up, does it make sense? or is there some inconsistencies? obviously, we are not ahead of the process, but we already see there will be a lot of inconsistency. and then there will be a second stage from april to the meeting of the leaders in june, where some policy can be suggested to correct those inconsistency. some can be made to try to see, these figures which don't add up, what can we do to avoid the distortion and try to have more operative what to look at the future. i think this exercise, which is totally new and nothing to do with a different kind of forecast we had before, and may be very useful. but, of course, it relies on the cooperation of all the g-20 members, and their willingness to work together and look at the problems together. i think the very strong

consensus, the crisis is still there and that the willingness to work together is still there. that's the part of hope. and we will see how exercise goes on to but i think really it's very important for the global economy to be able to see that we went through global, there's no domestic solution. the camino global solution. but be able to assess those global solutions. you need to have a vision of the kind of growth modern we may have after the crisis which obviously would not be the same one in before the the next one. . .

it has take epiphany a long time to build a thing too, for instance. 12 years. but we don't have 12 years to build the reform of the new -- of the final sector today. and so we need to speed up the political pressure, in most advanced economies is very strong, so i do understand why president obama, others, may have to propose things, and i think that going in the right direction in maintaining the momentum of the political will to do something. now the point is, as i mentioned before, that we cannot have different kind of regulation and different kind of solutions in

the different part of the world. this will not work together and even not only will it not be consistent, but it may create other problems. my call is for a more coordinated way to make the reform. all the proposals that have been made are very interesting. i can have some reservation of one point or another. that's not the real issue. the real issue is that if we want to do something, to mitigate the risk, i'm not saying avoiding any kind of financial crisis, we'll have financial crisis in the future, if you want to mitigate the risk, then we absolutely need to put in place, which today, are not really looked at as -- let me give you just one example. the one my institution is working with every day. cross-border banking has obviously been, during this trial, one of the major issues, and the way one country having a

subsidiary and another country may repatriate, where they have another country solving problem at home but creating new problem as well, this kind of thing has to be addressed and we cannot have a reform of the system, which will only deal with the problems seen by each country of before its own financial system and again, it may seem to you, a very simple thing, obviously, but in the reality, i'm afraid that we're not following this rule and that's why i call on much more coordinated way to look at this reform. >> can i just follow that up joe seackerman, from your point of view, are the regulators the problem or the solution? >> they're absolutely part of the solution and i must say that the dialogue between political leaders, regulators, and bankers

have become very, very conservative indeed. i think we all know something has to happen quickly to restore confidence in the system. now i would -- if i may, distinguish between three different layers. the first layer is where we need absolute harmonization on the global level. that is for all these aspects where we compete with each other. that is capital requirements, liquidity requirements. then you may have the second layer, then you may have for domestic reasons, different regulations, mortgage market in germany or the united states or you name it. and the third layer, and that is the more complicated one, is where some countries start adding new taxation for whatever reasons, or changing the -- now how you do that on the global level, first of all, what is the impact on efficiency of the global financial system and secondly, of course, what does

that mean in terms of complexity for managing global banks? that's why i'm saying, in all these aspects, and i think we are in full agreement that things have to happen, but we need some sort of grandfathering or implementation, but we also have to ask ourselves, what is the trade ofoff and the tradeoff needs an impact study, not only on a corporate level for banks, but also on the economic side. we can stabilize in the real banks by having huge capital ratios, but maybe the lending is no longer available. and many other things, or what does it mean if you have specific regulations or certain activities, for the efficiency and liquidity in certain markets, so in that sense, it is much more complex and i think we should start and we should start introducing it and while introducing, we may be able to adapt, because things may go somewhat further than what we have anticipated. our goal is -- and this is the

noble task of the financial sector, not only to be resilie resilient, to shocks, but also to help the real economy and the people to grow, and to prosper, and that is also to -- always to -- it is an optimization issue between stability and efficiency, and if people think we can move back from a marketplace system to a bank-based, that will be an illusion. we are too far advanced in terms of the global economy. >> thank you very much. i would like to turn now to -- do you want to make a comment on this specific issue? yes, please. >> thank you. in the face of subprime loan issues, the lehman debacle was triggered and led to the global financial crisis and what is

described as investment now to be speculation, and they showed through speculative behaviors and also the multiple times of leverage, so a sheer speculation, and until the background, there was the state of global excess liquidity, so far away from the demand of the real economy. i think it is the view shared by everyone here, so then this kind of extreme financial bubbles bursting and then another generational bubbles and bubbles. after 1990 in the process of globalization of 20 years, this kind of policy has been repeated in the world economy in a way, so the -- some kind of global

center of regulation will be needed, or maybe the case like international solidarity tax to tax speak la difficult transactions of currency and others and that tax revenue could be used for the aid assistance in developing countries or for alleviating the global involvement, and whether the government in the world would agree to that and accommodate to that, that i think is a major issue. now we in japan or asia, shall i say, we have this philosophy of living with nature and look at medium to long-term investment. i think capitalism in essence has the ethical back bone and linking. so the lesson we should learn is

that the capitalism would be the capitalism to merger and grow the economy, not the leverage capitalism of selling through, and to serve the real economy and the climate. so capitalism should undergo a major change. the world -- entire world should not look at the speculative transactions, short-term selling, and that would cause entire fatigue of the world economy. now, in japan, it is committed to continue to excel in manufacturing technology activities and ecological activity like clean energy, and rapid transit and the marine

water deceleration and so forth. such advanced technology we are willing to offer to all the countries in the world and to make it as a part of long-term projects by all and it is going to be a part of a national strategy to cooperate with all the countries. >> your language is more or less identical to that of the french president. and so two very major industrial countries, both think that capitalism needs pretty comprehensive reform. i think the issue, very importantly, is probably a little bit beyond the panel, but it's certainly on the table. and then there's another sort of capitalism we hear constantly about state capitalism and its impact on the world, so that brings it perfectly to you, so i'm going to raise a couple of structural issues with you. one we've already talked about. some of us think that $2.5 trillion in reserves might be enough, and that maybe there

are higher return investments and some of us wonder why you're so determined to let the federal reserve make your monetary policy, which, as your own government has frequently pointed out is wildly inappropriate for china now, so there is an issue about how you manage your external policies in the medium term. exchange rate, reserve accumulation, monetary policies, how is that going to resolve. it has -- evolve, it has enormous impact on the world and that fits very well with china's idea about this medium term structural shift towards consumption, towards a better balanced economy, actually going to proceed in the post crisis here ra. how do you see these two aspects of your policy fitting together? >> well, basically -- thank you for the quevmen question. this is a pure export driven,

which is not sustainable and we have to change it and we're working on it and i think everybody agrees with me, last year since it has improved, but it takes time because it's a structure issue. in the front it's income distribution. in the back, it's social network issues and a lot otherrish ice, making people able to borrow money, but the real fact is that china gets rich only goes through one generation. in the u.k., it take 150 years from poor to middle income. in the states, it takes another 60 to 80 years, three to four generations to get people to get rich, so the behavior has been different. i must be a very old fashioned person. the glass looks ok. i would not throw them away to buy a crystal one, although my income increased. i would still use it. so this is a lot of -- and we

really want to increase consumption, but still, it will take some time. internationally, $10 trillion a year starter and china together, less than 2 trillion, $1.65 trillion. india, they're less than $3 trillion, so they're very imbalance of structures. we need a lot of international cooperation to manage the smooth, structure change, for us to increase the consumption and for the other side to decrease consumption, increase savings as well. i think the whole thing, everybody sees that, and everybody walking on that. we saw on your side, consumption stabilized, and the same thing happened in china and india,

consumption increased, but they need a lot of policy cooperation at the international level, because it's an absolute long-term issue, you cannot do the whole thing overnight. now i tell you good news. young people in china have a very different consumption patterns between the age of 20 and 30. they have $200 million to $220 million, and hopefully they will buy more, but i don't know whether they can borrow money because they have no money. that's the first issue. the second issue, china accumulate a lot of foreign exchange, everybody talks about that. it is a problem, right? how can we have a more fair exchange, more money? people say you have too much money. how can this become a problem. you know, that's the real issue sometimes, difficult to understand. there are a few things. during the asian financial crisis, awe the asian countries

