AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH
"AN INSIDER'S VIEW: DEMOCRATIC POLITICS
AT WORK IN IRAQ"
A FOREIGN POLICY BRIEFING FROM
IRAQI DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER
AHMAD CHALABI
Wednesday, November 9, 2005
2:30 - 3:45 p.m.
Wohlstetter Conference Center, Twelfth Floor
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
[TRANSCRIPT PREPARED FROM A TAPE RECORDING.]
MR. DEMUTH: Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. I'm Chris DeMuth, President of AEI.
It is an honor to welcome Ahmad Chalabi, the Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Iraq to the American Enterprise Institute.
In the 1990s and early 2000s, Ahmad Chalabi did more than any other man to advertise to any one who would listen the horrors of the Saddam Hussein regime, its clear and present dangers to those beyond Iraq's borders and the urgent necessity of removing Saddam from power.
At the same time, he was again, to anyone paying attention, the very personification of the engaged political liberal and democratic reformer, a walking refutation of the many powerful and well-connected people who were so certain that the Arab-Muslim world was unsuited to freedom.
In the 2.5 years since his last appearance at AEI, Minister Chalabi has been practicing what he had taught and promised, building a new pluralist political order in Iraq and brilliantly resolving many acute problems of politics and government administration.
All in the face of difficulties that those of us on the outside can scarcely imagine, and in the face of incessant horrific violence, from domestic and foreign powers, for whom freedom and self-government among Arabs would be intolerable.
During this period and before, he has also been defamed, undermined and attacked by agencies of the U.S. government itself.
A year ago any conversation with any Member of Congress with access to intelligence briefings was certain to include a Manchurian candidate moment--a false accusation against Ahmad Chalabi popping up eerily out of context in word for word mechanical phrasing.
History will record that that shameful campaign did tremendous damage to American and Iraqi interests, treasure and lives. But it did not succeed in destroying him.
That it did not succeed is itself testament to the power of democracy and self-government, that Ahmad Chalabi permits himself to exhibit no sign of bitterness, but remains comprehensively focused on steps to improve the future prospects and well-being of his new nation is evidence of statesmanship of the highest order.
As Iraq confronts one staggering challenge after another, one of the many good reasons for hope is the continuing presence of Ahmad Chalabi as one of her leading founding fathers.
Please give a warm welcome to this very great and very brave Iraqi patriot, liberal and liberator, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank Chris DeMuth for his kind words. This is the eighth time that I'm here at AEI. And before many people recognized the need of the Iraqi people for change of government, AEI did. And they provided for us a forum from which to launch our political campaign. And I'm glad to be back now as a representative of the government of Iraq.
Iraq, as you well know, is a country of 27 million people. It is in the throws of a campaign of violence that is unprecedented in the Middle East. It has become the focus of all the enemies of freedom and democracy. And independence in our region has become the focus of the enemies of progress, of taking the will of the people and building a government on the basis of the will of the people.
It is also a country that has emerged from the dark ages of Saddam. Three-and-a-half decades of a totalitarian regime which systematically destroyed the fabric of Iraqi society. It atomized (ph) the society into individuals. It deliberately destroyed institutions of the society, and it squandered untold treasure and driven the country back several decades.
Iraq now is a country of people who have been deprived of being associated with the march of progress in the world for the past three-and-a-half decades. The people of Iraq are shell-shocked. But they have emerged.
They are intelligent. They have a huge reservoir behind them of determination, of history, of culture. They never forget that they are the cradle of civilization in the truest sense of the word. And they are proud of their heritage throughout.
I came to Washington at the invitation of the United States government with a delegation of my colleagues who are involved in the political process in Iraq. Almost all of them stayed in Iraq during Saddam's period. They fought Saddam in Iraq. And I will introduce them to you. I will start with Said Jalil Osomydye (ph) who is candidate for the parliament. And he is a leader who has resisted Saddam.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Masamoud Brohad (ph) who is a candidate for the assembly.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: The conscience of the de-Baathificaiton Commission, Ali Fasco Alimi (ph), who keeps it going.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Jarad al-Balani (ph), a member of the Assembly now, and a candidate for [inaudible]. Sheif Admad Jahahashi (ph), candidate for the Assembly and the leader from South of Baghdad.
