Liberty and all those who wish them well that we move
forward as fast as we can while we have the chance.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Now let me interpret that. That is, with
all of your heart and soul you are recommending that we ignore
the issue and not ask for a response?
Ambassador Fried. Mr. Chairman, I would know better than to
recommend that you ignore any issue in which you have an
interest. I wouldn't dare.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I want you to be really careful because
this is really important, and watch every word that you make.
Are we satisfied that there were not weapons in Camp Ashraf
after the 2003 agreement and up until now? I mean it is not a
tough question, I mean it is yes or no. I mean I understand the
many implications to yes and no, but knowing the truth is
certainly--there is this motto that I think somebody said about
knowing the truth is going to make you free.
Ambassador Fried. A good saying.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I think knowing the truth is really an
important part of making policy.
Ambassador Fried. I know I am aware of no barrier that
ought to prevent the process moving forward. The process of
convoys, the last remaining convoys out of Ashraf to Hurriya,
the process of UNHCR interviews and the process of the
international community, U.N., U.S.----
Mr. Rohrabacher. So are you suggesting then, if we would
give an affirmative that there are no weapons there that that
in some way would interfere with the relocation of the people
who are currently in Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty? By answering
the question, that would interfere?
Ambassador Fried. No. As I understand what you just said,
if I get that right, I am not saying that. I am being
extraordinarily cautious because this is a matter of active
litigation. Motions are being filed. Letters are being sent.
And I have to be more careful than I would be if you had asked
this question and there were no litigation going on.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. So if I just mentioned to you that--
was it the General who testified yesterday? And I believe the
General testified that there were no weapons, and he was our
man there. So if he is willing to testify that, or he is not
testifying, but briefing us on that, he testified yesterday and
I believe under oath, you can't give an answer based on a
brigadier general who was in charge of the camp acknowledging
that?
Ambassador Fried. It is my understanding that the
Department of Defense, which knows this issue in a way that the
Department of State does not, had made the judgment that the
camp was largely disarmed with no heavy equipment at that time.
Now my mandate is not to go back and review the record of those
years. The mandate of my office is to move forward and it is my
hope that the remaining convoys can move ahead.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Let me ask you, does your hesitation to
answer the question in a direct fashion have anything to do
with the fact that if we were now to go on record as the
official government position is that Camp Ashraf was disarmed,
that those people who went in and took the lives of over 30
residents of Camp Ashraf would then be guilty of a war crime?
Ambassador Fried. No, not at all. Not at all. My caution is
a function of the fact that there is active litigation going
on, which means I have to be more careful than even usual.
Mr. Rohrabacher. I am sure that we are glad there wasn't
any active litigation going on after Pearl Harbor, we could
have never retaliated against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor, I
guess.
Well, I will go back to reserve the balance of my time to
ask questions. And Your Honor, I am sure you have a few things
you would like to bring up. And now you are dealing with a
judge now.
Mr. Poe. And you are going to have to keep your answers a
whole lot simpler than you have been with Mr. Chairman. Has the
State Department ever asked to search Camp Ashraf, to your
knowledge?
Ambassador Fried. The State Department?
Mr. Poe. The State Department.
Ambassador Fried. Not during the time in which I have been
responsible for this position. And I have good, direct
knowledge of what has happened since I took my current job last
November.
Mr. Poe. Is there anything preventing the State Department
from searching Camp Ashraf other than the Iraqi Government
saying you can or you can't?
Ambassador Fried. Well, as a practical matter Camp Ashraf
is not our sovereign territory. It is Iraqi sovereign
territory.
Mr. Poe. I understand all that.
Ambassador Fried. Now on the ground I can tell you that we
have substantial efforts going on to have our people go to Camp
Hurriya, Camp Liberty. They were there 2 days ago. They are
there on a pretty frequent basis. We have had people going up
to Camp Ashraf before to meet with people. Our emphasis, now we
put our resources to work on the current issues of welfare,
security of the people at Camp Hurriya, support of the UNHCR
for its refugee processing, support of the convoys. In my
judgment that is where our efforts should be, because to get
these people out of Iraq we have to get them from Ashraf to
Hurriya and then from Hurriya out. That is where our emphasis
has been. Our resources are substantial but they are not
unlimited. And frankly, everything I know convinces me that our
resources are rightly devoted to the here and now and not to--I
don't want to see them or our efforts diverted.
