 Thank you very much for coming this afternoon. I'm delighted that you can be here. I'm delighted that we have a chance to welcome Dr. Roubaix to be with us today. We look forward to an interesting afternoon of thoughtful exchange. Let me just say a word. There's so much controversy associated with the war in Iraq now that it's caused people to feel that they need to react in other ways and through dialogue and listening. Can I ask that everybody today share this as a time where we talk with each other rather than we shout at each other? I think this is important for us to figure out how we're going to proceed. Ambassador, thank you for joining us. I know that you were desperately trying to get here through the traffic and not all the time does Washington cooperate. And we're delighted that you could join us. It's, we as a nation are trying to sort out. We're having a great debate right now. And we're trying to sort out how we proceed. How are we going to manage this very complicated, difficult situation? And to know how to do that, we need to listen to people who are involved in it. We may not agree with them, but we do need to listen to them and we do need to talk. I've had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Roubaix when I was in Baghdad this summer very briefly and asked would he consider to come to Washington to talk with us, talk with us. And I'm looking forward to that very much. We, he is a man who is in the arena every day. And being in the arena, he has a point of view and a perspective we need to understand. And we're fortunate that he's going to give us a chance to talk with him about that. We will have a period of question and answer. Christine Wormuth is going to be leading that. I would ask that you indicate that you would like to ask a question, but please for everyone here, let's make this a constructive dialogue and conversation so that all of us are going to benefit and learn. So let me, do you want to say anything further Christine? Dr. Roubaix, would we like to turn to you? Would you like to speak from, I think probably best of you speak from here because all of the microphones are here. I introduce and welcome, would you please join me in welcoming Dr. Roubaix. In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, Chairwoman, ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. I have spent the last four or five days in DC and three or four days before that in New York. And I met several top officials in the administration. And I carried a few messages from Iraq. And admittedly, I have to say that there are so many good listening ears. They gave me so many listening hours with sympathy. Not the sort of I hear you, but I can listen and I understand you. We are going through difficult times, but let me at the beginning of the outset, let me say a big, big thank you to the American people, to the American government for everything they have done in Iraq. Starting from the one of liberating this country to trying to maintain and sustain the stability and security in Iraq. And my message to the mothers and those who have lost their loved ones in Iraq, my message is very clear. It's well worth investing in Iraq. You invested heavily, invested the treasure, blood, fear, sweat. So the Iraqi people as well invested a lot in that. But I believe it is well worth investing that. And I believe it is, you're going to have, United States of America will have a strong, permanent, strategic ally in the region for years and years and years and years to come. Now let me start with throwing some stimulator or stimulus, stimuli to stimulate the interest of some people and throw some ideas. Number one, we believe in the government of Iraq that it is pivotal to have a continued support from the United States government. And it is important for the political process. It's important for democracy in Iraq and it's important for the security in Iraq. How long is this? We'll come back to this. You have heard Crocker and Petraeus' report a few weeks ago. We can confirm that. There is definite tangible palpable progress in the security. But the problem is that you cannot see there is also progress in the political arena. But that progress in the political is not visible to you. If you look at the five or six legislation and see what are the contents of this legislation, most of the contents of this legislation, we are implementing in practice, we're applying it in practice, using executive decree, executive orders from the prime minister. Pending, ratifying and approving this in the Council of Representatives. We have a huge, great step of the political progress. The agreement, the declaration of the 26th of August between the big five, call them. The big five leaders, that statement, I think it was huge progress in the political side. But what we would like to ask you is to understand us better. Iraq is difficult place. And the problems are difficult. They were not problems of last few years. These are, some of these problems are centuries old. So you need to understand these problems better. And we have a lot of obstacles facing us. And we need to overcome them. Some of our partners in the political process, they have decided in the last minute to pull out from carrying on in the cabinet as well as in the political process. They are