 Good morning, everybody. My name's John Hamry. I'm the president here at CSIS, and I want to say welcome to all of you. I said to Minister Zabari that I couldn't imagine that we would ever be able to get anybody to come on a Friday in August. I told him I think it was only Bill Gates and the late Michael Jackson that could have gotten an audience out here in Washington, but I think it's a testament to Minister Zabari's just essential leadership role in Iraq. This is a man who has steadily been at the heart of Iraq's developments these last ten years. He has been leading the foreign policy for Iraq. He's a voice that's welcomed in Washington. People understand him. They trust him. They know him. He's a friend, a real friend of somebody that doesn't tell you what you want to hear. And this has been his consistent voice. And he's here now at a time to help us understand that this is a very challenging time in Iraq. And the conflict in Syria is having very negative implications for Iraq. We don't appreciate that. We don't understand that. And his visit with us is to help us understand what this ally, and I say that word quite intentionally, this ally, is living through and what we need to try to do to help. So I want to say thank you to the foreign minister for his leadership, not only in Iraq, but here in Washington. And so I would ask you with your applause, would you please welcome this remarkable statesman for Minister Zabari? Thank you. Dr. Hamer, thank you so much for your great introduction. And thank you, Joan, also for inviting us to the CSIS and with this distinguished crowd. I know many of you in person. I worked with some of you. We've dealt with you in the past. And I'm really honored to be among you today on this Friday. I'm honored also. This could be the last lecture here in this building. So I have the honor, let's say, to the CSIS before it moves to its new building. This is another honor thing. Thank you. I'm here to offer a view from Iraq and the region. And being honest and frank with you, really I'll devote most of my time to the question to Q&A, rather than giving you a ready-made piece of what you want to hear from me. I know many of you have many, many questions, serious questions about Iraq, its future, its interaction in the region, and whether Iraq has succeeded in the challenges or it has not. But let me start that much of what is happening today now in the Middle East, in the Ramesses Square today in Cairo, in the southern district of Beirut, or in Idlib, in Derizur, in Syria, or in Baghdad, in terms of terrorist attacks, really they are in many ways interrelated. And the challenges and the opportunities, the triumphs and the tragedies has been taking place in Iraq for the past decades. And Iraq was the first country in our region to make the transition from dictatorship to democracy. We know that the road is long and hard and has been very, very arduous, torturous for us to make that transformation, but still worth taking. As the Arab Spring has shown, countries that are going through transitions are at risk of foreign intervention and domestic violence. In Iraq we are confronting all these challenges and more, but we are also making progress towards stabilization, stabilizing our society, growing our economy, building our democracy and developing good relations with all our neighbors. Ten years after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, the better future that we seek is still a goal. Not a given. But some conclusions are as clear as anything can be in our region and in these times. For all the suffering we have endured, the people of Iraq and our neighbors are much better off now than Saddam is gone. Iraqis are forever grateful to the sacrifices that the Americans have made in time and treasures and in blood. Iraqis, of course, have endured even greater losses. And as the recent attacks of terrorism have reminded us, our ordeal is not over. The Iraqi people and our government intend to redeem these losses by building a future worthy of our sacrifices. After decades of dictatorship, three disastrous wars, international isolation, economic sanctions, the displacement of more than a million Iraqis, and the deaths of tens of thousands more, including the latest victims of terrorism. Iraq is embarking on building its economic future, democratic future, and building bridges within our society and with our neighbors. As Iraqis, we, as we rebuild our country, Iraq and the United States, will benefit by building a long-term partnership. Together, we can and must develop what President Obama has described and I quote, as a normal relationship between sovereign nations and equal partnership based on mutual interest and mutual respect. With our political progress, our economic progress and our diplomatic progress, Iraq is taking its place as a partner for the United States, for our neighbors and for the family of nations. On the political front, we are building a multi-ethnic, multi-party democracy with respect to the rule of law. Our democratic process is moving forward at a strong and steady pace. Our local elections took place in April of this year. In Iraqi Kurdistan, there would be regional elections in September this year and our legislative and general