Mr. Poe. Are you aware that in April 2009, the Iraqi
Government searched Camp Ashraf with dogs and then signed a
document saying that there were no weapons there, no ammunition
there? Are you aware of that?
Ambassador Fried. I have heard that.
Mr. Poe. There is also a video of the search. Have you seen
the video of that search where they found no weapons?
Ambassador Fried. I haven't seen that video.
Mr. Poe. I don't think it is on YouTube yet. But are you
aware of any third-party countries that have expressed any
willingness to take a resident from Camp Liberty? They say they
will take them?
Ambassador Fried. Yes.
Mr. Poe. And those countries are?
Ambassador Fried. On March 23rd, the UNHCR hosted a
conference in Geneva attended by the United States, the Iraqi
Government, a number of European and non-European governments.
Many governments expressed a willingness to consider taking
people. There were no pledges or promises or numbers, but there
were a number of governments that said yes, they were willing
to work with the U.N. and receive referrals from the UNHCR. The
United States was one of those governments but we were not the
only government. That is a start. It is not sufficient in
itself but it is a good start from which to build and it is
precisely there, Judge, that we have to throw our efforts.
Mr. Poe. It seems to me the listing of the MEK as a foreign
terrorist organization is one factor that makes countries
hesitant to take these residents even though some of the
European countries have delisted the MEK. I think that if there
was delisting that you would have some more, much more
cooperation with third-party countries in taking these
individuals back.
You mentioned in your testimony--my last comment. You
mentioned in your testimony about the living conditions. As we
talked about last time, some, Rudy Giuliani, for example,
mentioned that Camp Liberty was a concentration camp in
conditions. And we are moving this process further down the
road, it always takes longer than anyone expects, to get the
residents from Camp Ashraf, Camp Liberty and then to somewhere
else in the world.
What kind of deadline is the Iraqi Government giving the
whole process and how will that affect the living conditions of
the people in Camp Liberty?
Ambassador Fried. The Iraqi Government has suggested that
as long as the process is moving forward. That is, convoys
moving from Ashraf to Camp Hurriya, and then the UNHCR process
moving people and hopefully out of Camp Hurriya, and I should
add that a few have left. As long as that process is going
forward there has been much less talk of a deadline. This is a
good thing.
In the meantime, there are legitimate issues of living
conditions that need to be addressed, water, sewage, power,
that sort of thing, facilities for the disabled. And there does
need to be progress made because as long as the residents are
there for how ever long they are there living conditions need
to be good and they need to be stable.
Mr. Poe. Mr. Chairman, I would like unanimous consent to
introduce into the record two documents, testimony by Colonel
Wesley Martin, before the House of Commons in Canada on May
15th, 2012, a second document by him regarding some issues of
the MEK and some questions and facts regarding that issue. I
would like unanimous consent to put this in the record.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Poe. I yield back.
Mr. Rohrabacher. We have been joined by Brad Sherman, a
colleague from California. Mr. Sherman, you may take as much
time as you so find appropriate.
Mr. Sherman. First, I want to thank the chairman for
letting me participate. I am not a member of this subcommittee.
It may have already been introduced into the record, but if
not, I would like unanimous consent to introduce in this record
a letter to Secretary Clinton signed by David Phillips, the
Brigadier General, Wesley Martin, the retired Colonel, and Leo
McCloskey, the Lieutenant Colonel, retired, all in reference to
this matter and dated April 19th.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Without objection, so ordered.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Rohrabacher. And let me remind my colleague that this
hearing will be over after the testimony and then the questions
and answers. We will have a second round. Mr. Carnahan should
have a chance too, hopefully, to ask his questions. After these
questions and immediately after this hearing is adjourned,
General David Phillips, who you just quoted in their letter,
will be briefing us in this spot for those who would be
interested.
And you may proceed.
Mr. Sherman. A hearing followed by a briefing, and who says
Congress isn't fun?