Dr. Ilal Naszi (ph), who is a historian and the chronicler of Iraqi society. The leader of the forces in the marshes, Ahwad Mohammed Alwi Abdul Karim Mahoud (ph), who fought Saddam from Iraq for over 18 years in the marshes with little help or no help from anybody. And he demonstrated by his resilience and perseverance and bravery that the spirit of the Iraqi people will not fail them in their hour of need.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Dr. Paro Abdullah (ph), member of the Assembly, leader of the Turkeman [inaudible] Party and candidate for the parliament. He is also a leader in Iraq who has suffered and who has fought Saddam and mobilized his community, the Turkemans, into fighting Saddam.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Mohammed Halal Balasa Hassein (ph), from a princely family in Wasart (ph) in Iraq. His grandfather was the [inaudible] sheik of the Mahantan (ph) district, a friend of my father. We have known their family for over a 100 years. He's also a member of the assembly and a candidate.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: And Nabil Moussoui (ph). Where is Nabil?
MR. : Nabil is here.
MR. CHALABI: He's in the back. He's my associate and friend and comrade in fighting Saddam in valiancy for many decades. He's now a member of the Assembly.
And Tefal Khombard (ph), a face now known to you. He's now the deputy military attache and the spokesman for Iraq.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: All of these people--we would have brought many more people, but we need them over there for the campaign.
But I wanted to introduce them to you to show you that Iraqi democracy has matured, and we are moving a step forward beyond identity politics.
This year, but the last elections, people voted on the basis of their identity. It was the only way to avoid a manufactured majority by mobilizing the people through leadership they trust and understand. And that was the leadership of the merger of [inaudible] al-Sistani (ph), who is a person with political ambition, recognized as such by the people in Iraq. And who was able to help put together a list of candidates which obtained a majority in the elections and was instrumental in drafting the constitution.
Now we have a constitution. And the merger has no interest in supporting any party, any list or any individual in the forthcoming elections. And he has urged people to vote their conscience. Because now we have a constitution. And we have seen fit to form the list of INC (ph) to separate ourselves from parties that believe in an Islamic state and Islamic ideology and move forward to a list which will give Iraqis who are Muslims, who are respectful of the major (ph) area (ph), but not believers in Islamic idealogy for governance, a voice to represent them in the Assembly.
This is important. It's an important development. And it was done in the spirit of political rivalry, political competition, but in the spirit of friendship and the lack of acrimony. And this is also important.
Iraq now is at the threshold of a new era. We have to be very clear. We are not out of the storm. We're not out of the danger zone. And what we do matters for the outcome. What we do will have an impact on peace in Iraq, on the continuation of the democratic process, on the relationship with the United States and on the quality of life of the people of Iraq and in the Middle East in general, all of the countries of the Middle East.
Iraq is recognized as a very important state. Although new in its current borders, but it is the country which saw the first urban centers in the world. It was the country that invented the greatest technological revolution in history, which is agriculture.
But now it is a country where [inaudible] of the reverse, where agriculture is in decline and everything else was destroyed by the scourge that hit our society, and that is the Baath Party and Saddam Hussein.
We move forward now. What are the issues that are facing Iraq? There is the issue of security. The issue of security is very complex in Iraq. Security in Iraq is by no means equivalent to fire power and the use of force. Security in Iraq is not achievable by the use of force alone.
Security in Iraq is achievable primarily by persuading the major components of the population that they have a stake in the state of Iraq.
It is important to build a strong security force, a strong army that is outside the control and influence of party militias and that is a force for national unity.
But the use of this force is also important. It must not be seen as an instrument of one community to coerce other communities as was the case in Saddam's time.
The memories of Saddam are very people's imaginations now. People don't want a rival of that. And at the same time, communities who are associated with Saddam do not want to be oppressed. And they must not be oppressed by others who have the upper hand.
The issue of security also impacts on jobs, on economic development, on unemployment. And we have to develop our economy and our job market and our investments in such a way as to provide alternatives for the young people of Iraq to get on with their lives in a meaningful way.
Over 60 percent of the people of Iraq are under 20 years old. And they require major investment in housing, in education, in entertainment and in personal development.
In short, they require a major improvement in their quality of life. And that is what we want to focus on. And that also impacts security.
Security in Iraq also now requires the envelope provided by the multi-national force. No responsible leaders in Iraq call for the immediate withdrawal of multi-national forces or American forces from Iraq.
Everyone recognizes the need to make this commensurate with the development of the Iraqi armed forces at which stage the multi-national force can reduce its presence in the cities and confine itself to its bases and provide strategic protection for the country.