elections would take place next spring, 2014, which will determine our national leadership and that would be a very, very important day to watch. We have a government of national unity. Now all the communities participate in the working of the government and of the parliament. Yes, we have differences of opinion as all democracies do, but we are working together and slowly but surely our efforts are achieving results. We are promoting human rights. There has been violations which we admit, but there are constant efforts to improve on that and to be responsive to all calls and also the freedom of expression and the advancements of women. There has been demonstrations and sit-ins in Iraq, in many provinces, in western part of Iraq, in some Sunni provinces in Iraq for the last eight months. And they have catrots, they have sit-ins, they have obstructions, but the government have not resorted to the same methods that the Egyptian recently used or deployed to disperse the demonstrators. All the political parties have accepted election as a method of power sharing and peaceful change. Iraq, you want to decide their own future with voting, not violence. On the economic front, we are growing and diversifying. We have the world's fastest growing economy, expanding by 9.6% in 2011 and 10.5% in 2012, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. We will grow by 8.2% this year, beating China for the third straight year. On the energy front, our oil production has increased by 50% since 2005. Iraq expect to increase oil production to 4.5 million barrels by the end of 2014 and 9 million barrels a day by 2020. As the International Energy Agency has reported, Iraq is poised to double our output of oil by the decade of 2030s. We will emerge as the world's second largest energy exporter and we will ease a strained global oil market. In spite of this progress, we have challenges that we are working to address. 90% of our economy depends on oil. Our employment rate is 11%. Our poverty line rate is 23%. Although there has been significant progress over the last few years in meeting the development millennium goal set by the United Nations. In order to diversify our economy beyond energy, Iraq is investing oil revenues in education and crucial development projects, including restoration of electricity power and rebuilding our transportation system. Our economy will benefit from our progress on the diplomatic front as well. Last month, the United Nations Security Council removed Iraq literally from Chapter 7 sanction regime, which imposed economic and other sanctions on Iraq after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait 22 years ago this month. We are working with the International Monetary Fund as well as the World Bank and the Arab League and the OIC and many other regional and international organizations as a fully responsible member again of the international community. Now we are moving towards a market economy friendly to foreign investment. Americans can provide that what our nations need through investment and trade, not charity and aid. We need the expertise on energy, technologies, engineering, design constructions and financial services. Iraq offers Americans tremendous investments opportunities for Americans developing and servicing schools, bridges and highways, healthcare, water treatment, telecommunications and much more. And this is what our agreement for the strategic framework agreement covers between Iraq and the United States. But make no mistake, nothing that we built together will endure unless we win our war against terrorism and the war to stabilize the country and ensure security for all the people of Iraq. We see the violence in Iraq and the terrible toll that it has taken daily. And we have heard about the threat that compelled your own country to close your missions, 22 missions in the Middle East and North Africa recently. Al Qaeda is behind the terrorist attacks against American Iraq. At a time when the United States is seeking allies against terrorism. We want to work with you against our common enemy. We understand what is at stake in this struggle. It is our fight for survival and it is the core of our national and regional policy. We consider terrorism a threat toward peace, the regional peace and to the security of our people. We are working in close cooperation with the international community and our neighboring countries to fight all sorts and every manifestations of terrorism. Whatever its sources, whatever its intention and wherever we find it. These terrorists are seeking to destabilize Iraq because they see our political, economic and diplomatic progress as a threat to the desperation on which they feed. If Americans are tempted to conclude that our concern with terrorism is only a justification for our failure and it is extreme, then think yourself how would you respond to the terrorist organization when operating on new soil as Al Qaeda or its affiliates is operating on ours. Together with the threats against American embassies, the violence on our soil is an example of why Al Qaeda is still a threat to all of us. Just yesterday they bombed five hospitals, not police stations, not government building, no five hospitals and deliberately. We've