unwilling. And on both side of the equation. On both side of the equation. And they have decided to, some of them put the sticker, it's clog and jam and freeze the political process. Bringing, trying to bring down the government, hoping to bring down the whole political process. And we have a solution for this. The way we tackle this is by, by what we call aggressive national reconciliation program. Anyone can be included in the national reconciliation program we have started in May last year. Anyone, any Iraqis, but many Iraqis are certainly excluded. The foreign terrorists are not, not to be included in any. But all the reconcilables, the mainstream, Shia mainstream, Sunni mainstream, while the Kurds, they're all included in our national reconciliation. We have another problem, which is not new for you. Our neighbors are muddling in our internal affairs. And we have, every neighbor has his own problem. And he wanted to settle score on the, on Iraq territory. We have, we have the only ways to strengthen our Iraqi security forces, capabilities, as well as with the help of our strategic allies, the United States government. We made our choice, the final choice of having a strategic allies in the United States government. The other problem and the other obstacles we're facing is the, we inherited a completely ruined infrastructure, completely ruined, ruined Iraq, let alone infrastructure. So when we start, we start from below the ground. I was, I was saying this in the, in the other meeting that the worst, the most horrible crime Saddam has committed is he has ruined this and this of the Iraqi people. And he has implanted an incurable virus in the software of stairs. And this is, that virus called Bathism, or Neobathism. This neobathism can move from, from the extremist leftists in the 50s to the extremist Arab, pan-Arabist nationalist in the, in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and to a neo-Islamist and the Salafist Bathists in the, in the, in 2003 onward. So that's, that sort of enemy we are. And we, we, we're, we're aware of that. And we, we, we are open to, to all, probably 90, we're, we're not. We're debathif, debathifying the ideology, not the Bathist as a member of the Arab Ba'ath Social Party. And we have a constitution, which is a formula to get over this problem. The other, the other obstacles we have is the lack of patience in the international community as well as in the, in this part of the world. And for those who have heard this from me, I'm going to repeat it. The old regime, the old order, we inherited a 1,000 year order. The old order of tyranny, autocracy, theocracy, religious supremacy, dictatorship, to a new, completely new set of rules. New order called democracy, human rights, federalism and transparency, accountability, rule of law. This is alien for the whole region. So to move from the old order to a new order, we are, I think, I think this is a huge paradigm shift. And it, we need time for it. It's the nature of this business. You can't, you can't, you cannot fit this in the election cycle of DC. You can't. It's too short. This is a strategic shift. You need time and you need patience for it. We understand the impatience of the world. But believe me, the government of Iraq is not sitting on their hand and doing nothing. No one, no one in the world, so eager to, to make progress in the, in politics, in security and in economy. A few weeks ago, we have issued a first ever in the, in the history of Iraq and in the history of the region, the new national security strategy. It's a roadmap for our country to move for the next, from now until 2010. It's a strategy for every single ministry so that they will build their policies on, according to the strategy, and they will implement that policy. So we have a direction, a sense of direction, a new vision. What is the vision of Iraq, of the government of Iraq for the next three or four years? This has never happened in the history of Iraq before. Never. We in the government of Iraq also continuously assessing the requirement of the foreign troops in our country. No one, no one on earth wanted the foreign troops for one day more in his country. If we cannot, if we can do without. But we need it because of the security situation. It's still changing. Our, our enemy is amorphous, changing it like amoeba. Changing the nature. So according to the threat assessment, we, we continuously assess that coming from internally and regionally. We continuously review this requirement. And I can tell you, without hesitation, that our Iraqi national secure, Iraqi security forces are gaining the capabilities very fast. And by the end of this year, the combat forces are in place. By the end of next year, the logistics are in place. And we'll be ready for, for, for any eventuality. We are prepared for any eventuality anyway. And if you, if you press me on the number of troops, I believe we will, we'll go back to the pre-surge level. That's, that's 15 brigades by probably April, by, by Easter. Next year. And probably before the next election to two digits figure. Or the worst things by, by the end of next year. But that's all depends on the condition on the ground. That's to the best of our knowledge and belief and assessment now. So that we will relax gradually, but progressively, we'll