need a self-defense reserve to protect yourself, otherwise, you're very vulnerable. we saw what happened in south korea, we saw what happened in indonesia, malaysia, and we were lucky to be immune from that, because it kept -- we still have enough for a reserve. i think this is very important issue still today, because within the globalization, we have a very global reserve system and we need those things. number two, this is structure issue. the reason we have more reserves, because we have more savings. the reason we have more savings, because other side has less savings, so it's just the migration of the global savings dislocated in the different areas. we will be more than happy to have international cooperation on those issues to solve these issues. also, it requires international cooperation and still, it's a long-term issue, but i think this is an issue that needs to

be solved and china is open, ready to engage in all these process. >> i think that's very impressive. i still have this strange feeling that if you sent a check for $1,000 to every man, woman and child in china, they'd find some way to spend it, but maybe that is a mistake and they would actually all invest it. they could -- the united state states -- >> do you want to be a chinese? [applause] >> i don't think i'd make a very good chinese. how do you see the structural problems, you have a very different position from -- in the world from china in that respect. nicely balanced. and this is just somebody else's problem. >> and how does it bear on your own strategy. >> this is why they call it a

rich discussion, in the sense that large number of issues have been raised, so i want to simplify a little bit and just make three points, which will cover some of the different issues. the first is we've had a very good discussion on the rebalancing of global demand. it's very simple. if you want to sustain a particular growth of -- on the supply side, which is feasible, there has to be the demand to sustain it and we know that industrialized country demand is going to go down, somebody's demand must go up. now as far as india is concerned, we're contributing our best. we are trying to jack up investment, shu mentioned that china is jacking up consumption, consumption is a very small portion of g.d.p., the net result we hope will be a current deficit, not a kind of near balance, so i think in that sense, we are small players in

the big g-20 group, but whatever it is, we are going to be contributing to global demand. now, from our point of view, to sustain that, we to be able to finance the current deficit, so a lot of the financial reform issues that are being talked about are very relevant for us. we welcome the move in the global financial system to put in place a reasonable regulatory structure. actually, our banks are always, what now is a great complement, are boring banks. we want out there the frontiers of innovation. so from our point of view, global -- global regulation that's being talked about will bring the global norm closer to the more conservative things that we were doing, though we would still have to of move in the direction of financial reform and liberalization to get to where the world thinks is appropriate and we will do that, but what we

are concerned about is how is that going to affect flows toward developing countries. in india's case, it could be argued that bringing in regulatory reform, once the system has settled down, should actually send more flows to developing countries, because we know that what was going on was an artificial creation of a belief that you can be highly liquid, and earn high returns, in the domestic, and industrialized market. that's no longer going to be the case. so where is it that high returns will be returned? in the fast-growing parts of the world, as and when the financial sector has worked that out, which i hope they will, it should become possible for them to think that in the mediation of savings, it ought to be moving towards at least the faster growing, emerging countries. we are not going to be very dependent on commercial bank borrowing, so even if there's a temporary constraint, because deleveraging, i don't think we are worried about that.

our ability to absorb, to borrow what we want to absorb will not be affected. much more concerned about what happens to foreign domestic investment flows and that is not just a matter of what happens in the financial sector, it's a matter of how people perceive globalization, so i'm hoping that we will get the financial reform done, i'm hoping that it is a financial reform that will keep in mind that rational allocation of capital will mean more going to emerging markets and less going to exaggerated mortgages, etc., etc., in the industrialized world, but a concern here is whether the regulatory reform will be a disguised form of financial protection. now, that's an issue that as the reform structural reform is played out, and we're glad that that's being done or should be done, in the financial stability board, which is now being democratized, all the g-20

countries are members, we are participating in the process, i think we want to be sure that disguised financial protectionism does not find its way into the system under the guise of improving the regulatory structure. so the third key point i think, and that's going to affect a lot of, you know, investor animal spirits, is what happens to all the protectionist noise. now, there is genuine concern around the world that there's too much protectionist noise. there's actually also an appreciation that there's much more noise than action. and i think from a political point of view, we know that if you have to -- if you're experiencing a downturn, i think the points that larry made about the numbers of people who are ouout of a job, because actually some of them have walked out of the labor force, is much larger than the unemployment rate and clearly, that's a political

reality. the world recognizes that, so i'm hoping that the protectionist noise remains noise and doesn't get translated into action. but you know, one of the issues that we need to think about, for the last five or six years, in the industrialized world, the charge towards globalization and integration has been led by the financial sector. the manufacturing sector has actually taken it for granted and not been the leading force in pushing for multilateral trade negotiations, entrepreneuetc., etc.,has realll sector. now that sector at the moment can be as it were, retired first, nursing its wounds, understandable, it will come back, but as a result, in the short term, you to not have in the industrialized world, an organized voice pointing to the need to maintain an integrated, open global economy. i was very encouraged by what larry said, that this is a

win-win situation, he said that yesterday on -- in this forum. it's a win-win situation, and in the u.s., long-term interests and integrated global economy is very important. i think what's going to happen is that the ability of the world to resist protectionist pressure, which is actually now in the industrialized world, this is one of the great asymmetries. 10 years ago, emerging market countries are for bringing down trade barriers or fighting a lot of resistance and nervousness in their country. we've done that successfully. and actually created a private sector, which is quite open, quite confident, willing to get on with the world. i think -- it depends on the quality of political leadership that can be mobilized to make sure that something happened and this is where it comes in. the credibility for global action is going to be tested by the do-around, not by climate

change. i mind it difficult to believe that if the global community can't resolve multilateral trade negotiations, that it will be able to handle much more complex issues like climate change, it's going to be difficult. that's it. thanks a lot. >> i'm losing control here. you covered everything. [applause] >> the -- i'm losing control as i knew i would. dominique strauss-kahn wants to intervene and i want to -- if we're very disciplined. >> thank you for giving me the floor for the third time. i'll be very, very short recall looking at the new gross model and what we're going to do in the coming years, a different point and i don't want to address all of them, one is obviously debt facility and that will be one of the main concerns of many countries. another one is the one we were just discussing extensively, on

the relationship between service countries and deficit countries, this kind of thing. but the third one i would like to emphasize on a little is that the gross model obviously will be a low carbon gross model, and it may surprise some of you, that it may be a concern for the imf, but it is, because when i look at what happened in copenhagen, it seems to me that the question behind the discussion was not only a question of binding requirement or something like that, but also obviously a question of financing and i could not believe that the problem could be as big as we all know, saying that it may be the biggest challenge that mankind ever had to face, that for several generations, our kids and the kids of our kids will live in an impossible world and that we will be stopped by traditional financing problems. so then if we have to think out of the box, then if it's obvious

that developing countries don't have the money to pay for adaptation and mitigation of the climate change problem. if it's obvious that developed countries don't have the money, because they have this debt sustainability problem, directly related to the solution we provide for this crisis, then we'll have to find innovative ways to finance it and we are going to provide some idea, built around the green fund, devoted to -- [inaudible] that is needed for addressing the problem, based on capitalization of the sum coming from central banks, backed by -- and the system will be criticized a lot, but that's not the problem, which provide a industry innovative way to try to find the financing to deal with the question which cannot be seen as a huge problem with

no solution. so the gross model out of the process certainly has to deal with traditional question of gross model, that's sustainability, imbalances and all those kind of things. i'm not saying it's important at all. it's of critical importance, but also, it has to do -- it has to be low carbon gross model, which means that the financing for this has to be provided and if cannot be provided and obviously cannot be through traditional way of financing, then we have to find out of the box ideas, and we will relive the paper in a couple of weeks with one possible out of the box idea based on what we know, what we can do, which is sdr's issuance, so i wanted just to make this small announcement. >> ok. [applause]

another big structural issue. >> i'm particularly interested in two aspects, do you have anything you would like to add specifically, because i know you're very involved in the financial regulation thing and then finally, there's the euros only imbalance issues. many of us are concerned that the net pressure in the euro zone from from massive fiscal contraction and that that will make it very, very difficult for it to make contribution to global growth and euro zone is the world's second largest economy, so would you like to comment briefly on those two points? >> i will actually friday to combine the two, martin, because i think that the -- certainly the euro's own experience is relevant to the coordination that dominique was referring to, and coordination of economic policy just like any coordination is extremely difficult. and that's what we've been experiencing in the euro zone, the euro zone has been in existence for 10 years, the

european union following that, but to coordinate, to make sure that we adopt the same economic policies that we see the same urgency of the same degree, the same level, is a tough call and it's anser sighs of discipline, that each member has to adhere to and i have no doubt that all members of the euro zone understand the issue and understand the urgency of delivering against commitment. it's clearly an everyday test. so when dominique is referring to the need for coordination and all of the panel speakers have referred to that need for coordination, i have -- i have enthusiasm and concern at the same time. and i believe that in the interest of time, which i believe is very much of the essence, in the face of our public opinions, in the face of the need for development in some countries of readjustment between others and unemployment