also seen the attacks on the Eid and the last day of Eids which cost many, many, the life of many people. If America takes its eye, if America takes its eyes of the Middle East, then there will be a resurgence of Al Qaeda and all its affiliates and more menacing than ever we have seen. Our concerns with the consequences of terrorists at a terrorist heaven next door shape our views about Syria. For American Syria is more than 5,000 miles away. For us, Syria is right on our doorstep. Our border with Syria is long and purse and therefore we are deeply concerned about the ability of terrorists to use and to cross these borders. And just that is why we are participating in the search of a political solution in Syria that will reduce the violence and diminish the rule of the extremists. It's not easy this political solution as we see the balance of forces moving this way and another. But that is one of the viable options for the people of Syria. Hopefully the Syrian people can decide and determine their future. Iraq was at the table during Geneva 1 talks and in fact the final communique that was produced by the meeting has strong Iraqi input in even the language that was adopted by all the participants. Now there are new talks about resuming Geneva 2 according to what we have heard here in Washington and in New York. This could only happen maybe in October or maybe later. There are no fixed dates yet about that possibility. We in Iraq do support the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people for freedom, democracy and self-determination. And Iraq has tried to adopt an independent neutral position not to side with one side against the other but to seek and to support a peaceful democratic solution in Syria. There is no sympathy whatsoever with the Ba'athist in Syria at all or the Ba'athist regime. In fact at one time when we called the international community to hold the Syrian government responsible for terrorist acts in Iraq we were the only voice and all our allies and friends abandoned us in that call. Unfortunately there are some who have called for Iraqis to volunteer on both sides in Syria and have used religious justifications on the basis of a sectarian confrontation. But let me be clear, the Iraqi volunteers who are fighting on either side in Syria do not represent the policy of the Iraqi government in any way. We are also opposed to the smuggling of arms from Iran to Syria. The government of Iraq is committed to implementing UN Security Council resolution promoting peace in Syria and keeping with our position against the militarizations of the conflict we are doing our utmost to prevent the shipments of arms across our borders or airspace by whoever. But we cannot do this without the capabilities and the sophisticated integrated defense system that we lack and this is what we have been asking from our friends to help us. This is one more reason why the United States and Iraq need to deepen our partnership and to combat terrorism. We need to continue to fully implement the strategic framework agreement that our countries signed before the withdrawal of the American forces in 2011. That means expedited delivery of promised military cells as well as assistance in counter-terrorism and enhancing the capacity of our security forces. Short of reintroducing American troops in Iraq, nobody is calling for the redeployment of American forces but under the strategic framework agreement there is a great deal of room, of space for security cooperation to enhance our common fight against terrorism. Iraq is also in the process of purchasing over 10 billion worth of military equipment mainly from the United States and other countries. We are paying for it with our own revenues and we want to buy this hardware from the American allies. Our recent purchases of 30 Boeing planes for our national carrier testifies to our potential as a market for American companies, American products and American services. The view from Iraq and the region also include opportunities as well as challenges as we have outlined. Over the past two years, relations between Iraq and Kuwait have improved enormously. In fact, there have been mutual visits between the two countries at the highest level. The problems of the past are being resolved through the Joint Ministerial Committee and the UN Security Council Resolution No. 2105 on June 27 of this year. This included Iraq's compliance with our obligations toward Kuwait, the only remaining issues which is not a controversial issue because there has been mutual agreement and payment is the compensation which Iraq is doing. But my country is literally, is practically out of Chapter 7 and the sanction regime. Now we are focusing on the future relationship between our countries so that together we can promote peace, stability and security in the region. Considering how much has changed between Iraq and Kuwait, there is a new hope for our neighbors throughout our region. We do not object to Iran having peaceful civil nuclear power program but we would be one of the first countries to object to Iran possessing nuclear weapons because of the past and because of the history. In fact, we favor the universalizations of the Nuclear Non-Pull-Offeration Treaty and strict