U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

74–237PDF 2012

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/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

DANA ROHRABACHER, California, Chairman 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

RON PAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

KAREN BASS, California 

(III)

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

(1)

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 

2

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:]

3


74237b-1.eps
4


74237b-2.eps
5

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 

6

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. 

7

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 

8

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. 

9

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:]

10


74237a-1.eps
11


74237a-2.eps
12


74237a-3.eps
13


74237a-4.eps
14


74237a-5.eps
15

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 

16

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. 

17

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. 

18

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:]

19


74237c-1.eps
20


74237c-2.eps
21


74237c-3.eps
22


74237c-4.eps
23


74237c-5.eps
24


74237c-6.eps
25


74237c-7.eps
26

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:]

27


74237d-1.eps
28


74237d-2.eps
29

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-todoor 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? 

30

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 

31

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 

32

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. 

33

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. 

34

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, assumVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:57 Aug 29, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\OI\051612\74237 HFA PsN: SHIRL
35

ing 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? 

36

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 thouVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:57 Aug 29, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\OI\051612\74237 HFA PsN: SHIRL
37

sands 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. 

38

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:]

39


74237e-1.eps
40


74237e-2.eps
41


74237e-3.eps
42


74237e-4.eps
43

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.] 

(45)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

46

f


74237n.eps
47

f


74237m.eps
48

[NOTE: Responses to the above questions were not received prior to printing.]

Æ


74237f.eps