We had on May 8th, the U.S. Court of Appeals dealing with
the writ of mandamus on the MEK. First of all, Ambassador, are
you aware of any other circumstance where a district court has
issued a writ of mandamus on an issue of foreign policy
directed at the State Department? Is this as extraordinary as
an action as the courts have ever taken on a foreign policy
matter?
Ambassador Fried. My experience on those sort of legal
proceedings is limited. I do gather that it is somewhat
unusual.
Mr. Sherman. Somewhere between highly unusual and utterly
unprecedented would be the way I would characterize it. Now
during that proceeding, the lawyer for the State Department
said the MEK did not permit an inspection. They did not permit
a door-to-door inspection looking for caches of weapons, or to
actually disarm door-to-door. Since then a letter has been
signed by the soldiers actually involved in that searching
effort, the Brigadier General, the Colonel and the Lieutenant
Colonel, all basically saying that the State Department lawyer
lied to the court.
Has the State Department taken action to make sure that the
court has been advised that this lawyer that had no direct
knowledge of what actually happened on the ground at Camp
Ashraf said some statements to the court that might mislead the
court as to the actual events?
Ambassador Fried. Sir, this is a matter under active
litigation and so I have to be very careful. I said earlier in
response to a similar question that it is my understanding that
the Department of Justice has sent a letter to the court
answering some of the questions. I believe that letter has been
filed and is available, but because it is active litigation I
have to restrain myself and not go any further.
Mr. Sherman. Do you disagree with the three officers
involved that, in fact, a proper door-to-door search for
weapons was, in fact, conducted at Camp Ashraf?
Ambassador Fried. Here to, I believe that the letter from
the Department of Justice addresses these issues, and because--
sir, I am in an awkward position. This is active litigation. It
is taking place in Federal court. And so my mandate is to try
to get people safely out of Camp Ashraf over to Camp Hurriya
and out of Iraq. That is my job, and I hope that the Department
of Justice letter can clear all that up.
Mr. Sherman. So your ultimate goal is to get them out of
Iraq. Is that relocation facilitated by the designation of the
MEKs foreign terrorist organization, or is it impeded by that
designation?
Ambassador Fried. The Secretary of State's decision on the
designation will be made on the basis of the facts and the law,
not on even my----
Mr. Sherman. I didn't ask you what she is going to do or
what she should do. I just asked whether the current situation
impedes you and your stated goal. I mean there may be other
reasons why that designation is maintained, but as long as it
is maintained does it impede you in achieving your goal?
Ambassador Fried. I have to work with the designation as
long as it exists.
Mr. Sherman. We know that.
Ambassador Fried. And I will do my best to work with what I
have got. That decision will be made apart from my office.
Secretary Clinton did say on February 29th that MEK cooperation
in the closure of Camp Ashraf will be a key factor in any
decision, and it is also my understanding that the State
Department is prepared to make that decision within 60 days of
the closure of Camp Ashraf.
Mr. Sherman. Is there anything in the statute that says you
have to cooperate in moving into what could very well be an
Iraqi Government plan for a death camp, in order not to be
designated a terrorist organization? I have read the statute,
and there are lots of organizations around the world that are
not cooperating in their relocation. And that is not a factor,
under the statute at least, in designating an organization for
a terrorist organization.
My wife wants me to move or wants to move. I don't want to
move. I am not willing to move. Have you designated me yet?
Ambassador Fried. I wouldn't think of interfering in your
wife's designation in any way.
Mr. Sherman. But the point I am making is, is there any
legal basis to, in effect, require relocation in order to not
be designated or continue to be designated a terrorist
organization?
Ambassador Fried. Here to, the question you raised is very
close to the issues that are now being litigated. So I have to
stand back, not actually my nature to do so, but it is required
of me that I stand back because this is active litigation.
Mr. Sherman. Well, it is active litigation as to which the
court was misled by the State Department's attorney. It is
active litigation as to which the State Department appears to
be using designation as a terrorist organization in order to
push for policy changes that have nothing to do with whether
one is a terrorist organization or not.