ricing in many others -- rising in many others, i think that's in addition to the long-term coordination goal we should have, which is difficult to accomplish, which is a matter of discipline for each and every member. i would like to come on the imf and the fsb for the work that they're doing, but my suspicion is that sooner rather than later, they're going of to -- enter into a job of reconciliation. in other words, rather than pure coordination and making sure that everybody plays exactly by the same rules, applying the same models, we're probably going of to -- enter in to the reconciliation exercise, where we're going of to -- check whether the -- going to have to check whether the rules applied here are consistent with the rules supplied somewhere else and are trying to achieve the same purpose. and i'll give you one example for that. if we look at the accounting rules, for instance, and i won't bore you with the details of former iaf39, but if we look at the position taken by the fasb and the position taken by the iasb and the goals and purposes and expectations in various

corners, i don't see very well how we're going to converge in that respect and clearly, that's where -- maybe as an alternative or as a pathway towards convergence and coordination, we're going to need this reconciliation efforts. it's -- it's not the perfect solution, but in the interest of time, i don't see what an alternative we have at this point in time. >> thank you very much. we only have five minutes. and i'm going to take one question at this stage, see what -- very pointed, does anybody want -- yes. the person has got a hand up there. i have a suspicion i might know this person. but of course, i couldn't see him. >> i have to apologize. chris jiles. four years almost to the day, the people's republic bank of china committed china to r

rebalance demand and to slow the rate of growth over goods. i don't know how to put this politely, but clearly we heard the same thing today and it might be a preliminary bit of a credibility problem in these commitments. could you answer, why we should believe you more today than we could believe your boss four years ago? >> i'm sorry. i cannot see you obviously, but i cannot here you. >> the question was, the promise you made for rebalancing was made here four years ago by the governor of the people's bank. what is different this time? >> well, it's a long process. it's not overnight thing, right? we're working on those things. it probably will last for another five years or four years, but we're working on it. usc, progress day by day, year by year. i can promise you that.

>> china is a very old country is the normal answer to these questions. time is measured differently there. i will make one more question. the gentleman here. i can't really see the back because of the light. could you stand up, please? and very sharp. wait. wait. you need a microphone. everybody is interested in china. >> you are the man, so -- >> very quick. >> the question is, why -- i just don't understand, why the appreciation of the generation is not part of the rebalancing. even just a few days ago here you said that you are seeing currency as stable, stability as a plus, but your country -- it should just go up. >> sorry. >> finally, finally. exchange rates issue -- >> one minute. >> i need one and a half minutes.

>> we will be shot or i will be. >> the issue obviously within this group, rebalance issue, but it's a small part. exchange rate changes will not be able to change the whole thing. we saw experience in germany, we saw experience in japan. the exchange rates are not necessarily changing the global trade balance. i think that's a very important things. the third thing is china is a developing country and also big country, on stability, they're very important. they have 1.3 trillion people. they need a job. a stable exchange rate, i think, is good for china, also for the world. as i said. and when our neighbor or the other currency depreciates, we didn't do it. when it depreciates another 30%,

we didn't do it. the if the global is ready to do the excess strategy, china is ready, and including various issues, exchange issues, hall these issues. it's a lot of global coordination required. >> ok. i'd love to continue with that issue for the next two hours. i'm going to make three points in 10 seconds. from which i take to be the big take-aways. one, nobody has disagreed that -- not surprisingly, that the great danger is early exit from stimulus rather than late exit, which is just i'm not very confident about the sustained private sector recovery in the developed world. secondly, there is no consensus on a completely new capitalism, but pretty strong sense of the financial sector shouldn't be allowed to run quite as it did

before. but it's the new proposals need to be regulated -- coordinated and there's a lot of regulatory uncertainty out there, and that clearly wasn't really disputed. and finally, this rebalancing discussion is going to be very, very long and very, very messy. but at least countries are saying the right thing, because they do seem to realize that mars isn't a good export market. thank the panel. >> it could be long, but it could be constructive. >> it's always constructive. at least the panel is constructive. i'm pleased to thank the panel. they've been excellent with these two subjects and remember south africa. [inaudible conversations]

>> our company, whether it's providers of video, or those who actually invest to create the content, are working overtime to figure out how to get consumers all of the content they want on every platform or device that they may own as quickly as possible. >> this weekend, kyle mcslarrow, head of the national communications and telecommunications industry for what's next on cable. >> now, part of a recent conference of the national gay

and lesbian task force. we'll hear from executive director, rea carey, about her group's political agenda. this is a of half-hour. >> i love you too. >> oh, we're here, a year ago, when we came together, as kay said, we were digesting a couple of high-profile losses, but at the same time, we were filled with hope, our minds filled with possibility and promise. our sweat, votes, money and worked had helped elect a new president and a more pro-lgtb congress and finally, it seems, we might, we might start building a solid floor of legal equality from which we could reach the sky of freedom.

the bush-cheney years were behind us. change was coming. and it was no longer a question of if, but when. and for those of us who have been fighting for so long, and that's every one of us in this room, and millions who are not with us today, when was sounding pretty good. we believed and why shouldn't we, he said, i'm running for president, to build an america that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all. a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters, we believed. he said it's wrong to have millions of americans living as second class citizens in this nation. i will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all lgtb americans. we agreed, we were eager to see what a fierce advocate could do.

but now, it's a year into this new administration. it's a year into this new congress. there have been glimmers of advocates, but certainly not fierceness. change is more than worried. change is action. [applause] >> if we really are all created equal, if it really doesn't matter who we are or what we look like, or who we love, then it's time for this president and this congress to take concrete steps to ensuring that equality. [applause] >> and since the president and congress brought up the topic of don't ask, don't tell in the last week, let's start there. if the administration does in

fact implement soon what it now states, that it can do under the existing law, the lives of thousands of service members will begin to improve and the witch hunt will end. and i thank the president for showing leadership in taking these steps. i really do. [applause] >> but let me be clear. a yearlong study does not a fierce advocate make. a year is far too long to wait and it's time the president used the executive branch to stop these discharges now, while the military and congress move to bring this shameful and

discriminatory chapter of u.s. history to an end. [applause] >> mr. president, the ball is in your court. you have the opportunity to go down in history, as one of the few presidents who acted decisively to move human rights forward. now, while we have criticized the president, we must hold equally, if not more accountable, the members of congress who stand in the way of legal quality. [applause] >> their hands are not clean. i've been out in gay america for 27 years, since i was a teenager. i know that change takes time. but happen, it must. things take time we're told. we're in two wars, facing an economic crisis. there's climate change.

look at the calendar, we'll get to you. well, first, i say those issues concern us too. [applause] >> and i am looking at the calendar and it is 2010. 2010. should freedom have to wait any longer? should equality be something we schedule? should we only act to end blatant discrimination when it's politically convenient? no. that's why we've come together this weekend. because the change we seek must come from us, from our strategic work together. we thought we were finally going to have leadership that would stand with us, work with us, and for us. but that hasn't fully happened yet. and so it's still up to us to push and in fact, to lead. [applause]

we, we in this room, we across the country are the agents of change. we have the power to compel change. and while the struggle has become a political struggle, one used to divide people, and turn groups in our country against open other, to rally electoral and political favor, if you step outside this entrenched political battle, at its most basic, this is about our humanity. our equality and frankly, the integrity of our country. and when it comes to equality, full equality, you either have it or you don't, and we don't. [applause] >> last june, we asked people to send us letters, many of you in this room wrote them to us, that i then and delivered to the president. and with a school teacher wrote, that she has to hide the fact

that she has a partner and two kids, and that she could lose her job if anyone finds out, she's not equal and we're not equal. equality is a moral imperative, because who we are and who we love should not be the subject of political debate. it should not be put up to the political whim of voters, and certainly our lives should not have to be on trial. there can be no compromise on civil rights. no piecemeal human rights. these rights must be unabridged and we stand with all those who seek the promise of equality, and who still struggle for its fulfillment. [applause] and i suggest to those who say don't push so hard, just wait.

that sounds like advice from somebody already enjoying the benefits of hey quality. -- equality. someone who can marry who they want. someone who can serve their country freely. someone no can enter nursing homes without having to go back in the closet. someone who doesn't have to face the indignities of filling out form after form deciding if they will cross off mother or father and write in a new word, just to reflect the realities of our families. i know the pain of how this invisibility affects our children and to that person, asking us to wait, a little reminder, this is no such thing as being just a little equal. what has gotten lost in washington and communities across the nation is that this is not a political question, this is a moral question. justice and freedom are not just american promises, they are not

just lgtb promises. they are human rights. and when the president says he's committed to equal rights and congress takes an oath to uphold the founding principles of our nation, that doesn't mean some rights, it means all rights. non-negotiableble. it is 2010 and we have waited long enough. if we don't leave here this weekend together focused on real change, last year's when will become if once again. compelling change to happen is and always has been up to us. and honestly, i take faith in that, because i've seen what we can do together. when we dedicate ourselves, when we decide we're not going to settle for anything than what we

deserve, so while we wait for action, for the president to of move beyond words and in to bold actions, and for congress to find its moral compass, we're going to keep pushing and keep working and much of this change will happen in our own cities and states across the country. [applause] >> and that work is not easy. it takes sacrifice. both personally and for our families. we in this room know that deeply. we've seen long days and long nights. and while at the end of those days, there will be wins and losses, regardless, we keep moving forward. we keep working together, we keep getting more support and we keep getting stronger. no matter what happens along the way, the dignity of our lives will not be denied.