We must not forget that Iraq is a country now which has virtually no armed forces surrounded by six countries, which between them have three million people under arms, more than 10,000 main battle tanks, more than 15,000 heavy artillery pieces, and more than 2,000 combat aircraft.
We don't have anything heavier in our army now than a medium sized machine gun, medium caliber machine gun. Until we develop something significant, we will need this important security envelope.
The Iraqi people understood liberation, welcomed liberation, but all of them rejected occupation. From this forum and in articles in major American papers, many Iraqi leaders called for the continuation of sovereignty of Iraqis over Iraq after the fall of Saddam. Unfortunately, this was not to be. Resolution 1483, which mandated occupation.
But that is over now. We have theoretically sovereignty under a United Nation's resolution 1546, but we must make that sovereignty actually real. We must develop it and improve it.
Iraq sits on, I believe, the greatest oil reserve in the world. It's not recognized as such because oil companies have left exploration in Iraq since 1960 in a major way. And due to communist and socialist policies, we passed law number 80 of 1960, whereby we alienated the major oil companies. And they went to develop oil elsewhere in the Gulf.
Iraq now has the potential to increase its oil production immediately and quickly. We have the means now to do it in a fast way and progressively come up to three million barrels a day of production.
We need some technical assistance. And we need some security assistance. And we've had discussions about this today with U.S. State Department and the Secretary of State. And they are very sympathetic and supportive.
And we will move forward with that.
Now Iraq also requires oil revenue for its own development and for the development of its security forces. We are short of what is required for the security budget of Iraq. We are short at least $4 billion, and we have to look for ways to make, achieve the results with the limited resources we have or find other resources for the security.
Iraq also is in need of a major new initiative to deal with subsidies that are the hallmark of the Iraqi economy. Fifth percent or more of Iraq's state budget now is devoted to subsidizing food and subsidizing petroleum products.
We pay every month $500 million to Turkey and Kuwait and Turkmemistan to import gasoline and diesel. We import gasoline at 55 cents a liter and sell it at 1.5 cents a liter.
We produce at the best of times 11 million liters a day of gasoline from our refineries. More like it now less than eight. And we need 22 million liters of gasoline a day.
We wasted 2.5 years without any major investment to refineries. We have now moved forward and we have approved in the cabinet a draft law which we are presenting to the assembly for approval, which permits private sector operations in downstream oil products. This is an important departure. And I think international oil companies will come to Iraq, and they will build refineries and they will have gas stations in the country.
We have also introduced price reforms not because the IMF insisted, although that was an important reason, but because we need them. We've raised the price of premium gasoline in Iraq by five times what it was. And I think the price of gasoline all together will be about 12 to 13 times what it has been in the past, so that we will sell gasoline at 17 cents.
This is important also because that gives us the ability to save on oil product prices and to distinguish those people who deserve assistance, the poor people in the country, from those who get a free bonus of $30.00 every time they fill their gas tanks. The poor people don't have cars.
The main beneficiaries of the price, of the cheap price of petroleum products are the people who are affluent, who have cars, and the black marketeers and the smugglers who are really the main beneficiaries.
This has been instituted. It was a brave decision that the government took. And it is recognized as such by the international community and by the United States government.
In terms of food, for the first time Iraqis are going to get a cash payment in lieu of the food rations that were denied to them because of the policies of the previous government in 2005. We will distribute $400 million to Iraqi families with the ration card system. It's the first time in the history of Iraq where people actually get money from oil revenues. And that brings me to the major idea that is encapsulated in the constitution, Article 109 that oil and gas belongs to the people of Iraq, all of the people of Iraq in all of the provinces, period.
This statement will enable the new parliament, if it chooses, to make legislation for methods of distributing oil wealth directly to the people. This is a revolutionary idea in the Middle East with oil-producing countries. Because rather than the government owning the oil and giving handouts to the people, it is the people who own the oil and fund the government through taxation approved by their representatives.
It changes the whole dynamic of the relationship between the people and the government. And it's an important idea. And I think that once it is done in Iraq, the people of Iraq will come together to defend their wealth and to defend their rights.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: And this also will be a message that will reverberate among all of the people in the Middle East and oil-rich countries, that you are the owner of oil. That the relationship of the previous system where governments collected oil revenues no matter what and used them as they saw fit to oppress or to give handouts or to do whatever they chose without regard to the people, this is the different now.