And you won't admit it on the record, but you certainly
haven't argued against my belief that the fact that the MEK is
designated impairs your efforts to get people relocated outside
of Iraq. And if you have an argument against that conclusion I
will give you a chance to--and I don't see you grabbing the
microphone so I will go on unless you do want to grab the
microphone.
Ambassador Fried. I won't argue against that assertion, but
I will say that the efforts of all those who want to see the
residents of Ashraf safe and secure and out of Iraq, that
effort will be enhanced and advanced if we work together to
help the process move along as it has moved along since
December. The last convoys need to leave Camp Ashraf for Camp
Hurriya. Camp Ashraf should be closed. The international
community needs to step up and do its part to help people get
out. And since I think it is important that all those who agree
that should be the objective ought to be working together to
achieve that objective, and that it is my hope that we can work
together in that direction.
Mr. Sherman. The chairman has been very generous. And I
will just conclude by saying it is by no means clear that this
relocation is not an Iraqi Government first step toward mass
executions. But in any case what is clear is that many of the
countries in the world to which people may be relocated are
democracies. And let me tell you, it would be extremely
difficult for the immigration minister of any democracy to
admit any person from this camp while the organization is
designated by the great United States as a foreign terrorist
organization. So if you are able to relocate anybody while that
designation remains in place, you are doing the near
impossible. But I am not sure you can do the near impossible
thousands of times, and we have thousands of people to
relocate.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this indulgence.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes, Mr. Sherman. We have with us
Congressman Rivera, a member of this subcommittee, and he is
recognized for what time he may choose to consume.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ambassador, thank you
very much for being here today. I am wondering if you could
apprise the committee on two issues. One is inspections,
particularly State Department inspections, the status or
history or evolution of State Department inspections. And
second, this issue of the belongings, the personal belongings
of those in Camp Ashraf as well as these reports of
confiscations and lootings and so forth. So let us start off
with the inspections.
Ambassador Fried. As I have said earlier before you came
in, sir, that because there is active litigation going on about
Camp Ashraf and about some of these issues, I have to be
extraordinarily careful. The mandate of my office is to help
move people in safety and security from Ashraf to Camp Liberty,
now called Camp Hurriya, and from Camp Hurriya out of Iraq.
The issue of Camp Ashraf and inspections and all of that
business is the subject of letters and motions. There is a long
history to that. It is partly during the many years we had
troops in Iraq it was the Department of Defense that was
responsible. The State Department during my time responsible
for this issue, has devoted its energies to working on the
priorities I mentioned. That is, the convoys from Ashraf to
Hurriya, and the living conditions at Hurriya and support of
the U.N. mission which is to help get these people out of Iraq.
So the issue of inspections is being handled in another venue.
I regret any expenditure of energy which will not advance
the process I laid out. Our priority, it seems to me, should be
to get people from Ashraf to Liberty and from Liberty out of
Iraq, and to do so as quickly as we can, safely, and with
consideration for basic, decent human standards.
Mr. Rivera. Are you saying because of this ongoing
litigation or these litigation concerns you can't even comment
or apprise the committee as to the facts just what has
happened? I imagine it is not a secret what has happened in the
past. What has gone on with inspections?
Ambassador Fried. It is because this is--I mentioned the
Department of Justice letter in the past couple of days, which
has been filed with the court, which I believe answers some of
these questions. I find it frustrating that a perfectly normal
question, which is what you have asked, is because the topic is
being litigated right now is more difficult for me to answer
than I would like. But that is the odd position we are in. And
I will say again, I regret the diversion of energy into an
issue which does not advance the cause of my office and my
department, which is helping people out of Iraq in safety and
security.
Mr. Rivera. And the letter that you recently said, is that
not a letter----
Ambassador Fried. It is a Department of Justice letter and
it is part of the court filing, but I believe it has----
Mr. Rivera. Is that on public record?
Ambassador Fried. I mentioned it because I understand it
has been filed with the court and therefore is the public
record, yes.
Mr. Rivera. All right. Do you want to apprise the committee
of the contents of that letter?
Ambassador Fried. Because it is a Department of Justice
letter let me just refer it is available. I have to be very
careful where matters of open litigation and the court are
concerned.
Mr. Rivera. Tell me about the belongings issue.