[applause] >> and that's what the pundits milled in their post-election discussion and analysis of maine. that one ballot measure was a reflex on our -- wasn't a reflection on our movements or goals. maine wasn't definitive or a turning of the tide, any more than it turns out california was. do our losses hurt, particularly for families in maine and california and elsewhere? absolutely. does it mean we are giving up, allowing a temporary loss to stand in the way of history? absolutely not. [applause] this year, this year, we gained marriage equality, in vermont, iowa, connecticut, new hampshire, and washington, d.c.

you did that work. we did that work. we successfully fought back attempts to roll back protections in places like gainseville and kalamazoo. you did that work. we did that work. and in cities large and small, like salt lake city and redding, pennsylvania, we ensured non-discrimination protections to thousands more. we did that work together. our grassroots support is strong and growing. our progress, on the local and state level, is definitively forward, not backward. and mark my words, we will regain marriage in california and maine and elsewhere.

my grandmother has a magneton her refrigerator, she's got it for as long as i can remember and i keep a copy of it in my wallet. it says, fall down seven times, get up eight. and well in her 90's, it has served her well and it serves our movement well. we've seen that when we come together, when we focus, when we roll up our sleeves and dig in, we create change. in the past decade, through our work together, the number of states recognizing same-sex relationships increased from two to 11 plus the district of columbia. the number of states outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation increased from 12 to 22. outlawing gender equality jumped from one to 14.

[applause] >> and we are, we have elected hundreds of pro-lgtb candidates and defeated those who are not our friends. and just in this past year, through our work together, as kate mentioned, we finally passed and got signed in to law the matthew shepherd and james byrd jr. hate crimes prevention act. [applause] >> let us not forget, let us not forget that one the important things of the signing of that act is that for the first time in this nation's history, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are covered in federal law. and through the advocacy of our

new beginnings federal policy project, a collaboration of 20 organizations, we have already made tangible federal policy changes that will improve the lives of lgtb people, including seniors, people with low incomes, and transgender people and we have ensured that our marriages and our partnerships will be counted and reported out of the 2010 census. [applause] this is what can happen. this is what does happen when we work together and we push together. this year, i have been reminded again and again, that our real inspiration comes from each other. that's who keeps us pushing. who epiphany able us to get up day after day and keep working. that's who truly in expires us and keeps us going.

it's the transgender high school student who goes to school every day, dressed as she wants, no matter what is said and no matter what fingers are pointed. it's the soldier determined to fulfill his or her dream and whose love for our country is greater than our country's loves for them. it is the parents of those killed by hate who have committed their lives to stopping violence from happening in the first place. it is the straight neighbor who walks side by side with us in the streets of professor test. -- protest. these are our heroes. these are my heroes. [applause] >> for those of you who look at the last year and are angry, to those who are frustrated by the

pace of change and the circuitous route it has taken, i say so am i. but that anger, that anger unless channeled will not bring us change. that frustration, unless redirected, will not move us forward. that frustration turned upon each other is destructive. [applause] and may i say, may i say that is exactly what our opponents want. that want us distracted and downtrodden, they want us splintered and sniping, saying that one tactic will of is a the day over others. they want us disorganized, working secondly.

they see us united and it scares them. that's why -- that's why this year, we will not ask for change. we will not debate change. we will not plan for change and we will not wait for change. we will create change. [applause] >> there will be a day when people will wonder how our rights were even an issue. what was the big deal. this state of inequality cannot be our children or our grand children's inheritance. [applause] that means stepping up and answering the call at this moment in history. we have an opportunity to lead. it is up to us to define what

must happen next, and what will happen next. if we do not step up with an expansive view of what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, if we do not explain that being lgt or b is simply being human, we will be making a mistake. whose calling is that, if not ours? an agenda, yeah, i have an agenda. certainly. let's fight the legislative battles, including, let's end don't ask, don't tell, let's overturn the so-called defense of marriage act. pass both an inclusive employment, non-discrimination act and the domestic partnership benefits and obligation act for federal employees. [applause] >> and state by state, let's

enact anti-bullying laws to protect lgtb youth. but let's not be defined by those battles solely. let's not be limited to those ways of defining our lives. we can't let others see us as just these issues. that others see our struggle as more as a movement for justice, equality, and liberation, as a movement for human rise, is critical to our success. and so as we step into this new year, let's lead, let's really, really lead, and as of today, fortunately, there are no places, and i do say as of today, because tomorrow, we'll see, but as of today, there are no places that face an imminent

threat of an anti-marriage or anti-lgtb discrimination measure in a city or state this year. however, if they come up, we will be there. [applause] and yet, with a ward connerly backed ban with affirmative action on the november ballot in arizona and the likelihood of a parental notification initiative in the ballot in california, and potential anti-immigrant measures, we must be at the ready to step up and work on these issues that affect our lives. [applause] let us work. let us work for meaningful health care reform that protects lgtb people. :

>> committed to freedom, justice and equality, then reforming our nation's cruel and broken immigration system must be on our agenda for action. [applause]

today, today there are at least 12 million immigrants including at least half a million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people who are forced to live in the shadows of our society. there are people like harold, an 18-year-old gay man who came to this country when he was 5 years old. this is really the only country he's ever known, but today because he's undocumented he cannot get a driver's license, cannot get a job, cannot get a student loan and is in constant fear of being arrested and deported to a country where he has no connections, no prospects, and where he cannot speak the language. there are people like victoria, an undocumented transgender woman who was swept up by the immigration system, put into a detention jail where she was denied hiv medications and medical attention even when she

was vomiting blood. this cost victoria her life. she died chained to a hospital bed with two immigration guards standing at the door. and, of course, there are at least 36,000 binational couples who cannot live together here in this country because federal law bans recognition of their relationships. so, yes, immigration reform is an lgbt issue. [applause] at some point be, at some point the president and congress will take up immigration reform. this fight will make the push for health care seem like a walk in the park. [laughter] it will involve incredibly hard

choices, but let's be clear -- we will stand by our allies in the immigration movement, in the immigration reform movement come what may. [applause] we need to make this next generation the decade our nation realized that we face far greater issues than who someone loves and wants to marry. that our strength as a people is weakened and lessened when we fight each other rather than the social, economic, environmental and global concerns that face us all. the lgbt community is talented, we are skilled, we are creative, we are ready to contribute to a vision of inclusiveness and to a transformed society. and if there was ever a time we needed to work together as one people, it is now. [applause]

believe it or not, believe it or not, there's still thousands of people who don't know anything about our lives and to whom we are invisible. so as we are wont to do, let's start right now and create some change. please, take out a piece of paper or your handheld. [laughter] i'm serious. now, at the top write, "my life." below that write, "talk, write, meet." now, as lgbt people and our straight allies, i want us all to commit to taking three

actions every month for the next year. each month talk. talk to a neighbor, a coworker or family member about an issue that affects your life. each month write, write a letter to the editor, write a blog, write on your facebook page, but write about an issue that affects your life. and each month meet, meet with your elected officials, meet with local nonprofits, meet with community leaders and talk about an issue that affects your life. when you get home, tape this up on your mirror or fridge with all your other after my missions and -- affirmations and reminders. if all of us just at this conference commit to this, we will have taken over 72,000 actions just in the next year to move forward the visibility of