adherence to all of its obligations, particularly in the tender box of the Middle East. Definitely Iran needs to convince the international community that their program is only for peaceful purposes and the world community needs to engage with Iran to address the issues that have isolated it. We are encouraged by the election in Iran and the victory of President Rouhani and the selection of his new teams. Iraq has been trying to be useful or to be helpful in reaching and understanding on these very important issues. In order to reach diplomatic solutions to the crisis of the nuclear program, Iraq has worked in cooperation and coordination with the Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union to host the meeting of the 5 plus 1 group in Baghdad last May. Iraq will continue its efforts in the area of coordination and cooperation with the countries concerned. As the first nation in our neighborhood to abandon weapons of mass destruction, Iraq recently chaired an international conference in disarmament. Just imagine 20 years ago where we were. We seek a Middle East free of nuclear weapons. Towards that goal, we support efforts to convene a UN conference in Helsinki. Iraq seeks to forge friendship with our neighbors and a strategic partnership with the United States. Together, we can build a future of peace, prosperity and democracy worthy of the struggles and sacrifices of Iraqis and Americans in our time. And the hopes and dreams of generations yet to come. I thank you very much. Mr. Minister, thank you very much for that statement. I think it's a sign both of the complexity of your agenda and the skill with which you handle it. The minister has agreed to take questions, but our ask is that you wait for a microphone and that you identify yourself. And that we only ask one question until everybody has had a chance so that we can work our way around this rather full room. So we'll start right here if we may. Thank you, Mr. Alverman. Thank you for your excellency. My name is Sayed Erika. I'm a Palestinian journalist in town, but I also served in Iraq as a United Nations spokesman for five years. I got to know it. Your excellency, tell us what are the safeguards that you are implementing now to ensure that Iraq does not slide back to the bad old days of 2005 through 2007, especially in light of the merging of al-Qaida, Iraq and al-Qaida, Syria. And how would that figure into a new SOFA security agreement, so to speak, without introducing troops on the ground, boots on the ground? Thank you. First, I'm a believer and as a practitioner of Iraqi politics, not as a diplomat, I personally don't believe Iraq is sliding into sectarian or civil war for a number of reasons. First, with all these attacks you have seen, the people have not responded, have not been influenced at all by these deliberate attacks to ignite sectarian or civil war. You've all seen the reports last spring of troops massing up in the frontiers of Kurdistan or in the disputed areas between the federal government and the regional government, but nothing happened and the problem was resolved peacefully. You've seen many people abandon the government in Iraq, the Kurds, the Sunnis and others, but then through dialogue, through interaction, I think now everybody has rejoined the government to work together. So secondly, we've been there before in 2005, 6, 7, and we've seen how terrible that situation was when we were counting 100, 150 bodies in the streets of Baghdad and so on. Really, there is self-restrain by all the communities not to be dragged again into that. Although civil wars and other phenomena actually does not happen by decisions, by an incident or another incident, but we all followed how the search worked in Iraq and how successfully. And still actually there is a great deal of expertise and benefit we are drawing from these efforts. Secondly, politics has taken over in Iraq. I mean, most of the Iraqis, even who are opposed to the new Iraq or the new regime, are embracing democracy. They're all waiting for the next election to change their future. We have seen the recent local elections, how the people have spoken everywhere, and they are waiting for the next elections in 2014. As I said before, really we have demonstrations, sit-ins in many parts of the country for the past eight months, and the government never resorted to the kind of violence, except in one or two incidents in Hawija. I'm not here to justify these violations whatsoever, but really generally the government has tolerated this so far to go on without any intimidation. And the dialogue is continuing. The other element and restraint is the religious establishment. The Shi'as religious establishment in Najaf and Karbala have stood very strongly against any engagement in retaliations or responses. There are militias, there are forces, actually extreme forces on both sides, but really they have not reached the level of seeing the country dragged into a new civil or sectarian war. So security-wise it may not be stable, but it would be manageable until the next year. Now, there is no plans actually to have a new sofa. We have concluded the sofa, it's done, it's over. We have another agreement as the Strategic Framework Agreement. That's a long term that defines Iraq-United States relations for many years to come. And under this there are joint commissions on security, on diplomatic, political issues, on services, on energy, on cultural things. I have attended the fifth meeting of the Joint Coordination Committee on Political and Diplomatic with Secretary Kerry yesterday at the State Department. So this is an indication that this is going on. But under the SFA I think there is room for more security cooperation between Iraq and the United States. David Mack, Middle East Institute, an old hand at U.S.