Ambassador Fried. The issue of cargo property and moveable
property has been one of the most contentious issues throughout
the process of moving from Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty. The
residents of Camp Ashraf have taken to Liberty enormous
quantities of personal effects, computers, some cars,
furniture. They are online. They are communicating by email. So
a lot of their personal property has been moved.
It is also true that it is the intent, we understand that
it is the intent of the residents of Camp Ashraf to sell much
of their moveable property. There are a large, large number of
cars. It is their intention to sell it. I believe that an Iraqi
businessman has already been to Ashraf and looked over some of
this property. It continues to be an issue of some debate and
disagreement between the residents of Ashraf and the Iraqi
authorities. That is, what can be transported, what is personal
property? Are street lamps personal property? What about
vehicles? What about generators? These things come up
frequently. The U.N., with our support, has done its best to
mediate arrangements for the transport, if necessary, property.
They have made some progress. In other areas more progress
needs to be made.
But you are absolutely right that this is one of the issues
that is part of the tough negotiations with each and every
convoy. Progress has been made but there is more to do
including on this issue.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Rohrabacher. We have joining us today another member,
and not a member of the subcommittee but a respected member of
the House. And I would yield to Ms. Sheila Jackson Lee, 5
minutes.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, let me thank you for your
kindness, and certainly the kindness of the ranking member for
allowing me to proceed today. Thank you. Let me also thank you
for your good works on this issue. It certainly has been a very
long journey, and I think America can take heart that there are
sometimes a number of unique issues that there is bipartisan
unity and concern that has been expressed by this committee.
To Ambassador Fried, let me thank you for your service. I
think we have not been on the phone, but we have been on the
phone in the past. And I think you can understand. I have heard
a little bit of members' questioning and don't want to
attribute frustration to their questioning, but I think you can
assume that there is a great deal of frustration as to where we
are.
And so I would like to start, first of all, with however we
may have determined it, whether we got it by word of mouth,
whether or not there are other means, can we establish as the
U.S. Government that the residents of Camp Ashraf and those who
have been relocated are disarmed or without arms?
Ambassador Fried. As I said, I have got to be
extraordinarily careful and cautious because some of these
issues are matters under litigation. It is true as a matter of
the historical record that during the period when the United
States had troops in Iraq we judged that the camp was largely
disarmed with no heavy equipment. That took place some years
ago. This issue I have to say came up suddenly. Three weeks ago
it was not on my list of things to worry about.
On my list of things to worry about are the completion of
the convoys from Ashraf to Liberty in safety so that Ashraf can
be closed, and very much on the mind of the U.S. Embassy in
Iraq and the U.N. and the State Department generally is the
issue of finding ways for the people at Camp Liberty to leave
Iraq in safety and security. And that is where we want to put
the bulk of our efforts. We have come this far, we are not
there yet. We need to finish this process and that is going to
take a lot of work. Anything that drives us backwards I am
against. Anything that moves us forward I am for.
Ms. Jackson Lee. I can totally agree with that. So let me
do this without putting you in the crosshairs. I think it is
very important to clear up the representation that has now
taken to the airwaves and to places far beyond this room.
Because the good work that you are trying to do, the good work
that members have tried to encourage, some having visited the
region, should not be now either tainted or undermined by the
cybersphere, meaning something has gone into massive airwaves,
massive hearing and massive understanding, and it makes it very
difficult.
And so let me proceed in my questioning. So I am making an
official request on the record to have that clarified. If you
are unable to clarify it today, in whatever methods have to be
utilized we need to have that clarified. And I say that because
we do know remaining at Camp Ashraf are families, I believe
there are children. But just by the nature of humanity I know
there are people that are frail who are not as well as others,
and need to have an orderly departure from the present status.
So if I missed it I apologize to my colleagues, do you have
an inventory of individuals who are left in terms of age,
health conditions, children, new births, et cetera? Do we have
any of that?
Ambassador Fried. We do have an approximate profile of the
residents. There are few, if any children, and I have heard of
no births in many years, if ever. We do have a profile. There
are some who are disabled and require special care, and that
has been one legitimate concern that they be given the support
they need. We are learning more about the people at Camp
Hurriya as the interviews proceed.