relax the requirement for the, for the presence of the foreign troops in our country. Then my last point, and then probably the trick is here to fill the time so that there will be no questions. But I promise you this is my last point or the one before last. Keep on reviewing there. The, the importance of the enduring bilateral strategic relationship with the United States government. We do need this for years to come. And we, we, we have asked the United States government to start the serious negotiation on this. And this is not going to be only security. This is going to be security, economy, diplomatic, and political. So it's going to be comprehensive package for enduring relationship for, for, for, for, for, for decades to come. A long-term relationship with the, with the United States government, with the United States. We're going to be one of the anchor of the, the strategic ally of the United States government in, in the region. Because Iraq has finally chosen, once and for all, its strategic ally. That is United States of America. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you Dr. Al Umay for very interesting comments. And I'm sure there's no shortage of questions. I thought as the chair I might have to get things going, but I don't think that's an issue. First, the, the woman in the white blouse. And before, as you ask questions, we do have people with microphones. Please wait until the microphone gets to you. And then please give your name and your affiliation. Thank you. Hi, I'm Courtney Cubie from NBC News. You mentioned a more aggressive withdrawal strategy than General Petraeus spoke about last month with 15 brigade combat teams in Iraq around Easter time. Is there something that's changed in the past couple weeks or why is it that you are, it seems like you're planning on a withdrawal of American troops faster than the United States? These figures are not in grind in, or not in grind in stone at all. These figures, depending on the conditions on the ground, we, our assessment probably slightly different from the assessment of the multinational forces. We work very, very closely with the coalition forces, we work very, very closely with the, with David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker. They are, we have, you have top class world soldier in that part of the world. And we work very, very close with them. But our assessment probably is different. We believe that Iraqi security forces capabilities, capabilities we need is much higher than the assessment probably of the coalition. And also we're negotiating acceleration of arms and training and readiness of our Iraqi security forces. That's right. That's right. Okay. The gentleman right over here. Mohammed Sayyed Lwafi, Al-Iraqia TV. I will ask my question in English. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said that in her meeting with President Taliban, she felt that he was very optimistic and he told her quote and quote that, all what the American forces has to do is to train the Iraqi forces and the rest can be done by the Iraqis themselves, quote and quote. My second question will be when we're talking about destabilizing the situation in Iraq and having neighbors interfering in the internal affairs of Iraq, who you mentioned specifically and what is your opinion toward the speculation about any Iranian intervention in Iran? Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. The Iraqi security forces, their combat force will be in place by the end of this year. We are already in the lead of more than 70% of all the security operations in the country. Our counterterrorism force, we are proud of them. I believe they are one of the best refined counterterrorism force in the world now. They are doing probably in the region of 90% plus percent of the operations in the country. What we are lacking is the logistical support, is the intelligence, is the whole logistical, is the transport, is the fire power, is the air power, that's what we are lacking. And we have a detailed plan to move on and by the end of the year, of next year, inshallah, all these logistics will be in place. Okay, the gentleman here in the front, I'm trying to keep track of you, but right here. Let's go ahead and try and give, there are a lot of people here who'd like to give questions, so I'd like to go ahead and move around and we'll try and come back to you. Oh, the issue about the Iranian involvement, could you, he did ask? It's not a secret that Iran is muddling in our internal affair. I'm not disclosing a secret here. So other neighbors as well. Syria is doing that as well, through a, well, tending a blind eye to these foreign terrorists. But I believe in the next, and this is not a good news for everybody, I believe if we leave things as they are now, we're going to have more escalation and this is going to endanger the security gain and the security success we've gained over the last few months. So what we need to do with Iran, we, the government of Iraq told them in a very clear Arabic language that they should stop muddling in our internal affairs, because that's, we're going to lose everything because if this continues, the whole political process will collapse. Not this government will collapse, the whole political process and whatever the Iraqi people got