-Iraqi diplomacy. I want to salute what you've done in terms of reintegrating Iraq into the international community. I think future historians are going to rate you right there with the great French Foreign Minister, Tali Ronde, in terms of what you've accomplished. But my hard question for you is, what is the outlook for improving Iraq's somewhat troubled relations with two of your larger neighbors, both Turkey and Saudi Arabia? Thank you, David. I appreciate one of the first American diplomats in my career before becoming the Foreign Minister of Iraq was to meet David Mack at the State Department. And I remember that meeting very well in 1991 immediately after the Gulf War and the uprising and the exodus. So it's good to see you, David. I'm a friend and I have a great deal of respect. Your question is very important. We in the Iraqi government have been discussing this really very closely. Let's be honest about each other. There are two countries that have had influence over Iraqi-Sunni communities, Saudi Arabia and Turkey for different reasons. We have good relations with Iran. We have good relations with Jordan, with Egypt, with the Arab countries. And for your information, now in Iraq, we have nearly 92 or 93 diplomatic missions, including 15 Arab embassies. So those days of boycott of Iraq, of not accepting this alien body are gone. Even the Saudis have non-resident diplomatic representation. With Turkey we've experienced many, many problems and primarily because of the lack of respect by the Turkish politicians or officials for dictating on an elected Iraqi government what to do and not to do. I think now they realize and recognize that there is another way to follow in fostering. Although Turkey is our largest trading partner, actually now we have between 12-14 billion of trade with Turkey. And they are after the closure of Syria for their own goods and transit and so on. Iraq is the only viable route for them to the GCC and to the Gulf. I'm planning to meet with the Turkish official soon, maybe in Ankara or Geneva for talks in order to improve that. With the Saudi also we have not broken relations. We have communications and contacts. There are a number of things we can do to improve relations or to introduce some confidence-building measures. One of them we have a treaty to exchange the prisoners. We have Iraqi prisoners in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have some prisoners in Iraqi jails. Almost we are at the final stages of concluding that. We are also considering some business relations with Saudi Arabia through reopening the RR border point between Iraq and Saudi Arabia. David, for your information, I was in Riyadh a few months ago and I discovered really that the Saudi trade with Iraq, not directly but through Jordan and Kuwait, is nearly four billion US dollars. Also we need to lower the sectarian rhetoric on both sides in many ways in order to seek viable, healthy, good relations. Our resolving of our problems with Kuwait have helped with the Saudis and with the other GCC members. But I take your point it is an important challenge for us in fact to work on that very seriously. Barbara Slavin from the Atlantic Council in almonetary.com. Minister Zabari, always a pleasure to see you wherever in Washington or in the region. I wanted to get a little more detail about your views on the new Iranian government and what Iraq is prepared to do to try to facilitate the nuclear talks. Were you in Tehran for the inauguration of President Rouhani? Can you tell us something about your discussions with them? And what your sense is of how the US is receiving the overtures from the new Iranian government? Thank you. Thank you Barbara. I believe that the elections of President Hassan Rouhani was a statement by Iran and the Islamic Republic of Iran to the international community to the world that it means serious business. Otherwise there are many ways his success or his election could have been scuttled from the first round to force it into a second round. But the pressures were enormous on the establishment to go along with this outcome. And also he has drawn a great deal of support from the reformist movement. Rouhani is a credible leader who is a member of the regime. He is not weak. He has very strong relations with all the key leaders in Iran. Khamenei included Khatami, Rafsanjani and others. So he's a member of the revolution. His credentials could not be challenged. Also the statement we have heard calling for moderations, calling for ending of Iran's isolations and the suffering that Iranian people are going through by the imposition of sanctions and political isolations I think were made very clear and loud. I wasn't