And this article of the constitution is a unifying article. It unifies all of the communities of Iraq. Because 80 percent of the oil wealth is in the south in the provinces of Amara (ph) and Basrah, which now are the most backward in Iraq. They are--they have the least development in the country. And there was a fear that with the new ideas of federalism wealth will be denied to the western provinces where there is no oil. But no, that fear has been put to rest by this constitution and statement.
Also, the constitution includes articles which will enable the regions to initiate oil development in their areas and stop the central government from pursuing dominate policies against regions they don't like.
It's an important idea too that the people of the regions will not be denied access to development of their oil wealth because some bureaucrats in Baghdad don't like this development as happened in the past.
So we expect to achieve some level of oil development and oil exportation, which will put us back among the major players in the world and oil market more than we are doing now. But again, we need security.
Another plague in Iraq has been the massive corruption in the operations of the state that was started under Saddam Hussein and continued. I can claim now without hesitation that the current government has stopped 95 percent of the corruption in Iraqi contracting which was the major part of the corruption.
This was done through a mechanism of creating a contracts committee in the cabinet which reviewed all contracts above $3 million with a view to see that they are compliant with law and with contracting procedures as exists in the Iraqi government, and having a control mechanism whereby wealth, money is only kept at the ministry of finance and not found around in accounts of ministries which can be used at will without regard to procedure in contracting.
Look, this has had a very beneficial affect on Iraq's reputation, on the international market and also in terms of savings, great savings, in the purchasing of the Iraqi government. After all, Iraq purchases close to $3 billion worth of food every year alone. And signs contracts for major infrastructure projects also.
And it became visible how Iraq was looted by the procedures of the Oil-For-Food Program through systematic policies that were modified as we went along. And we learned in the contracts committee.
A case in point if the Volker Report, the last section of the Volker Report that came out recently on the 27th of October, the 5th installment of the Volker Report. It names 2,236 companies as having paid Saddam illicit money to conduct business with him, money that should have gone to the Iraqi people.
I say to you now that there was nothing new in that report that was not known to us back in December of 2003. But we chose not to publicize it, and we chose to keep it quiet because we would have been charged with forgery, with political use, with anti-U.N. campaigns and with targeting people who were against the liberation of Iraq.
We left it to the U.N. And the U.N. came up with exactly the same results that were known to us. We deliberately withheld the report of the Oil Ministry that was submitted to the Governing Council detailing these transgressions. And now with the imprimatur of Mr. Volker, the whole world knows the extent of the corruption that was behind the political support that Saddam had gotten.
This is not now mentioned as forgotten. This massive case of bribery--I understand, I believe that the foreign minister of India has stepped aside until investigations into his conduct regarding the Oil-For-Food Program are resolved.
I also understand there are five indictments in the southern district of Manhattan against people who have looted the Iraqi people in violation of U.N. resolutions and in violation of U.S. law.
There would be many cases. Ten years probably it will take all of the prosecutors around the world. But when these issues came up, we were attacked for putting even the slightest hint of them to the world as an issue that we want to politicize our rejection of the U.N.
We don't reject the U.N. We are founding members of the U.N. But what we reject is that the U.N. using its authority, would work to loot the Iraqi people.
This condition, these procedures of corruption did not go away with the demise of Saddam. They continued because the bureaucrats in the government by-in-large remained in place on the ground that they are irreplaceable and on the grounds of competency.
This continued under the CPA, and I will refer you to the report that came out from the International Advisory and Monitoring Board that was appointed by the U.N. This board determined that Iraq should be paid $208 million by the U.S. because of overcharging that was done at the time when the CPA was in operation.
I will also refer you to the report of the tireless Mr. Stuart Bowen, who is the Inspector General for the CPA, not for Reconstruction in Iraq, about the way accounts were kept in the development fund for Iraq when it was under CPA control.
The advent of the interim government of Iraq in June of 2004 did not change very much the corruption. Corruption continued. Now there is a judicial investigation of corruption in Iraq. High level people for the first time have been indicted and their assets frozen.
I do not want to go into this because I do not to give the impression that this is being politically driven, but rather it is being done by the judiciary in Iraq with the support of the executive as it says in the constitution.
We are working with strict separation of powers. All, many laws were cast aside and violated. And this will come out. And I think now the lesson will be learned that Iraq is a country which insists on the rule of law.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Iraq is a country that will not accept violations of the law be it in terms of financial action or any other action. The current now, for example, the Iraqi government has a surplus of close to $6 billion, but we are not able to spend anything for the moment because we have run through our budget appropriations. And we are waiting for the Assembly to convene to approve for us further appropriations.