over the last three or four years, they will lose. Now, if they continue escalating that. But at the same time, what we need from the, and in the same token, what we need from the United States government is to engage seriously with Iran in a serious negotiation, constructive, serious negotiation. Engagement with Iran is the solution. Escalating, I have no problem in making them feel the pain in Iraq. But attacking Iran, I said, big fact, no to that. It's a fatal mistake. It should never be an option at all. But stopping them muddling in our internal affairs and with the help of our friends and allies in the United States government and in the coalition, yes. But at the same time, we need to get a positive, constructive, serious engagement with Iran. Okay, we'll have the gentleman here in the front and then the gentleman in the very back. Right here in the blue blazer. Hi, Ben Lando with United Press International and the Iraq Oil Report. I'm wondering if you can talk about how you view the oil sector in Iraq through the national security lens, your thoughts about when you're dedicating resources, money, and personnel, for what and why is it so important and what it goes to? If you don't have a follow-up questions, I'll answer your question. Take the microphone, because I know what his follow-up question is. I'm pleased to say that I just came from a very constructive, very informative meeting with the Secretary of Energy. And that sector is pivotal and it's like the Jaguar vein for us. We discussed in detail, we're going to have more capital investment for next year, 2008, in the oil sector. And try to find, that's what we agreed in the Department of Energy, we tried to make a priority list of small projects, quick fix, quick hits, we call it, to try to increase the number of barrels every day we get out, okay? So that's our immediate concern for next year. Second concern is the protection of the pipelines and the infrastructure. With gas as well as pipelines, oil pipeline as well as the power line. And these are issues we prioritize for our next year. Next year, and this is for you, next year, probably the last two years, or one and a half year, we were talking about security, security, security. If we can sustain this level of security until the end of the year, I can tell you next year is going to be services, services, services, economy, economy, economy. And then security, that is our emphasis, is going to be services and economy. Does that answer your question? Okay, the gentleman in the back, and then I think you had a follow-up question? Yeah. Okay, but. Hi there. One question but two parts please, sir. Could you please identify yourself? Oh, I'm sorry, Mike Kellerman, Press TV. Two, one question, two parts, sir. Today, Connolly Sir Rice announced that the U.S. State Department is going to, in effect, crack down on the security firm such as Blackwater in Iraq. This, of course, in response to all the publicity, as you know, about the alleged killing of innocent civilians in Iraq. My question is, first of all, what is your reaction to the U.S. government announcing these new rules for the operations of companies like Blackwater in your country? And second part of that question is, is your government going to prosecute any of these people in case there's enough evidence to do that? The Blackwater and other private security companies are covered, actually, by the United Nations Security Council Resolution, the 1546, and the CPO Order 17. And there is a huge legal gap there as well, which is not addressed as well. But I don't want to politicize this issue, and I don't want to make this issue as a point of friction between the government of Iraq and the United States government. Of course, what they have done is appalling. Of course, what they have done is something against our Iraqi people and killing innocent people. But I have to wait for the outcome of the investigation, and I'm pleased to say that the department, the Secretary of State has responded very, very quickly to our appeal and to our request to include the revision of the CPO Order 17, which gives the blank immunity to the private security companies working in the country. So we're going to have a radical review, a revision of that CPO Order 17. This is number one. Number two, we don't want to, this is not, this is a legal jargon. This is rather than, this is also not only a legal and lower jargon and lower gains, but it also has a direct encroachment on our sovereignty. And this is a huge sovereignty issue in the country. And if you follow the newspaper, the national newspaper in Iraq, you will see how big this issue is. And the television, the radios, everybody discussing and analyzing this issue. So it is a huge sovereignty issue we need to sort out and sort out quickly. But we don't want to jump into conclusion. We don't want to pre- and or influence the investigation. We need to wait for the investigation, the outcome. We need to look into the compensation. We need to review the CPO Order 17. Probably we need to resend the CPO Order 17. And we have the power. The government of Iraq has the power because it is an elected, constitutionally elected government to resend it. But we don't want to resend any CPO Orders without consulting with our allies who are the partners in the