As I said earlier, and at the end of March at a conference
in Geneva I announced that the United States would be receiving
referrals from the UNHCR and looking at them on an individual
basis. We need to step up and do our part to show that we are
part of the solution in all ways, not just moving people from
Camp Ashraf to Camp Hurriya, but out, and we have to show
leadership. And I will be frank, the support of the Congress in
this is critical, and I thank you for it, I really do, and I
thank the chairman for his support.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, could I conclude? I see you
moving on that button. Can I conclude with just one round-up if
I can get it, round it up?
Again, I may have missed the answer, but I believe we want
to do right. It looks like we have been talking about safety
and security for Camp Ashraf for a very long time. I served on
this committee. I have been serving for awhile. And certainly
not the time frame of my chairman, but had the privilege of
having been able to serve, but I also serve on Homeland
Security. So this has been in the eye of the storm for a very
long time.
Could you give us today, a date when you will complete or
there will be a completion of those, at least out of Camp
Ashraf into Camp Hurriya, and then the process of relocating?
What can we look forward to?
And I will end by this last point. I see a light at the end
of the tunnel, potentially. I know that you are very sensitive.
I am a lawyer to an ongoing case. But let me just publicly say,
I want every manner of vetting to occur. We have Iran and the
oppression of Iran in our eye, the world has it in their eye.
These individuals are Iranians. However, the MEK now remains as
maybe the existing opposition and resistance, but I don't know
whether anyone can document today, on this day, that they are
terrorists. Whatever process we can move along, we would be far
better off if we are assuredly having vetted them and move them
off the terrorist list. This will aid in any manner of things
that I think we are all trying to do. So I will just make that
point.
You look hesitant to comment, but let me just try to get a
definitive time frame that you think the removal of these
individuals or the relocating of these individuals can occur.
Ambassador Fried. I can't give you a precise time frame
because the movement of convoys is beyond our control. But let
me try to be responsive to your question as best I can. Convoys
have been about 400 persons, a little less than 400 persons per
convoy. We have had five convoys, almost 2,000 people. The
convoys started in February. So that is 4 months, five convoys.
We don't know, assuming there are between 3,200 and 3,400
people at Camp Ashraf that means three-plus convoys. The Camp
Ashraf leaders suggested once the convoys could be a little
bigger to get out faster. They made that suggestion at one
point. Let us say three more convoys. How fast they move depend
on a lot of factors beyond our control. But if you do the math,
right, five convoys, 4 months, three convoys remaining, at that
point your math is as good as mine. At least this is knowable.
We can have an educated way to frame up the timing.
Much less knowable is the issue of resettlement, and it is
important that this process begin. The people at Camp Liberty,
at Camp Hurriya ought to see that there is way out, they are
out of Camp Hurriya in safety and security. There have been a
few that have left, but these are individuals, and we need to
see that process moving ahead. That is where my office, that is
where the Department of State is putting its efforts working
with the U.N., the UNHCR and other interested governments. That
will increasingly be and should be our priority.
You said it well, ma'am, on light at the end of the tunnel,
an old cliche but it works for this. But we are not going to
get there on autopilot. It is going to take at least as much
work to have a good outcome as we have put into it so far. That
work we are prepared to do, and it is my hope that everyone
will look forward and find ways to move this ahead while we
can.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, I cannot thank you enough
for your kindness, and I will just say to you as I inquire of
this committee, whatever we can do, those of us who you have
been courteous enough to extend time to, to join in the
delisting of the MEK. I think that will go a long way for the
resettlement of those who are now in Camp Ashraf.
I have just heard Ambassador Fried, who I take at his word,
and I am going to compliment the administration for still
staying in the fight in moving these individuals along. But if
there is any hindrance by Iraq that stops a convoy from moving
faster than under 4 months, let us find out what that is. And
if there is any hindrance in now moving to the next step of
delisting the MEK for many reasons, I hope that we can work
together in a bipartisan way to provide some assistance from
the Congress to move this along and move it along now.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much----
Ms. Jackson Lee. I yield back.