This is the first time that this happens in Iraq where the government, with a huge case reserve, will not spend money because of legal restrictions, meaning it has to go to the Assembly, for approval.
For example, recently now for the oil program, the oil subsidy program, we ran through the budget. We are over 100 percent over the budget. We had out-standings of a billion dollars to pay to Turkey and Kuwait and Turkmenistan. We could not pay it. We have to--although there is money in the oil ministry budget for capital expenditures which are not going to be done this year, we cannot use this money to pay. We have to go to the Assembly and seek their approval to transfer money from the budget of development to the budget of oil subsidies.
These may be details. These may be common knowledge to you. This is the procedure in the United States, but it was not in Iraq until this government. And we are going to continue to insist on it because we cannot move forward without complete transparency.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: Iraq also has issues with its neighbors. The Arab League has adopted stance which treated the Iraqi government as an illegal creation of foreign powers. They're seeing now gradually that this is unwise, and they are now trying to engage Iraq again.
They rarely, if at all, condemned acts of violence against the people of Iraq. They rarely at all condemned the murder of innocent Iraqis in the various towns, villages and cities of Iraq.
Now they've come to Baghdad to try to put together a conference of national reconciliation. When asked, I said, who do they want to reconcile? The residents of the mass graves with their murderers?
There is no reconciliation for the people who murdered Iraqis. But there is every chance of complete dialogue and participation among all of the communities of Iraq, Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. It is a mistake to equate the Sunnis of Iraq with the Baath Party. As a matter of fact, most of the members of the Baath Party were Shiites. A lot of people, everybody talks about the Sunnis, but very few people talk to the Sunnis.
We need to understand the situation.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: We need to understand the situation that the Sunnis of Iraq also suffered under Saddam, but they are fearful now of retribution, about fearful of excluded. We will not exclude them. They are part of the country. They are a very important community, disproportionately important for their numbers. We recognize that, and we recognize that there can be no peace in Iraq without having them completely on board.
But this is no longer the politics of monopoly. This is the politics of participation and sharing.
[Applause.]
MR. CHALABI: And we need to move forward with that now in Iraq, that power is shared, wealth is shared and things are open to the communities all together.
We have also a human rights problem in Iraq. And all of the communities are guilty of that. And security forces also are guilty of that. And we need to resolve that. We cannot accept human rights violations. There are now people who are held in Iraq in violation of the law. People are in detention who have not been charged. People have languished in jails, both American and Iraqi, tens of thousands of people for over two years now some of them, without being charged with any specific offense. This is in violation of the constitution. We must address that. And we will rest until we address this issue.
It is not an excuse to cite security issues to violate human rights of tens of thousands of people. It's not acceptable. Because this argument, apart from being illegal, defeats the very purpose for which is just stated. By putting in jail innocent people, you create enemies of them, and you encourage them to go to the other side.
The way to win against the terrorists in Iraq is to clearly separate them from the communities in which they hide. And it is paramount to win the confidence of these communities. And their interlocutors are not necessarily the personalities that you see on television.
Their interlocutors are the people who live and suffer in and around Baghdad every day as a result of this struggle that has outlived itself and must stop. And that we intend to do.
And this is a message we have given to the United States. And they accept it, and we will work with them in Iraq to make this happen.
Issues of security impact on infrastructure. The main plan of the Baathists and the terrorists now in Iraq is to defeat the government and the Coalition through a siege of Baghdad in terms of power, electricity and oil.
The protection of the infrastructure was not a priority for two years. When this government came into power, through continuous dialogue and demonstration of the facts to the multi-national force, this now is the first priority of security in Iraq. We now have a big problem in Iraq. Saddam built 50 percent of the refining capacity of Iraq in his area. We have two perpendicular lines, crude going from the Kirkuk fields west towards to Baji (ph) and product lines going from Baji towards Baghdad north-south.
We made the Energy Committee in the beginning of May, we put this issue on the table. General Casey, the commander of the multi-national force sympathized immediately and acted to help us move forward. We did succeed. For two months we exported oil from Iraq to Turkey worth $500 million. But then the expected counter-attack came, and they have both electricity and power lines. And now we are engaged in a struggle of repairing and rehabilitating those lines both for oil and power.
