Maryam Rajavi's controversial claim about students' demands: Rewriting history with the shadow of blood and betrayal

Maryam Rajavi's claim about students that they want the MEK comes at a time when the MEK's track record is tied to blood and collaboration with the enemy.

While student protests in recent days have once again turned Iranian universities into a center of political discontent, Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the People's Mojahedin (MEK), has attempted to hijack these movements in favor of her organization by publishing a message on her personal page; an organization whose name, for many Iranians, is associated not with freedom, but with cooperation with a foreign enemy during a time of war and bloody domestic violence.

In a message posted on social media, he wrote: “Greetings to the students who rose up in Iranian universities, from Ferdowsi University of Mashhad and Tehran University to Sharif University of Technology, Amir Kabir, Science and Technology, Khajeh Nasir, and others, who, on the second consecutive day on the occasion of the 40th day of the martyrdom of their martyred comrades in the Dey uprising, emphasized the continuation of the uprising by shouting “I swear by the blood of my comrades, we will stand until the end,” “Death to Khamenei,” “Death to the tyrant, whether he is a king or a leader,” and “No monarchy, no leadership, democracy is equality.” The attempts (appeal) of Basij mercenaries by raising deviant slogans and attacking the student fighters were met with a decisive response from the students.”

These statements come at a time when there has been no independent and reliable report of chanting in favor of the organization known as the "People's Mujahedin" in Iranian universities. On the contrary, in many protests over the years, and especially in the last two months, slogans in support of Reza Pahlavi and the slogan "Javed Shah" have been heard; a slogan that indicates a tendency on the part of the protesters to reinterpret the era before the Islamic Republic, rather than a preference for a group with a controversial history in contemporary Iranian history.

The People's Mujahedin Organization, which entered into armed confrontation with the Islamic Republic after the 1979 revolution, has been responsible for or accused of involvement in a series of armed operations and bombings in the 1960s; actions that led to the deaths of citizens and government officials and plunged the Iranian atmosphere into a cycle of violence.

But the most controversial chapter of this organization's activity was its open collaboration with Saddam Hussein's regime during the Iran-Iraq War, a war that left hundreds of thousands of Iranians dead and wounded. The deployment of this organization's forces in Iraq and their participation in operations such as "Eternal Illumination" in 1988 (which was carried out from Iraqi soil against Iran) was seen by many Iranians as crossing the line of political opposition and entering into collaboration with the aggressor enemy.

In the collective memory of a large segment of Iranian society, this action was not a “political strategy” but rather standing by the army that was raining missiles on Iranian cities. It is this history that has led the organization’s current claim to represent the Iranian people to be met with skepticism and even anger.

The protest developments of recent months (from nationwide protests to student rallies) have been largely rooted in domestic economic, social, and political demands. The main body of these protests is made up of the younger generation, students, and disaffected segments, whose slogans reflect a diverse range of demands.

However, the attempts by some groups abroad to attribute these movements to themselves are questionable. Critics say the MEK is trying to present itself as an alternative while it has neither a clear social base at home nor a track record that has been able to garner public trust.

Critics also point to the organization's internal structure, which has been repeatedly described by defected members as a closed structure based on lifelong leadership, a structure that is inconsistent with the slogans of "democracy" and "equality."

In recent days, Iranian universities have been the scene of a conflict of narratives; on the one hand, the government is trying to control the atmosphere through security pressure, and on the other, various political movements abroad are each trying to register the protests in their own name.

But the fundamental question is: Do the people who pay the price of protest with prison, deportation, bullets, and even the gallows need a political guardian or owner? Or, as has been heard in many rallies, are they themselves choosing the path and symbols they desire?

The historical record of the MEK (especially during the Iran-Iraq War) continues to cast a heavy shadow over the group’s current claims. For a generation seeking freedom and a different future, it is essential to be aware of this history, lest, in the midst of crisis and public anger, groups that once stood by the aggressor enemy once again seek legitimacy with deceptive slogans.

In an environment where Iran is engaged in one of the most sensitive periods in its contemporary history, society's awareness of the past of political actors is part of the same awakening that can prevent the repetition of historical mistakes.