our lives to engage and to advocate, 72,000 just at this conference. [cheers and applause] and i follow some of you on twitter, and you're my friends on facebook, so i know how far our reach is, and that isn't even counting the people watching this on c-span. but that's what we have to do. we have to take advantage of every available opportunity to push forward. we will create change. last year the right wing organization americans for truth about homosexuality -- and believe me, there's not a whole lot of truth there -- used a quote from my annual speech here in one of their fund raising letters. like good activists, we turned around and used their quote in our fund raising letter. [laughter] well, americans for truth about homosexuality, here is your money quote this year. [cheers and applause]

we are still recruiting! [cheers and applause] we are recruiting! we are recruiting a movement of people who care about freedom, justice and equality, and we will not stop until all people can live their lives without fear of persecution, prosecution or attack just because of who they are or who they love. we are still recruiting! [cheers and applause] we'll see what they do with that. [laughter] for 37 years the task force has been at the forefront of change, and that's exactly where we plan

to stay. and we want you there with us. as change agents we want the task force to be your home. for those of you who spend your days in public service working for change as local, state or federal government employees, you are home. for those of you who take action through blogs, social networking or tweets, you are home. for those of you who are an activist for queer nation, you are home. for those of you who lived it, you are home. [cheers and applause] for those of you who like elton john and lady gaga -- [cheers and applause] surely one of the queerest moments in grammy history, you are home. [laughter] for those of you who have the

courage to proudly practice your faith, to take back your faith, a faith that may have rejected you or others, you are home. [cheers and applause] and for those of you who are straight and see yourselves in the fight for lgbt equality and justice, welcome home. [cheers and applause] the task force has never been homogeneous. we are diverse, dynamic and passionate, and because of that we've not always agreed with each other. [laughter] but together we always compel this country to pay attention to our lives. we always compel others to evolve toward fairness, and

that's what we're going to keep doing. let us inspire each other to lead. to create a society where equality is unconditional. where the acceptance of diversity is not a goal, but a given. and where the concern is not who we love, but that we love. let's go create change. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> and next on c-span2 we'll here from christopher hill, the u.s. ambassador to iraq, as he looks at the upcoming march 7th national elections in that country. just getting underway from the u.s. institute of peace in washington, live coverage on

c-span2. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i'm cara, executive vice president here at the united states institute of peace. i'm delighted to welcome you all to help welcome and hear from ambassador chris hill. there will be time for questions after the ambassador's remarks, and i think we're using microphones? there will be microphones, roving mics, and if you would,

please, identify yourselves before you ask a question and to keep it relatively short so we can move around the room as quickly as possible. to introduce our guest of honor, i turn to ambassador richard solomon, president of the u.s. institute of peace. >> good morning and thank you all for turning out and thanks to all the cameras in the back. it's clear we have a very important and timely session today which in some ways is heralded by the lead headline in "the washington post" today, specter of sectarian strife resurfaces in iraq. this is a special occasion not only because of the work the institute has done on iraq over the years and the importance of something that isn't so much in our headlines these days as we focus on afghanistan, pakistan, other issues, but very much because of the opportunity we've had to work with ambassador hill

over the years. he has taken on some of the most difficult diplomatic assignments, and i suppose you could say in the old saw that no good deed goes unpunished. after four years of trying to get the six-party talk process moving forward in terms of the north korean nuclear program, something that i'm sure he will detail has had some significant and lasting impact in a positive direction, he was given the most challenging assignment that he has today as ambassador to baghdad. in 2005 there were elections in iraq that generated a wave of sectarian violence, and in terms of the president's objective of seeing the country stabilized and focusing on other challenges in the region, the upcoming elections are really critical

and we'll be hearing from our presenter his assessments of the current situation. ambassador hill, one of the outstanding diplomats of his generation and others no doubt, began his career in the peace corps in the cameroons, has been ambassador to macedonia, poland and south korea, republic of korea before his current assignment. he's received distinguished honor awards for his role in supporting the dayton accords and a special envoy for trying to stabilize the balkans. so we're exceptionally pleased that ambassador chris hill is with us today. please, mr. ambassador. [applause] >> thank you very much, dick. it's a great pleasure to be here at usip. i gather you're going to move to the new building pretty soon.

i will miss this building mainly because in my old job at east asia bureau we had a terrific view of the river which we don't have anymore. [laughter] so you remember the office. i mean, you'd look out there and look at the potomac river and think of north korea. [laughter] but it's, it's all gone now, and in its place is a beautiful, beautiful facility which i really do believe befits the status and the tremendous mission of the u.s. institute for peace, the things you've done, your work and really all over the world. i've worked with usip in every different part, i mean, whether in the balkans or in east asia, but i particularly appreciate what you all are doing in iraq because you're taking on one of the major challenges there which is conflict resolution and getting people in the same room to talk to each other and

getting people to sort of understand that there's a way through problems. and a way through by dialogue. i really appreciate the fact i saw ambassador bill taylor out there just a couple months ago, i think, and visiting and your office, i mean, you have a standing office there. it's working, you've gotten iraqis to buy into the process. in fact, i think you've got some iraqi employees there. and i think it's just a great credit to what you do because we've got a lot of talk shops in washington, but probably fewer do shops in washington. i think you, you do both very, very well, so we really, really appreciate what you've done with this institute and the direction it's going. so i'm, it's a great pleasure to come here. it's always a pleasure to be in washington, even a greater pleasure to leave, i guess, after a few days.

but i really do believe this is an important time for iraq. i think it's an important time for u.s./iraqi relations. i think really a time that will, i think, when we look pack it'll be a time -- back it'll be a time of probably one of the most critical periods because we are now on the eve of national elections in iraq which are coming up in some two and a half weeks. i was talking to the prime minister a couple weeks ago, and i said, you know, we have elections, you have elections in 30 days, and he said it's actually 28 days and 7 hours from now. [laughter] so i think everyone is very aware of the moment. it's also a year in which our military is preparing to draw down after seven truly, truly heroic years of service. it's a year in which the u.s. military will be out of combat

operations and will leave in its place later this, beginning of the fall we will have advised and assist brigades, but we will not be directly involved with combat operations. it's also a year in which our embassy -- bill, in fact, as someone who's run embassies was commenting on the size of the thing -- i think along with the great wall of china, it's one of two things you can see from outer space. [laughter] it truly is extraordinary. we are there, the u.s. embassy is there for the long haul. people who equate our interests in iraq with our troop presence have, may i say, kind of missed the point because we are interested in a long-term relationship, and the embassy that we have there is very much symbolic of that, of that relationship. it's also a year in which i think new economic potential

very much beckons iraq into this, into a new decade. we have a number of oil contracts that have been reached with international companies, iraq is really on the move economically. it's also now a year just after president obama stated his vision for iraq in his camp lejeune speech, and i think it's a very appropriate time to share some of the observations from the ground in baghdad and, if i can, lay out some of the, you know, what we believe will be the road ahead. this will be a landmark year as we pivot from a military-led engagement to a civilian-led presence. the dynamic of our relationship with iraq, with the iraq government will mature, and as we make this shift the american civilian military team, and it is one team and one mission, will put into practice the hard lessons of the past seven years.

general odierno and i share the presence and strong resolve to help iraq finally become a place where its citizens can live free of fear, resolve to help iraq build an inclusive political system where people have a say in the decisions that affect their lives, to help iraqi communities settle their differences peacefully just as usip is engaged in thats process, to resolve to help iraq modernize its economy and very much resolve to help iraq integrate with the region and with the world. it is no doubt a daunting agenda. our embassy works very closely with u.s. forces, iraq to chart the course forward. we're committed to this course not just for the satisfaction of helping iraq or to right past errors, but rather it's undeniably in the interests of the united states to do so and to stay engaged. opinions about iraq among pundits, professors, politicos are about as varied as, you

know, as a choice of the nfl draft. and i must say when people sort of talk about the various ideas they have, you know, you hear a lot of terms, must and should. the u.s. must do this, the iraqis must do that, defense department should do this, state department must do that and so on. and there are a number of musts. in fact, i saw one in a u.s. newspaper had an editorial around christmas, and there were 11 musts in the editorial. we call them the 11 musts of christmas, in fact. so i, you know, in looking at all these musts i think i've tried to boil them down to maybe three of them, and they are that the first must is we need to, we must help iraq build healthy political and democratic institutions in an environment of peace and security. second must is we must help iraq modernize its economy. if it doesn't have a modernized