Now they know that if we succeed in breaking the back of the interdiction of oil and power in that area, we will win. But they also must know that Iraq has other choices. If that pipeline continues to be hit, we will make another pipeline from Kirkuk, skirting the Kurdish mounts up to the Turkish border. It will be cheaper to do this than to protect and play this cat and mouse game.
And I believe that if this is done, attacks on that pipeline will be reduced. But this is a plan which is fraught with implications. So I think people should better think about it. Because I think the planning for this is being done outside of Iraq, and they want to twist our arms. We are not of course powerless.
Finally, I come to an issue which has plagued a lot of people, that is the unity of Iraq as the prospects of this constitution.
[End Side 1, begin Side 2.]
MR. CHALABI: ... very good in terms of assigning oil wealth to the people, in terms of women's rights. It is the first time in the Middle East that the child of Iraqi woman is an Iraqi in the constitution. It is an important point. It was much debated, and some people did not want it. But it is in there.
Also, in terms of individual freedoms, the constitution is very good. We must make them stick. There are fears that the central government is too weak and too divided and that the regions will run amuck.
I say that the unity of Iraq is a voluntary proposition. People of Iraq must recognize the need to be united in one country. And I think they do. We are beyond the enforcement of unity through the use of force. We will not succeed. We have failed. Saddam failed. We cannot be more brutal than Saddam. So it's idle to try.
We must persuade the people, and they are persuaded that the constitution--that Iraq should remain united. And the constitution provides for this unity.
But again, I say to you, the way the government is going to act will influence how this constitution is interpreted. If the government is a failure in Iraq, then the fears of separation will resuscitated. If the government is a success, and people will see benefit from being associated with the state of Iraq, then federalism will be a positive project for unity.
Iraq has very intelligent people who have not been cowed down by decades of Saddam. Iraq has the resources. Iraq needs leadership. And we hope that the forthcoming elections will produce leaders who will be able to move forward with the projects that I've talked about.
Thank you.
[Applause.]
MR. DEMUTH: Minister Chalabi would be happy to take a few questions.
I'm going to call on people, and I'd like to ask you to wait until the roving microphone arrives, introduce yourself and ask a brief question. And we'll start with this gentleman right here.
QUESTION: Hi, I'm David Korn (ph) from The Nation magazine.
In 2004, you were asked if you and the INC had deliberately mislead the U.S. on WMD intelligence. You said you were heroes in error. I'd like to know now after 2000 Americans have given their lives in the war in Iraq if you would tell one of their relatives that your proud to be a hero in error, if you could describe for us what those errors were, and answer the question directly: did you deliberately mislead U.S. intelligence in order to push the United States to get involved in an invasion of Iraq?
MR. CHALABI: This quote is false. I denied it at the time. I never made it. I never said that we are heros in error. We are sorry for every American life that is lost in Iraq. And I regret every loss of American lives that happen in Iraq subsequent to the end of fighting with Saddam.
As for the fact that I deliberately mislead the American government, this is an urban myth. I refer to you to page 108 of the Robb Silverman (ph) report that debunks this entire idea. And I wish more people would read it.
MR. DEMUTH: Yes, ma'am, right there.
[Applause.]
QUESTION: Thank you. [Inaudible] with Turkish (ph) News Agency.
With regards to the problems that Iraq is discussing with its neighbors, how do you plan to address the Turkish concerns about PKK presence in norther Iraq?
MR. CHALABI: That is addressed in the constitution. There is an article in the constitution which says that Iraq will not be either a base or a transit point for any hostile or terrorist activity against any of its neighbors. The PKK are a terrorist organization, and they should be treated as such. We will not in this kind of treatment violate the human rights of individuals. We will treat with them humanely, but they cannot be permitted to conduct activities against Turkey from Iraqi territory.
QUESTION: Yes, could you tell me when looking at the voting returns in the election, was there anything that surprised you about the rejection of the constitution in the Sunni provinces. And if you looked at sectarian politics down the road in 12 months, do you see--why would you expect to see Sunni rejectionism diminish?
MR. CHALABI: The referendum was a very big step forward from the previous elections. Over 90 percent in some areas of the Sunnis voted. They participated in the political process. And they participated in the political process because they thought they had a chance to defeat the constitution, which they did not like. They did not defeat it in the end, but nevertheless, their participation has been a very strong indicator that they will participate in the political process.
You will see major Sunni participation in this election because they now believe that they have a say and they have a chance through participation, through coalition building to get some of their agenda passed. And I think we must know that democracy is not about unanimous consent. People do have different opinions, but the most important thing that came out of this referendum apart from passing the constitution, is that the Sunnis of Iraq feel that this is a real process and that their participation can make a difference.