country. We need to coordinate this with the coalition forces and with the embassy because they're doing service to the embassy. I'm sure we will come to an amicable solution at the end and we will certainly make the compensation whether they can be sued or they can be tried under Iraqi law. This is for the lawyer to answer because the way I look at it and reading the CPO Order and reading the UNSCR, I think they're not under Iraqi jurisdiction. Okay. But I'm not a lawyer, by the way. I'm a political boxer. Probably a very good thing not to be a lawyer. Did you still want to ask your poll question and then we'll have the gentleman right there across the aisle. You mentioned that the Iraqi government gave a very clear message to Tehran. So they to stop their interference in the Iraqi affairs. What's the government's position toward the Iraqi groups that paving the way to Iran, to Jordan, to Turkey, to Saudi Arabia, to other countries, the Iraqi neighboring countries to interference in Iraq? The answer to your question is one of the, until and unless we have real national unity, real national reconciliation, a cohesion between all political parties so that the allegiance and the loyalty as to Iraq and Iraq only, these countries will continue trying to intervene in our internal affairs. Because they find political parties and groups who are amiable to their strategic interest, to the neighbor strategic interest, not to the Iraq strategic interest. So we need to do to be more positive in our inclusion, in our national reconciliation. And I mean it when I said earlier, I meant it when I said we need to pursue an aggressive national reconciliation and be really, really inclusive in all sense of the world. You right here in the front row please. And then we'll get the gentleman sort of in the middle. Ron Bajans with Kuwait News Agency. How are the relations between Iraq and Kuwait today and what are your hopes in that regard in the next six months toward the end of 08? Thank you. The relationship between Iraq and Kuwait is good. I think Kuwait is one of the good friend in the Arab world and they have a good relationship with the different level of most of the politicians leading the country now. The new Iraqi elite, political elites, they are friends of the royal family in Kuwait and we've worked with the Kuwaitis before and after the invasion of Kuwait and the liberation of Kuwait and also they helped us during the liberation of Iraq. But there is a very important issue need to be tackled. And that is the issue of debts and issue of compensation, war reparation I mean. This is an issue need to be tackled with the Kuwaitis brothers need to be brave and courageous and have a good position on that. And they said, we are not, we are going to stop punishing the Iraqi people by getting them to pay the war reparation for war. Saddam Hussein has launched and invaded the country and all the Iraqi in contradiction to the Iraqi people will and against the Iraqi people will. And I think this is for the Kuwaiti government, for the Kuwaiti parliament to stand and be a very good example for the rest of the Arab and for the rest of the members of the Gulf Corporation Council to take the lead and be pioneering here. Okay, I think there was a gentleman with a yellow tie in the middle there or yellow shirt. Thank you. Howard LaFranche with the Christian Science Monitor. You mentioned federalism under the points of the new order in Iraq. I was wondering if you could tell us your view of efforts in US Congress to press for a devolution of powers in Iraq to regions and specifically the proposal from Senator Brownback to press for a Sunni region to be created in Iraq. Federalism is part and parcel of our constitution and you cannot have democracy in Iraq without federalism and vice versa. So you cannot, democracy means that the majority rules and then it will be the majoritarian dictatorship and that's not acceptable in Iraq. Iraq is a very diversified country. We need federalism and it's an integral part of our constitution and devolution of power to the periphery is extremely important and we need that. But we need to agree on what sort of power need to stay in the center and what sort of power need to go to the provinces and the regions. But partition, I honestly believe even hearing the partition is a capital crime. It's really irritating. It's not my brain, my mind, my heart. No partition on air was written by pencil. Every partition was done and written by blood and we don't need to shed any more blood. This country is more than 5,000 years old. This Mesopotamia, this Iraq, this blood in the hand and it is a crime to think of partitioning this country. Honestly, we've lived thousands of years and I don't think those who are using the word soft partition or partition or devolution of central. I don't think they mean partitioning the country as such into three different countries. No, I believe they meant, and when I talk to them, they meant federalism and we are all for federal, for federal units. Strong federal units mean strong Iraq. If we don't have strong federal units, we have very weak Iraq. And I cannot see any contradiction between strong central government and strong federal units. I can't see a contradiction in that. If there is a clear cut line of demarcation between