economy, it's not going to work. i mean, that is really the name of the game. and thirdly, we must help iraq establish a productive relationship with its neighbors, and in so doing we can secure iraq's role as not only a reliable partner for the united states, but a strategic partner for the united states. now, of course, you can have a thousand musts, and it won't mean anything without a stable and secure situation in iraq. years of sacrifice and strategy have moved us ever closer to this critical stage. first of all, we won't ever forget the sacrifice of our u.s. military, our coalition partners, our iraqi counterparts who have taken on what is often a deadly and assuredly a daunting challenge. due to their collective efforts, violence against civilians, violence against elements of the iraqi state have dropped dramatically. in addition, violence against our forces has also dropped

precipitously in recent months. these changes which are evident all across iraq's 18 provinces are not only a sign of a stronger iraq, they're also a sign of a smarter american presence. a presence where we have learned the lessons of the last few years and, frankly, some of those lessons were very hard, indeed. just as we have brought change to iraq, so iraq has changed us. we have new military doctrine, a new counterinsurgency doctrine developed from our experience in iraq, we have new civilian military engagement. you know, i worked on military-civilian engagement in the balkans. i can tell you what we have going on in iraq is unprecedented in the scope and depth of the degree to which we work together with the military. the united states has developed many more effective uses of smart power, all of this can be traced directly to this war. and while every war is

different, the lessons learned through the sacrifice of lives and resources in iraq will inevitably change the way america interacts with the world. our efforts in iraq will be indelibly etched in the history books for future generations to judge. in 2006 and 2007, iraq interests and power were played out on the streets against the pack drop of -- backdrop of death, uncertainty and fear. today the notwithstanding the article in today's washington post, power and interest are battling it out with election posters that, frankly, obscure the bridges and blanket the markets in every province. if you drive through iraq today, you'll see these posters just everywhere, and they will look very familiar to anyone who's ever seen an election anywhere in the world. it is inspiring stuff. everybody has these posters out there, the campaign for this election has, indeed, begun. we know that late night

intensive negotiations and anyone who's negotiated with iraqis, you immediately see the prayer beads and the tea. i must confess i've engaged in both. as iraqis, politicians consolidate their blogs and hash out very tough political deals. truly the iraqi people have embraced the reality of democracy, and i, i think it's very important to understand that it is a place where people speak their minds. iraqis are quite comfortable letting you know where they stand, and the issue is to try to create some rules of the game of that, try to explain that politics can be just as tough as american football, but at least in american football we have a field that's 100 yards long, and we need some type of scope for how that iraqi politics is going to be, going to be played out. one of the major issues in the recent weeks that has been very

difficult in iraq has been the debaathification issue. given the history, given the baathists legacy in iraq, it is very understandable why it incites strong emotions in iraq. given the history of the u.s. in iraq if you look at the 1960s and how the u.s., the united states was very concerned about the potential spread of communism to iraq and how baathism was seen as an alternative to communism where the u.s. preferred it in 1968 that led to the return of baathists, how the u.s. preferred that outcome to a communist iraq, it is understandable, it is really understandable why some iraqis look at a pattern in the 1960s and think they're seeing a pattern today where the u.s. has been so concerned about other influences in iraq and somehow

when people look at that pattern, they think we must be in some way supporting a baathist resurgence in iraq. for americans it's hard to understand. after all, we have lost 4,000, over 4,000 of our countrymen in this struggle against baathism. we took on saddam hussein, we defeated him. he rooted out baathists throughout the country. it is simply extraordinary for americans to try to understand that some iraqis think we somehow support baathism. but when you look at this pattern in the 1960s, you can see how this distant and cracked mirror can somehow affect people's view of the current situation, so we need to be respectful of the history and respectful of people's emotions. i think when the initial lists of excluded candidates was read in the council of representatives -- and this was a process that i must be very clear with you that we did not feel passed any measure of transparency, a process of

naming people essentially denying them their rights to participate in the election without, in our view, any kind of due process -- we had a lot of concerns about this. but i think it is very, people need to understand that when this initial list of candidates was read in the council of representatives, it received standing and sustained applause from all the members there. baathism is a vibrant, important subject there. people feel strongly about it, and we need to respect that, and we need to understand that in dealing with it we need to try to deal with it not as a fundamental issue that is reflected in the constitution, but deal with the question whether it was done with sufficient transparency and done outside the political scope. obviously, we had some concerns about it. we registered those concerns with the iraqi government. we are very active in making sure iraqis understood our views on this. and so we felt, for example,

that there was scoring political points was a definitely a part of the controversy. yet i think it was very important for us to make clear to the iraqis that as they got ready for elections, they need to make sure that this baathist issue was handled in the context of the rule of law. so we have gotten through this issue now. it hasn't been easy, it is very upsetting to member -- to people who were excluded who don't feel that they should have been excluded, but we have moved on from that period now, and now with two and a half weeks to go we see, i think, a very vibrant campaign, and i think we will see that iraqis will whether they're sunni, shia or kurds, they will be voting in mass numbers. voters on march 7th will decide who fills 325 seats in the parliament with the winning bloc taking the lead in nominating the prime minister and the main

cabinet posts. now, i know many -- this being washington people want to know, well, who do you think's going to win? what are the polls suggesting? well, it is a very complex process because after the actual votes are talking tab lathed, ae worked very hard with our colleagues in the u.n., worked very hard with the high election commission to manage the technology of the elections which we believe will be run well, we know that as they get through the votes they will have to -- there are five major coalitions, and we'll have to see which one actually wins. and it will go to the major winner to see who will then try to form the government. and then that day, that march 8th or whenever this is finally decided, it will be later than march 8th, they will begin the process of putting together a new government. and this process will not be an easy process are. it will be a process in which

they need to reach out to different coalitions and put together some kind of coalition government. so i think this first of the musts that is helping iraq build healthy political and democratic institutions in a secure environment is something we really need to focus on. in the end, to this end we have been, our diplomats at the embassy in baghdad and the civilian experts are very heavily involved. secretary clinton has assured the state department is adequately funded to assist in this democratic project. we've provided some $200 million to assist the iraqi people in holding these credible and free elections. the true test of victory will not be in the behavior of the winners when they are finally announced, but rather it will be how the losers accept the results. so i would argue in iraq as elsewhere losers have an even bigger responsibility to be part of the, part of the political

process. and i've always felt that the quality of democracy is determined by the losers, and iraq will be no exception to that. those who do lose need to understand that they have this responsibility, they have in some ways as great -- they have to win the public's trust as well. this has implication for what could be a lengthy government formation process, and it also affects the security. security concerns keep us very watchful on the, of the frictions that have been in plain view during the current full-contact political season. the issue runs much deeper than the election mass of iraq. we all know about some of the showcase political splits in iraq, the arab/kurdish shoe, the sunni/shia issue. but, you know, when you're there, of course you're concerned about arab/kurdish shoes, of course you're concerned about sunni/shia issues, but you're also

concerned about kurd/kurdish shoes. you're concerned about sunni/sunni issues, shia/shia issues. in kirkuk there are also kurd/arab/turk issues, and frankly, other turkmen have issues with each other. those are deadly, deadly serious for those of us who are there, and none is more essential than the disputed internal boundaries, the so-called dibs. that forms the center piece of the arab/kurd dispute. there are some 15 features along this kurdish/arab divide. kirkuk, these are all areas in

which there is a dispute, in which there are forces who do not share the view of the iraqi army forces, and we need to deal with these things. kirkuk, which is number 11 of those, has rich oil fields but also a very difficult history. it's become the focal point of this arab/kurd dispute. the unite is determined to help re-- united states is determined to help resolve these differences and play an important role in trying to address them. we have sent one of the state department's premier regional experts to be in kirkuk, a senior foreign service officer who speaks flawless arabic, and he is meeting every day with the various parties in kirkuk to try to deal with these, with these problems. the shia/sunni relationship has implications well beyond iraq's borders, even beyond our times. but intramural fishers among sunnies are also common.