in Iran actually during the inauguration, but the vice president was there. Nature-run Barzani, the KRG prime minister was there also. So the feedback we have had that there would be a change. But this change could not come immediately as many people expect. The key elements everybody would be watching is the 5 plus 1 meeting in September and whether the Iranian will come to present any new approach. I personally doubted that it will happen that soon, but the pressures are mounting definitely on them to seek a solution. My message has been really not to underestimate this change in Iran, but we have to wait and see because the proof of the pudding is in eating as they say. But it is a positive change the way I see it. Mr. Minister, if I could just pick up on one part of Barbara's question. She also asked about whether Iraq sees any role helping to facilitate some change in the world's relations with Iran. Is that one of your ambitions? I believe Iraq could serve as a bridge between the United States, the Security Council, member, and Iran. And we have played that role in the past. And as indicated by speech, the hosting of the nuclear talks in Baghdad last year was an indication that we have an interest here to help to facilitate not to be a bridge that we will fall under the pressure, let's say, on both sides but to communicate fairly and honestly and we will continue to do that because we have a vested interest there. All the way in the back. I'll read back in the high university. Mr. Minister, in the Kurdish areas of Syria, you have now a fight between the Kurds and the al-Qaeda. And the president of the KRG has said that he might use force to send the Peshmerga in to protect the Kurds. So what I'm trying to understand is what is the position of the Iraqi government to an attempt by a segment of Iraq sending forces across the border into Syria. Would that be part of your policy? And also what do you think should happen in with the Syrian Kurds? Thank you. Thank you, Henry. Good to see you on island. Thank you. And this is a good question again. In fact, there has been fighting and tough fighting between al-Nusra and some other Qataib. You know, Ahra al-Sham and many of the extremist groups with the Kurdish or the PYD party there, which is in charge. And there has been some massacres reported by the killing of hundreds of civilians on ethnic base or on this. And this has raised alarms really in the Kurdish community throughout the region but also in the KRG to do something to defend or to protect the Kurds in Syria. But these decisions really needs to be coordinated. We've discussed it in Baghdad and the Iraqi government, Prime Minister Maliki government are fully aware of the tension in Syria and the danger of al-Nusra, al-Qaeda, nexus taking place across the border in Syria or to control out of space areas, let's say, in Syria to declare their Islamic states. But I believe what President Barzani said really he will ask the newly formed Kurdish national committees to investigate this before making any decision. So it's not sending Peshmerga across the Tigris or the Syrian borders to fight another war there. Still it's early, we are not there. There has been discussions, I think, between the Syrian opposition recently to resolve this conflict. But any decisions I think will be coordinated with the government of Iraq. It will not be unilateral by the KRG. Thank you. A clarification with CBS. What if you could address specifically the threat from al-Qaeda in Iraq in Iraq? I believe the numbers have gone from about 5 to 10 suicide bombings a month up to about 30 a month. That's a big escalation. What do you attribute that escalation and what is your government doing about it? Thank you. That is why we are here basically to seek more help and support because really the al-Qaeda network and its affiliates is a real serious challenge, let's say, to the stability of Iraq and of the region. And also we see this emergence between al-Qaeda in Iraq and Nusra Front in Syria and other affiliates groups. They are flourishing in this kind of circumstances. The United States has a vast experience in combating al-Qaeda in Iraq and its technology, its intelligence on al-Qaeda, on their networks, on fighting them. I think in their counter-terrorism technique, we need to benefit from these expertise to forge a better relations with the United States security forces to enhance our abilities and capabilities really in terms of weapons, equipment, technologies. Because it's not going to stop there, I think, al-Qaeda as such. We have our own failure as the Iraqi government. We have admitted them. We could do a better job, but really the challenge is beyond our capabilities. Minister, good to see you again. I'd like to follow up on this entire issue about Mark Kim and I'm sorry, on this issue of counter-terrorism. You've identified it as probably the key issue inside of Iraq right now. It's what's brought you here to Washington, D.C. Yet you have preemptively taken off any option of U.S. military support, what you referred to as boots on the ground, which would necessitate a sofa. Is that an Iraqi decision not to ask for American troop support to provide that expertise, or is that an American political decision