the authorities and responsibilities. There was a gentleman in the back over there. Hi, I'm Bob Dreyfus with Rolling Stone magazine. I wanted to ask you about reconciliation vis-a-vis the Sunnis. Recently, the United Iraqi Alliance issued a very strong statement denouncing the efforts to engage with groups like the tribal forces and militias and so forth and said, really, this is intolerable. And also, Prime Minister Maliki said that he would investigate former Prime Minister Alawi because of his opening a dialogue with forces around Isat Alduri and some of the ex-bathists and so forth in Damascus. Even though Alawi said he did this with the Americans present. What does this say about the efforts to reconcile Sunni and Shia if these kinds of efforts are so quickly opposed by the Iraqi central government? I'll take the second question. It's easier. I'll have a meeting with the Arab Socialist Party. It's illegal to recognize the Saddam-Bath Party. This is a constitutional requirement. You cannot recognize when you sit with somebody. You sit with the Bathists, but not with the Bath Party. The Bath Party is illegal entity. And our constitution is enshrined in our constitution. And we're a constitutionally elected government. So we have to abide by our constitution. This is easy one. So I think the Prime Minister Maliki was right in being upset and irritated by people meeting Arab Bath Social Party. The other question is what we call Iraqi security volunteers in the tribal awakening. We, the government of Iraq, we have started this national reconciliation in May last year. And we have helped the tribes in Al-Ambar, with arms, with money, with organization, with media. And we really brought that to fruition. And we have absolutely no problem in recruiting after vetting. We have in place a vetting system, vetting people from their past criminal record, security clearance. And if they are clear, then most will come, come in. And we will turn even a blind eye to the minor offenses they might have committed in the past. And this is in the homogeneously ethnic areas, like Al-Ambar, for example, like in Nainawa and Mosul, like Salahuddin, probably. But in the mixed areas, we need to be careful here. We need to be careful with the armed groups. Number one, they should not come back as a group, as a bloc. They can come back as a bloc, but we have to recruit them individually, not as a bloc. This is very important. Number two, they have to renounce violence, or at least pay allegiance to the Constitution, or at least pay allegiance to the Constitution elected government. Now, if we forget about that for the time being, we need to vet them properly and have a mixture of them. When they come and recruit part of this, for example, neighborhood acts as a sunni area, we should, in Baghdad, it's all mixed. The friction is in Baghdad, it's all mixed areas. In Baghdad, we have to have a mixed police from Sunni NCA. We cannot afford to consolidate what Zarkawi and Al-Qaeda wanted to, they want to drive away, they want to consolidate the line of demarcation or the default line in Baghdad. We cannot accept this. This is a Sunni area, so give it a Sunni police. This is a Shia area, give it a Shia police. No, that will not be acceptable to the prime minister and to the government of Iran. We will aim to recruit from mixed communities to serve mixed communities. That's what the prime minister, and I believe also, I read carefully the UIA statement as well. They're worried about this. And this is, I'm quite rightly, if we have to, there are some risks, but sometimes we have to take this risk. There are some risks in the national reconciliation, and we are fully aware of it. And that's why we put this implementation and follow-up committee for the national reconciliation to vet these new recruits and to bring them into the police, bring them into the army, or give them a temporary contract for three months, six months, renewal, and then after that, we give them either stipend or renew their contracts or bring them into permanent contract within the army or within the police, or bring them to a vocation and training scheme to train them something better for life. But we will cross that bridge when we get to it. We need to cross that river now by taking some risks. Okay, I think there were a couple of questions over here. The gentleman here and then, sir, you in the middle. James Kiffiel from National Journal Magazine. I have a chicken and the egg question here. You said that as long as Iran and some of its neighbors are meddling and supporting militia groups, et cetera, you cannot reach a national reconciliation because they're aggravating those tensions. Yet, absent a national reconciliation, you can't get them to stop. My question is, how do you get over that hump? Is a national reconciliation, international conference required, will we get everyone at the table? How do you get over that hump? And if you don't, can reconciliation happen from the bottom up, as some have suggested? Thank you very much. Two-track. Well, there will be no serious national reconciliation without a regional reconciliation. If we carry on doing this Shiazim versus Sunnism and this extremism in the region, it will be extremely difficult to have a real national reconciliation in Iraq. If you carry on