if you witness the divisions among secular and more strictly religious sunnies that we see is playing out in some of the provinces. the standoff at the provincial government building last week which showcased the shadow line between political gamesmanship and potential for violence. some observers think of the kurds as a united front, but the picture is far more complex when you look at what is going on, especially with the development of the change list which is a new political identity that has come out of the puk, out of president talabani's pu,uk. well beyond just the three provinces of the kurdish regional government. the shia/shia divisions are also front and isn't. prime minister maliki is

fielding challenges from opposing parties. recently, i had the opportunity to visit hugh sane al-sadr who's actually a cousin, so sometimes the divisions are within the family as well, and he spoke of the benefits of a united nationalistic iraq that incorporates all religions and all communities, a refreshing message, i think, for the iraqi people. we had a long subject that spanned -- conversation that spanned subjects from debaathification to water sources. he talked about iraqi politicians lacking a strong base and the fact that some resort to religion and sectarianism to define themselves. actually, this is part of our conversation, but he mentioned our conversation on his web site, so i don't mind telling you about it as well. [laughter] in short, it was heartening to see a cleric of this stature talk about these issues, and i think there are some people in iraq and such people that we need to reach out to and listen to, not just the politicians of

iraq, but also people who, i think, have a great role to play in influencing iraqi public opinion. which this does lead to the a question that, i think, comes up a lot which is, there is no doubt that today there's a big difference between where iraq now has its sovereignty and where we as diplomats must deal with a sovereign iraq and the old days in the cpa in '03 when essentially iraq was ruled by u.s. of-ish -- u.s.-issued decrees such as the head of the debaathification commission. i think it's important to understand, though, that what we are -- the way we deal with iraqis is through diplomacy. we need to -- which is, diplomacy is really, i mean, there are probably a million definitions of it, but for me it's getting people to do things that they wouldn't otherwise do. and the moments in diplomacy

where your interlocutor slaps the side of his head with the palm of his hand and says, oh, now i get it, now i understand, that was a great argument, i never thought of that before, those moments are as rare in diplomacy, frankly, as they are in life. i mean, we need to engage with iraqis, we need to show them what our interests are, why we believe those interests are their interests, and essentially at time just make them trust us because their good relationship with us depends on trying to work through problems together. and i'd say we're doing that. but one thing it is not is a sort of false dichotomy where somehow we're, quote, not using our leverage, that somehow we have this leverage in our back pocket, but for some pedagogical reason we prefer to spend six weeks arguing with them over something rather than use this leverage that we could pull out of our back pocket and end the discussion on that day. it just doesn't work that way.

we have, we certainly have leverage in iraq, we certainly have a major role in iraq, and i would say the most important leverage we have in iraq is not just the number of troops we have there today as o to ezed -- opposed to what we might have a year or two years from now, or the troops today compared to two years ago, but rather our leverage is that we want to have a serious long-term relationship with iraq, and if the iraqis desire a serious long-term relationship with the united states, they need to work with us on some of these issues. so that is how the process works. we sit down, we explain issues that we think are important whether it's how they handle debaathification or how they, or whether this is the use of the army -- there's the use of the army in an inappropriate way in saladin, and if the we're going to have a good relationship, we

need these issues resolved. we are continuing to draw a way forward, and we have some truly superb soldiers in that country. it's truly amazing. we have specialists, we also have diplomats like myself. but we're determined to find workable solutions with the iraqis. we have worked a security mechanism along the arab/kurd fault line. this has not been easy, but this is really directly due to the great efforts of general odierno and his staff in trying to get members of kurdish potential murder da to work with the iraqi army, to go through joint training programs. this is something where you really have to do it step by step, and it is working. it is beginning to work. we are bolstering civil society, we're providing guidance and support to local organizations dedicated to uniting rather than dividing communities, we're maintaining a strong presence in the process, in the provinces

through our provincial reconstruction teams. you know, we still have some 22 provincial reconstruction teams. these are teams, these are joint military and u.s., we have american diplomats out in these places, people who have curtailed assignments in other countries such as places like, places literally like paris, france. we have people out in these provicinity cial -- provincial reconstruction teams. people every day are dealing at the provincial level, helping provinces with social, political and economic development. our provincial reconstruction team, we also have cell phones out there as well. laugh. [laughter] we've recently been working a very tough political military problem in nineveh which is one of the most difficult issues in iraq, and we have the head of our provincial reconstruction team, a guy named pat murphy who was also a peace corps volunteer

in cameroon. he has been out there, you know, looking -- working with the governor in nineveh, working with the kurdish minority there. it has been a really tough issue, but we have people out there dealing with these thick r things. -- things. so even our strong advocacy for opening iraq's oil sector has also had, we believe, a sal you story effect on some of the arab/kurdish shoes that we've been dealing with, the krg. as iraq has begun to develop their oil sector, i think the kurds have been interested in the fact that 17% of what potentially in the next ten years could be ten million barrels a day, 17% of ten million barrels is more than 100% of 100,000 barrels. so i think what we've been able to do in terms of encouraging transparency and openness and careful management and development of the oil sector has also contributed to trying to pull iraq, iraq together.

time and time again we've seen the power of the u.s. stand on issues as a key factor in promoting central tolerance and limiting extremism. despite the drawdown in funds and troops, it remains true in iraq that what we think and, more importantly, what we do matters profoundly in iraq. so all of us need to acknowledge and respond to the changing nature of our presence. this is not a time for slipping into complacency. the u.s. must remain mindful of its continuing in234r50u7bs and be -- influence and be prepared to use that influence to realize positive outcomes in iraq that benefit both the iraqi people as well as the american people. so as i mentioned with these oil contracts, the economic life of iraq does need to begin to mature. with targeted, smart help from us, the potential is really almost limited. this is our second must. we must help iraq modernize it economy. and there's no mystery here.

iraq's economic future hinges on its careful management of its oil sector. iraq is off to a good start, albeit is slow start, but a very good start. and it's also a transparent start as the use of these plex si glass boxes on live national tv as oil companies put their bids into these boxes and the bids were opened up on national tv, as that would suggest. the oil sector taking off in iraq could fundamentally change the lives of every iraq citizen, build the confidence that iraq needs to stand with its neighbors. they've realized some ten contracts, two of them are u.s. companies and some major u.s. companies including exxonmobil are going to be there, but they also have companies from all five members of the, all five permanent members of the u.n. security council. in short, many other countries now have an investment in iraq's security and its future.

so modernizing the energy service sector could create tens of thousands of jobs, attract hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign investment which, in turn, could fund rapid reconstruction and development of iraq. can import modern business practice, modern technology to an iraqi sector that has not seen foreign involvement since nixon was president. in short, when you look at the fact the emergence of foreign oil companies in iraq that is high-technology companies, this is a major new development in iraq they haven't seen for a long, long time. but this doesn't mean it's going to be easy, it doesn't mean we're going to -- that this is all assures iraq's future. it's going to be the, require every day old-fashioned advocacy, and that's something embassies do best we have experts deeply involved in advising on contracts, technology and geology and

environment, i might add. and our prt in basra is ramping up to support international oil companies as they set up in the operations and the oil-rich vicinity. you know, i think it was important, it was important to me that actually the first oil companies were not american. you know, we have, we have some representation, but the first oil companies were something else. there was a british company, a dutch company, also a russian company before the u.s. was, u.s. companies were there. so careful management of iraq's oil riches is essential because an iraq that succeeds economically as well as politically will be self-reliant and secure in its place in the region. also in position to live up to still another must which is the fact that we must help iraq establish better relations with its neighbors. we still have considerable work to do on this front because iraq's place in the world depends not just on us, not just on oil, but iraq itself and on its neighbors. egypt and turkey are stepping up

forging genuine multifaceted relationship with iraq, but us it's troubling that some other neighbors, and in particular some of iraq's arab neighbors, have been slow to embrace iraq, a predominantly arab country that in 1945 was one of the founding members of the arab league. of course, there's one neighbor that plays a significant role in it own history as well as iraq's, and i'm, of course, talking about iran. there's no question that iran has shown a very ma left lent -- malevolent face in iraq. it has probed for weaknesses, it has tried to frustrate u.s. and iraqi common goals, it has been responsible for helping armed militia groups, it's been responsible for training, it's been responsible for some of the munitions that have found their way into iraq, indeed, it's been responsible for some of the munitions that we've found land almost on our heads in the green zone. this said -- so this means we

need to be very mindful and very vigilant to this continued interest from malevolent interest from iraq. it's an interest that seems to emerge mostly from the kutz force in iraq, it seems to be very much militarily and security focused. but we also need to be respectful of the complexity of the shared history in iraq and not understand these issues to be sort of from an american point of view. we need to understand that the relationships there go far back in history, far before we were part of the equation. iraqi arabs and iranians have differed over the proper role of religion and government for decades, and in this context we sometimes see iranian influence thinking it's always about us. it is not always about us. i can assure you that no one in the embassy or camp victory is naive about this iranian

presence. we know the iranians are very much these malevolent acts, but we are working with the iraqi authorities on it, and we are convinced the iraqi authorities share that concern. they did not choose iran as a neighbor and, therefore, in the way they deal with iran as a neighbor, they deal very carefully because they know that for the next thousand years iran is likely to be their neighbor. it does not mean they are any less vigilant. for those who say that the shia in iraq are somehow part and parcel of the shia in iran, they do not understand the fact that during the iran/iraq war saddam hussein fought that war with an army that was 80% shia who never gave in to the iranians. so i don't think people should be concerned about the notion that somehow the shia in iraq are inadequately concerned about the continued independence and territorial integrity of their country. so i am not sure that even if