Mr. Rohrabacher [continuing]. Ms. Jackson Lee, and we are
grateful for your involvement in this issue.
A couple of notes from the chairman, that is me. Well, how
about this, Mr. Ambassador. You were at the UNHCR meeting in
Geneva in March, and it was a gathering of countries that are
usually receptive to refugees. In your testimony, you hint at
bringing some MEK members to the United States as well as a
show of leadership by doing that. That was what you mentioned,
I believe you said show of leadership, which is accurate. I
believe you raised this point in Geneva, and in regard to those
MEK members, who have relatives in the United States, under the
humanitarian parole process.
What reaction did you receive in Geneva to this reaching
out on the part of the United States?
Ambassador Fried. I believe there was a good reaction. That
is, the UNHCR appreciated the fact that the United States was
ready to stand up and declare our willingness to do our part.
Other governments expressed their willingness to at least
consider taking in people. Now a year ago, I am told, there was
much less willingness. So I think a lot of governments have
looked at this, looked at it again and decided that we need to
move forward. I still think that a U.S. leadership will be
needed. The Administraton is preparing to look at UNHCR
referrals, I should say on an interagency basis, not just State
Department but Department of Justice, FBI, Homeland Security.
We are looking at this----
Mr. Rohrabacher. What would you say the Congress can do to
help facilitate this besides, of course, not asking you pointed
questions?
Ambassador Fried. I welcome pointed questions in service of
a good cause, believe me.
Mr. Rohrabacher. It is the pointed answers we don't get
back that we are worried about, but that is okay.
Ambassador Fried. Far be it from me to suggest what
Congress should do, but a general support for this aspect of
the whole process. That is, if the United States is going to
review referrals from the UNHCR consistent with applicable U.S.
law, which is our intention, I think any sign of bipartisan
support from the Congress for this course of action would be
enormously encouraging not just for us. It is not that we need
the thanks, it is that other governments will look at us, and
if they see that, even in an election year, the executive
branch and the Congress on a bipartisan basis are determined to
do the right thing and move forward, that I am convinced will
be a powerful and welcome signal. It will help break this free
and allow us to move forward.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Obviously I agree with that assessment.
Whenever the United States Congress and the administration,
Republican, Democrat, work together we are a powerful force in
the world. Let me just say, obviously the point that Ms.
Jackson Lee just made as well as has been made by the other
members of the committee that you are not really able to fully
focus on for whatever reasons, I understand, that taking them
off the terrorist list we all believe would facilitate this
solution that we are talking about and would also have an
incredible impact overseas.
Let me just say in passing on this that issue has been
discussed. We realize just from your answers there is
limitations about what you can say. But my belief is is that,
and I am not condemning you for this, I am saying that you are
a good soldier. You are a troubleshooter that comes in and
tries to help our country get out of messes that somebody else
created. I understand that. But I think that our State
Department is being overly sensitive to the feelings of
murderous regimes that are now in power in Iraq and Iran.
And I say murderous regimes because I was kicked out of
Iran, along with Mike Hodel, after bringing up the Camp Ashraf
murders to President Maliki who just didn't want to hear about
that. I think that ignoring the slaughter of innocent people is
not going to make things better when you are dealing with
regimes like Iraq and Iran. I understand they are still in
power there, and thus we have other thousands of people to be
concerned about. The thousands of people at Camp Ashraf--if we
hurt their feelings we ought to go and slaughter those people
too. So I understand you are trying to save lives. But I think
that people who are engaged in such activity don't really
respect it when you are overly sensitive to their feelings.
It seems to me that what we are talking about, Ms. Lee, is
that there has been a dishonorable deal made somewhere along
the line in our, not this administration, not, who knows, last
administration, who knows when, but there has been a
dishonorable deal somewhere along the line with the mullah
regime in Iran that we will not support opponents of the
regime. And I think that was very indicative or very
demonstrable, when the Arab Spring demonstrations in Tehran
were taking place our Government was noticeably silent in
support for those demonstrators in the streets of Tehran
against the mullah dictatorship. And I think that that same
kind of, that that indicates that there was some sort of
understanding reached with the mullahs. And of course now, part
of that understanding could well be that we will not be
supporting the MEK in any way which the mullahs look as very
symbolic to people who are resisting their dictatorship.