placed upon you or a combination of both? Really, we are not short of boots on the ground. We have nearly one million under arms and thanks to you and to the U.S. for helping to raise and train this. So it's not the number of boots on the ground or American soldiers in Iraq. No, this is not the request for my government or to reintroduce U.S. troops in Iraq, in fact, in numbers. But as you know, we have security cooperation with you within the Security Office attached to the embassy in Baghdad. Under the Strategic Framework Agreement, there is room to support, to enhance Iraqi democracy and support all the efforts. When we draft it, actually, or we agreed on that agreement, we are conscious that in the future we may need future assistance and help. So there are many ways, you as a military commander, you know that there are many ways the military could do to provide help short of that, of sending troops into Iraq. So it's not the request of my government actually, and I don't think there is any appetite or willingness here also to send troops abroad or to engage into another conflict now. Thank you very much. I'm Josh Rogan with Newsweek and The Daily Beast. Thank you for your time today. As you know, as we discussed increased security cooperation, one of the main requests of the Iraqi government is for new U.S. arms sales to Iraq. Lawmakers here in Washington are concerned about those sales for two reasons. They believe that Iraq is still allowing Iran to use Iraqi airspace to promote the flow of arms to the Assad regime. Also, they're concerned that the Iraqi government may use U.S. weapons towards political ends to marginalize the political opposition, as we've seen in the past. What assurances can you give us on both of these fronts? What specific steps are you taking to stop the arms flow from Iran over Iraqi airspace to Assad? And what assurances can you give us that as we approach new elections that U.S. weapons won't be used for domestic political purposes? Thank you. Definitely, my government will abide by all the rules, the regulations you hear in the United States or Congress will impose on all these arms sales, not only to Iraq, to many other countries in the world. So we will abide by that definitely for these weapons not to be used for domestic use or improperly would be used for the defense of the country. Now, on the flight of the overflight of Iranian using Iraqi airspace, let me give you the reality. I mean, sometimes we're talking theoretically about the situation as if Iraq has dozens of fighters or aircrafts. For your information, Iraq doesn't have a single fighter plane up to now. It has a couple of helicopters, some training, let's say planes, small plane, but it doesn't have a single aircraft to protect its airspace. Iraq up to now doesn't have an integrated self-defense to protect its skies. We have requested, we are waiting for the delivery. So that is the situation when we talk about Iraq's capability and deterrence capabilities to prevent other from using its airspace and so on. We have made the marches to the Iranian. We don't want, we don't support you or any other to use our airspace because it runs against our policy of taking an independent neutral position here, not to militarize the conflict in any way. And we have done a number of inspections. Disinspections could not be, I mean, endorsed by some circles here in the United States that this could choose only those who carry, let's say, legitimate equipment or material. But we have raised the possibility here really. I mean, we will continue to live up to our commitments here. But there are Security Council resolutions banning this from leaving Iran, I mean, under Chapter 7, whether it's weapons, import, exports. We don't have the capabilities of enforcing this. Yes, as politically we've made these marches. So who is going to reinforce that? Is it the Security Council or who? We've taken note, actually, of the administration's serious concerns about this flight. I can tell you now they have gone down. They may have not stopped. But believe me, we have no ways of making sure that what kind of weapons, equipment, it's not only Iran that is providing Syria by arms and immunizations. Russia's other sources, it's very clear the Tartus port on the Mediterranean is seen daily, let's say, by U.S. satellite and imagery how much weapon is gone into Syria. So here we don't want to see, to take or to view Iraq as a whipping boy, let's say, for failing to hold others to their commitment. But we will live up to our commitment. I think we will do more, let's say, to live up to our commitment to stop, to prevent any further flights, legitimate flights. Again, there is an international location here, let's say, for this agreement and arrangements between countries and so on. But we have taken note, let's say, of the administration position. Mr. Minister, I'd like to, Phoebe Marr, an independent scholar on Iraq for a long time. I'd like to add my word of welcome and please come visit us more often. I do have a question. I'd like to get back to oil. One of the things, as you know, that's inhibiting investment is the lack of a hydrocarbon law. How close is Iraq really to achieving a hydrocarbon law? And please give us some