escalating in the region, then we have a problem in Iraq. That's number one. Number two, if we need to work and we have a detailed plan to strengthen our new national Iraqisim, national identity, and by bringing all the three communities together and break down this self-defense mechanism of the three communities and strengthen and build our Iraqi security forces on a national basis and make a national army and national police, then we'll be doomed. And I think this is the way forward to build a strong Iraqi national security forces, as well as national reconciliation, national unity, include everybody and make them less susceptible and less amiable to the influence from the region. But I can tell you that our neighbors are, with very few exceptions, are playing a very negative role in Iraq. I think there was a gentleman in the middle there and then over there. Hi, I'm Dave Michaels from the Dallas Morning News. This is sort of a question about oil, but I guess also about federalism. Was the decision of the Kurdistan regional government to issue its own oil concessions most recently to hunt oil? Was this helpful or hurtful for the cause of national reconciliation and also for the passage of a national petroleum law? And then also how do you regard the agreement as an illegal agreement or as a legal agreement? This is a very complicated constitutional problem, not a political problem. Politically, it's what the federal government done, they said this contract with the hunt oil and others, it's null and void. It doesn't bind the central government. So that's the central government issue, that very clear statement. How much this is going to be a really constitutional issue and the High Court is going to do it because the way the constitution is written allow the Kargi to do this. And the way they interpret the constitution, that's why they, and also their local, the regional constitution. So this is what we are, I wouldn't like to say that the hydrocarbons law need only to crossing the T's and dotting the I's. We've been saying this for long, but I'll tell you what. It's there is a huge pressure from everywhere, inside and outside the country. And we need to apply more pressure, even, on everyone to agree on a compromise hydrocarbons law, whereby all parties go home partly unhappy. That's the best compromise, I think, where everybody goes home partly unhappy. And that compromise, I think we are very close to that. We need some tweaking on that. OK, there are a lot of questions here, but I think we'll take the gentleman in the back with the glasses, the microphone over there. Hi, Jonas Gander from Foreign Service Institute. When you spoke about the long-term strategic alliance or agreement with the US that you're pursuing, that the government is pursuing, to what extent does that involve basing? And what is the future of American permanent bases or long-term bases in Iraq? I think it's too early to talk about basing. But I do believe that neither the United States government ask for bases, nor the government of Iraq probably or the Council of Representatives will ask for bases. I don't think they will. But it's too early to. And we haven't started negotiation. We're talking about the SOFA here. We're talking about the status of forces agreement. And not insecurity, as I said. We have to have an economic package as well. And diplomatic and political support from the United States government. But I believe we will need help in the way of counterterrorism forces, in the way of training arms, monitoring the borders, probably even as a guarantor to the new NACES democracy, or to deter the friendly neighbors from muddling in any and our internal affairs. So these are the grand plan, if you like. But we're going to work very soon. We're going to start very soon working on joint declaration, joint declaration of intent. What are we intending to do? And then we renew the 1546 or the United Nations Security Council resolution, probably for another year with some modification, with some concession on respect of the sovereignty of Iraq and respect of the government of Iraq and lay down some new rules on the ground. What is your responsibility and authorities? What are your responsibilities on authorities? And because sometimes it's difficult to have two armies at the same basal space and coordinating with them so that there are a lot of. And then we move on to a serious negotiation. And this is going to be experts. The experts are going to be working on the details of this enduring bilateral coordinate or cooperation agreement between the two countries. Even the issue of the other countries, the not the United States government. What is the other countries through? We haven't tackled that. This is a serious issue. We need to have a view and have a look at that and see what we can do with the other countries. Are they willing to go in to come with us on the same time or not? There are all sorts of things that need to be done. But this is all down the line. And next year or from now until the end of the year, of next year, I think we're going to be very, very busy. I know that there are a lot of additional questions, but unfortunately we've run out of time. Dr. Al-Rubay, please thank you first so much for coming. Please join me in thanking him. Thank you very much.