That is why I look forward to a time when they will participate on issues which they think are important to them. They are intelligent people.
QUESTION: David Schuster from MSNBC Hardball. You've denied that you deliberately fed information that was wrong to the Bush administration. But the fact remains that much of the information you provided the administration was bogus, was false, was not true.
I am wondering if you will now take this opportunity to apologize to the American people for giving the administration information that was false, that was used to frighten the American people into war.
MR. CHALABI: I say to you again, read the Rob Silverman report. Read the report of the Senate Intelligence Committee on this, and you will see that what we did and the affect of what we did in those reports. Do not chase the headlines and do not chase unattributed sources. Read the real report.
QUESTION: But the information was wrong regardless of whether it was used and how much of it you regret that the information you gave the administration was wrong.
MR. CHALABI: Read the report.
[Applause.]
QUESTION: Mr. Chalabi, I'm Tim Phelps from Newsday. Why were you not accepted on the Shia list of the major Shia parties this time? Is it true that it was because you demanded to be prime minister? And how do you think the new government will emerge? Will it be different than the one that you participate in now?
MR. CHALABI: You are misinformed, sir. We were not rejected on the Shias. We chose to make a list to distinguish ourselves from the Islamic parties. The Shias contain only Islamic parties. And that is an important point, because we believe that there are many people in Iraq who are Muslims, who respect the [inaudible] al-Sistani, but who are not believers in Islamic government. And this is--they need a voice to represent them.
[Applause.]
QUESTION: Ahmad, it's good to see you again in Washington. When the American Constitution was adopted...
MR. : Who's asking the question?
QUESTION: Yes, that's what I'm about to ask.
MR. : Stephen Solarz (ph).
QUESTION: Yes, Stephen Solarz.
MR. : And who [inaudible]?
QUESTION: I'm not with any journal. I'm here as an interested observer. Ahmad, the question is, when the American constitution was adopted in 1787, there was a lot of opposition to it. And as a consequence, after the Constitution was adopted, in order to address the concerns of those who opposed it, ten amendments were adopted to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights.
In Iraq, like in the United States in those days, there is obviously a lot of opposition to the constitution. Can you envision a series of amendments and/or legislation which could be adopted after the new parliament is elected which could affectively address the concerns of those in Iraq who opposed the adoption of the current constitution?
MR. CHALABI: Certainly. I will say to you now that we amended the draft before we put it to the referendum. And I think that amendment was instrumental in passing the constitution.
The constitution had to pass two barriers, first to get the majority of the people voting for it, which they got 79 percent. That was fine. But it had to pass the barrier of having no three provinces reject it by two-thirds of the vote.
Two provinces rejected it by two-thirds of the vote, but Mosul did not. And the difference was 80,000 votes. If they had switched, we would have a constitution rejected. But they did not. But we won because we introduced this one time amendment procedure which is much easier than the normal amendment procedure of the constitution.
There is now in the closing articles of the constitution, in the transitional articles I should say, there is a provision now to allow the coming parliament within four months to form a committee from its members to examine the constitution and to see if there is a need for recommending amendments.
And if there should be a need, it would but them to the Assembly and then put them to the referendum.
But to continue, after this provision expires--there's a sunset clause on this provision--when it expires, there is a procedure for amending the Iraqi constitution within the constitution. And I believe that as we develop in our political process, as society matures, as the fears of the communities from each other are lessened by the success of the state, the success of democracy in Iraq, I believe there may well be agreement to amend the constitution.
But the provisions are there.
QUESTION: Robin Wright, the Washington Post. Minister Chalabi, you are under active investigation by the FBI because of alleged or allegations about intelligence leaks to Iran. Can you describe for us, first of all, your relationship with Iran? And second of all, do you share the concerns of other Iraqi officials about Iran's role in facilitating the insurgency and its meddling in Iraq?
MR. CHALABI: First of all, I deny the first part of your statement, which I think has nothing to do with the rest of the question. Is it not true. I did not pass any information to Iran that compromised any national security interests of the United States. And I did not pass, for the tenth time that I say it, information about codes to Iran. I have no knowledge of U.S. codes or their statuses.