sense of all these pipeline proposals we hear about to take place. The independent one from Kurdistan to Turkey, the new one from Baghdad through Turkey, potential through Jordan. What are we to make of those and how realistic are any of them? Thank you, Phoebe. It's good to see you here and still same spirit. And the hydrocarbon law is one of the key political challenges for Iraq or for the new Iraq. On the basis of the Iraqi constitution that devolved power and wealth, let's say, among the region, among the people. And only recently, the Iraqi parliament passed a legislation to enhance the powers of the governorates, of the local authorities, let's say, in each governorate in Iraq. And it has been a political issues between the KRG and Baghdad, really, this hydrocarbon law. We had a version we agreed on 2007 that was accepted by both sides, but it didn't materialize. Still, it is the key reference point. Because of the deteriorations of relations between the KRG and Baghdad, there has been a separation of thinking, of planning, of using the oil resources and approaches with Turkey. And Iran also, for your information, it's not just Turkey. But really, I'm not pessimistic and hopeless that for finding a resolution of this because it benefits the country, it benefits everybody, it enhance Iraqi oil industry, the issue of ownership, the issue of reliability, let's say, for other oil investors to work in Iraq. It is a very, very important subject. And it is a top issues in all the political meetings between the KRG. But whether it could be enacted soon, I really don't want to give you any false impression. I believe this issue is one of the existential issues in the new Iraq. It has to be resolved with partnership, with participation, with genuine resolutions of the key political issues that are hindering Iraq. I personally believe there is a better atmosphere now. There is a better communication. Recently, after the exchange of visits by Prime Minister Maliki to Arbil and President Barzani to Baghdad, they have agreed to address this issue frankly and to form serious tactical commissions to look at the issues. There is also related to the hydrocarbon law, the revenue sharing in the country as a whole, they are related. These two issues, I think they are doable, but depends a great deal on the political understanding between the leaders. Yes, the KRG is trying to enhance its position through opening up to Turkey. Turkey's relations with Baghdad are not at the best stage, which is something we are trying that normalizing relations between Ankara and Baghdad could benefit all, including the KRG. And these pipelines, they are also controversial issues, to be honest with you. I mean, there is no agreement on them. And we agreed that soon, very soon, in Baghdad there would be a meeting of these commissions to address the issue of the pipelines and to see whether we can do finalize the hydrocarbon law before the end of this year or be left until next year elections, which most likely it would be. Back on the left, this will be the last question. Yeah, exactly. I think it pays independent consultant. And I wanted to give you an opportunity. A lot of people here feel like there's been a lack of political reconciliation in Iraq, and that it's been U.S. policy to support the Erbil agreement, which has not been implemented in Iraq. I think following up on Mr. Rogan's question, I'd like to give you the opportunity to explain why should the United States sell arms to Iraq when in fact many people believe the lack of political reconciliation is contributing to some of the violence today. Thanks. Thank you. Political reconciliation is the key issue, really, for Iraq, for the stability of Iraq. And I think all the key leaders believe that this is the way forward with the hydrocarbon law, with normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia, with Turkey. I mean, all the questions have been appointed questions about the core issue in Iraq. So the political reconciliation is moving, is not stagnant, really. I mean, look at the representatives of the Sunni community, let's say, or from Iraqi parliamentary blocs. Now they are represented in the parliament, they are represented in government. They may feel they are underrepresented or marginalized. This is a fair call. I mean, we could do more about that, definitely. But really, the lessons that came out of this local election was very, very important. Many people believe they could do with the majoritarian democracy or political majority government that one sect or one group can win all over and run by themselves. It proved they couldn't. They could win, but they could not govern. And I think everybody realized and recognized that there has to be an inclusive democracy, non-sectarian democracy in Iraq for this country to have any future. Mr. Minister, I've heard a lot of foreign ministers speak. I don't think any has a more complex agenda, and I don't think anyone handles it as well as you've demonstrated you handle it today. I'm also a little bit humbled by the fact that I think you have more friends in Washington than I do, and I live here. We haven't. So thank you very much for honoring us today. We look forward to welcoming you in our new building.