If, indeed, such a deal has been struck, which people are
trying to enforce now while saving the lives of these MEK
people, it was a dishonorable deal to begin with. And I know
how difficult it would be then at this point to try to save the
lives of these people and still keep that deal if the mullahs
look at the MEK as they do as opponents to the regime. And what
is the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?
Well, there is a difference between a freedom fighter and a
terrorist. Freedom fighters want to institute freedom and
democracy and fight soldiers, and terrorists kill innocent
people in order to terrorize populations into submission.
A little bit about, before we rang up here, we are talking
about, the fly in the ointment here from what I am
understanding from your testimony, is that the people of Camp
Ashraf who are still there said they don't want to leave unless
there is an inspection to verify that there aren't any weapons
there. Now why in the world would someone like that in that
situation make that demand? Well, I think that is totally
rational. And maybe you can tell me where I am wrong, but we
have a situation where--well, first of all, if whence they
leave they have to realize who then would verify that there
aren't any weapons. It would have to be the Iraqis or the
Iranians who would be verifying that which, of course, would be
unacceptable. I mean you can't believe whatever they would tell
you. They may well plant weapons.
The other thing is that the residents of Camp Ashraf
remember full well when our Government had made an agreement to
protect them. And they remember full well that our troops were
asked to retire and leave the area just prior to a genocidal
attack of Iraqi troops in which you had innocent people
slaughtered. Over 30, 35 people were murdered, 300 were
wounded. And our troops withdrew right before that attack. Now
that would kind of eat at peoples' ability to maybe just trust
us that we are going to do the right thing, and then maybe that
is the reason you want to make sure that this is verified while
they still have a chance to verify it.
And by the way, this subcommittee has been denied
permission to investigate that incident. We have been denied
the ability--this is the Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee who has been denied the right to investigate this
slaughter of people who under the protection of the United
States Government. And we have been denied that as well as a
number of other aspects of the MEK listing as a terrorist
organization.
So I am sure none of these were decisions that you made
years ago, but now they have thrown you into the position of
having to come here and face this questioning and answer with
the type of answers that you have given us today. I wish you
luck. I wish you success. I hope that we get these people out
of there and we get them over to Camp Liberty and then we get
them to countries around the world that will accept them. And
with everything I just said I know what a tough job you have
got, and we are going to work with you, but we are still going
to put this administration and our Government on the spot when
they make decisions like the one we are talking about that lead
us to this situation.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Rohrabacher. All right, you wanted to----
Ms. Jackson Lee. Introduce----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes, I will be happy to yield for moment.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Chairman, I know from your heart you
are looking forward to working with the administration in
trying to get something done. If I might ask unanimous consent
that may put a light on this. Obviously I am not reading a
classified document, but I think it is a document that you
read, and that is the Wall Street Journal, dated May 14th,
2012.
``Iran Exile Group Nears U.S. Rebirth. The State
Department is moving to take MEK off ban list at risk
of angering Iran.'' And if I might just briefly say as
I submit this one page into the record and as unanimous
consent, ``The Obama administration is moving to remove
an Iranian opposition group from the State Department's
terrorism list, say officials briefed on the talks, in
an action that could further,'' they use the word
``poison,'' ``Washington's relations with Tehran at a
time of renewed diplomatic efforts to curtail Iran's
nuclear program.''
I think the basis of it is that there is a rumor. And I
would like to ask unanimous consent to put this in the record
and hope that this will ultimately bear fruit. But it is from
the Wall Street Journal.
Mr. Rohrabacher. With no objections, so ordered.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Mr. Rohrabacher. And with that said I might note to my
colleague, she wasn't here when this was announced, that the
minute that this hearing is going to be adjourned, which should
be within 30 seconds of now, it will be adjourned, but we will
have a briefing by General David Phillips who oversaw security
at Camp Ashraf, to give us a briefing on what he knows about
this issue.
So with that, thank you. And Mr. Ambassador, thank you for
coming.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Rohrabacher. And this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:45 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[Note: Responses to the above questions were not received prior to
printing.]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