As for the relationship with Iraq, I visited Iran prior to my arrival in Washington. And I met with the national security chief, Mr. Larijani. And I met with the president. And I met with the foreign minister. And we discussed the concerns that you raise now. Iraq is a country which has 1,400 kilometers of border with Iraq. And the majority of Iraqis share the same faith with Iran, and their are religious authorities where influence across both from Iraq to Iran and from Iran to Iraq.
Now the concern that you are raising is that Iran is going to use its influence with Islamic parties that had Iran as their base to influence politics in Iraq in a disproportionate way. I believe this is the concern that you express.
This is a project that I think Iran will be ill-advised to pursue. Because this project is doomed to failure. The Iranians are smart and competent. They realize that this is a dead end. I believe we can persuade them that Iraq--the best outcome for them in Iraq is to have a country which is democratic, stable, and has a transparent friendly relationship with Iran. And I believe that this position will not find opposition in the United States government.
MR. DEMUTH: There are many hands. I'm going to try to get to everybody. And I'm going to call on this lady here. And then this gentleman who has been very patient back there. Then I'm going to go there.
Right here, please go.
QUESTION: Barbara Savin (ph ) of USA Today. You deny these allegations, but are you still actively being investigated by anyone? And several Senators and Congressmen have asked that you be subpoenaed and appear before Senate Intelligence Committee, House Intelligence Committee to discuss the information that was provided by defectors who were produced by the INC. Are you under active investigation? And would you appear before a congressional committee investigating pre-war intelligence?
Thank you.
MR. CHALABI: I have no knowledge of any investigation concerning me except what I read in the papers. So if you say so, I'll take your word for it.
[Laughter.]
MR. CHALABI: Now as for the other side, you will recall I had offered before anybody thought of it back on May 23rd, 2004, on four national television shows that I'm prepared to go to the Senate and respond to questions.
MR. DEMUTH: This gentleman right here. Please, sir.
Then here and here.
QUESTION: [Inaudible]. Mr. Chalabi, what should Turkey's role be in the near Iraq's future? And what kind of expectation from Iraq's neighbors do you have?
MR. CHALABI: Iraq, we have a very close and beneficial relationship with Turkey. Turkey is in a state of economic development that would enable it to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq in a substantial and effective way.
Already, for example, in the Kurdish area, in the Kurdish province of Sulaymaniya, Turkish companies have $440 million worth of contracts right now. Turkish companies have contracts in the rest of Iraq. And I think trade will develop between the two countries.
Also, we share long border with Turkey, and we have important security concerns, mutual security concerns, which we will develop very effectively with Turkey. And also Turkey is now close to Europe. And it borders on Iraq. So through Turkey, we have borders with Europe.
QUESTION: Thank you. Fedi Liadro, [inaudible] of Syria.
Thank you, Mr. Chalabi, for being here. And I can't tell you how important it is for Syrians to see that there's a working and vibrant democracy next door in Iraq.
There are rumors out there that there could be an agreement between the U.S. government and Assad regime. We don't believe them. But should that take place, and the Assad regime stop helping the insurgency in Iraq, and on and on and on, do you think that the Iraqi government can live, co-exist with a dictator next door? Or do you think that it's very important for Syria also to have a democracy as well?
MR. CHALABI: First of all, I'm glad to welcome you in Baghdad. And I hope to see you again there. It was an important message that you came to Baghdad.
Regarding agreements, first of all, the questions are all hypothetical. So I really cannot respond to hypothetical questions of this nature. It's an important issue.
We are committed to democracy now. But also we are committed to the non-interference in our people's affairs. But there is freedom of the press in Iraq, and there are opportunities for people to put their ideas forward in Iraq. Nobody will coerce people. And also, we have a strong clause in the constitution about the treatment of political refugees. We are not persecuting them, and we are not delivering them to their countries.
MR. DEMUTH: This gentleman right here behind the cameras. You've been very gracious.
QUESTION: [Inaudible] Salar (ph), [inaudible], Voice of America. Mr. Chalabi, I have two questions. The first one is regarding Iran and your last visit to Iran.
Is there any new message from the Iranian government to the United States government? My second question is regarding democracy in Iraq. You mentioned a role for Ali al-Sistani in Iraq. The question is, do you think that democracy is going with the returning all of the decisions to a person in Iraq? Thank you.
MR. CHALABI: I carry no messages from any government to any other government. This is first part of the question. The second part is I said deliberately that the Ali al-Sistani has excluded himself from the political process, that he will support no party, will support no list and support no individual candidate. Ali al-Sistani does not believe in th