they were in tehran and people woke up and decided they wanted to be so lens saw instead of martial law poland, i'm not sure that would mean a end to the meddling or easing of relations with tag bad. -- baghdad. i think it is going to take some time, and it's going to start with an acknowledgment from iran that if they want a good relationship with iraq, they had better start respecting iraq's sovereignty and respecting the fact that iraq is going to be their neighbor for the next thousand years and not an isolated neighbor as it has often been in the past, but rather a neighbor that will have a good relationship with the united states, a good relationship with the world. indeed, i would argue that the united states, one of the great calling cards we have in iraq is that we can introduce iraq to the international community. at present iran can introduce iraq to north korea and not much

more. so all of these musts, all of these political and economic conundrums, all the harsh chapters of history whose pages we need to turn, all of these constitutes an enormous challenge for us. and so the last thing, obviously, i want to be is guilty of careless on optimism,t it's also no time for pessimism either. it's time for tenacity, steadiness and resolve. we must be persistent in the face of adversity, we must be committed to achieving victory, achieving success. we're aware of the political complexity, we're realistic about how to address it. we have no illusions that things will be easy. as vince lombardi once observed, the only place success comes before work is in the english dictionary. [laughter] but as a new iraqi government lays out what kind of relationship it wants with the united states, they will need to see the united states is committed to building a relationship that will work out to our mutual benefit in the

long term. we know as we deal with this very difficult problem, as we contemplate the effects of our mistakes, the effects of many mistakes that have been there, we need to approach the subject of iraq with a great sense of hue pillty -- humility. humility in the mistakes that have been made. we need to understand that as we deal with this complex place, information and knowledge are not going to be sufficient in addressing our role in iraq. we're going to need some wisdom as well. we're going to need that wisdom as we move through the future. our diplomats, soldiers and civilian experts will continue to apply american power as best we can from mosul to baghdad, from anbar to basra. we'll continue to support the development of a robust rule of law in iraq carried out by impartial judges, trained police, competent military.

that is another issue we work on every single day of the year in baghdad. we will pour our energy into expanding private sector trade and investment so that iraq entrepreneurs have a shot at success, and we'll stay deeply committed to helping create a politically sound and prosperous iraq whose leaders and diplomats, friends to the united states engage confidently and prudently with their neighbors and with the world. a stable, secure and self-reliant iraq, in other words, is a strong and proud iraq, can be a catalyst for stability in the region. and given the threats that remain, the pains of the past and all the blood that's been shed there, this would constitute a major strategic success. so for iraq certainly, but also for those military and civilians who have served and, indeed, who have sacrificed so much. so in the end we are there, we are in iraq not only for u.s./iraqi relations, we're there for u.s. interests. we believe we can succeed there, we are very mindful of the difficulties, and we are very

steady in confronting them every day of the year. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> okay. okay. >> does that work? >> yeah. >> ambassador hill, we want to thank you very much for that presentation, and we appreciate, also, the time you have allocated in your time back here to answer questions from people. >> sure. >> you have a standing-room-only crowd here. you don't see it here, but there are three other rooms on this floor that are packed, and you can wave to them through one of these, one of these cameras there. [laughter] we are also streaming your presentation on our internet site, and so there are people in baghdad and in beirut and cairo who are listening who may send us questions as well.

>> relaxed. [laughter] >> that's exactly right. i may get a couple of cards from other questioners in other rooms here and also from the internet. so, so what i would ask the questioners is to raise your hand, wait to be recognized. i have two people who -- liz and zach -- who will be bringing you a microphone so you can speak into it. that will help our friends on the cameras to be able to hear your question. keep it concise, and we've got a good amount of time. so let me start right here. thank you, zach. very good. ah, okay. go ahead. and you'll be next there, sir. thank you. >> pierre. how essential a successful election is for the plans of drawdown of american troops in iraq? >> well, first of all, we have,

we have an agreement with the iraqis called the security agreement which does envision a drawdown of u.s. troops. the first major element of that drawdown was the fact that on june 30th last year we withdrew from the cities and towns. i think it was very important because many iraqis questioned whether we were, in fact, prepared to do that, and as general odierno has eloquently said on a number of occasions, we accepted some tactical risk for a strategic gain. and i think the risk has proven to be, has proven to be minimal, and i think what we have shown the iraqi people is we are prepared to do as we are, as we have agreed to do in the security agreement. so i think it was very important, and i think, frankly, if you look at opinion surveys of iraqi people or what they think of the u.s. forces, it is

increasingly favorable due to the fact that we do what we say we're going to do. so with respect to the drawdown now, we have a plan, and this was set in motion by president obama's speech in camp lejeune just a year ago, but we will withdraw to some 50,000 troops by the end of, by the end of august and that all our troops will be in advise and assist brigades, that is no more combat operations by the troops. i think a key element of this and is to have successful elections. when you say what is the alternative to successful elections, the alternative's not very nice. it's a very unsuccessful process with a very uncertain future. and so we are predicating our, the troop withdrawals on our confidence that we will succeed with what we're doing. and so we do expect a successful

election. again, elections are not, are essential because you have, you know, the constitution is quite clear, there need to be elections now, they need to seat a new parliament, and we have every reason to believe that they will succeed. we've worked very hard with the iraqis on this. you realize there are some 6,200 candidates. we have, you know, we have printed up the ballots for some 18.9 million iraqis. they've been printed up in a neighboring country, and they're being brought into iraq next week. there are going to be some 50,000 polling stations nationally. this is, these are big numbers, and we have been working on this for months, and we have worked hand in glove with the u.n. there under the, under ad mel cert who's an extremely capable

representative of ban ki-moon, so we are confident that this will succeed. >> i promised right here. >> hello, my name is mohamed, and i'm with news agency ips. yesterday general odierno said that iran, that the u.s. had direct intelligence that iran had ties with the heads of the debaathification committee, and he said that they had been influenced by iran basically suggesting the decision might have come from iran. do you also share the same concerns that iran might have been involved in the accountability and justice commission decision to -- >> i am in 100% agreement with general odierno on that point, absolutely. >> have you done anything, basically, to confront and terminate that kind of influence? there i'm sorry, have we --

>> have you done anything to confront and terminate that kind of influence? >> i think the iranians are extremely aware of our views on that. they are also even better aware of the extent of their malevolence toward their neighbor, and so i don't think it's a question of communicating these to iran, i think it's a question of iranian behavior and what they want to do. ..

>> i can tell you the problems we confront in iran aren't very, very difficult, very difficult every day and they need to be addressed. if we don't address them today, the whole situation is not going to work out for the better. i would caution people against assuming that at some point everything went well and it became a mopping up exercise after that. i would really caution you against that kind of sort of cartoon image of what we are dealing with, every day we have problems. many of the problems are unforeseen.

unforeseen by us, unforeseen by the iraqi's. we deal with them. we deal with what i believe is a very, very good and effective civil military team, team that we have seen in the past and i like to think we're seeing now, and we will see in the future. these are tough problems, so i'm just telling you that's what i deal with everyday of the week, including on sundays. >> i am bob drivers with the nation. prime minister maliki ended up siding with the accountability commission concept. his spokesman said the reversal by the court was illegal and unconstitutional, and he seemed to have, he personally named you, in fact, and said you had interfered, we're not going to let ambassador hill interfere with our politics. you know, one of his aides called for your expulsion.

i mean, if -- >> was that a threat or a promise? [laughter] >> so my question is, given all of that, isn't this a sign that our influence, or leverage as you put it, is pretty close to zero at this point? and that iranian leverage is likely to increase as we withdraw our forces, not the shia who don't like iran the nationals, but the political parties, the people. >> i frankly disagree with the. i think it is a sign we have elections coming up into an half weeks. and i would say it is assigned there is a very tough competition. i can't tell you who's going to win. i can at least tell you is

running, which is better than in some countries. but i can't say who's going to win. i know it's going to be very tight. i thank my lucky has put together a strong coalition. i think others have tried to do the same. there is the coalition which has mr. allawi, at the top, is a very secular minded shia, but there are many sunnis in his coalition. i can't tell you who is going to win. i can tell you that as issues come up, whether it is debaathification or other issues, there will be very strong, political reactions to them. now and again in this country as well, i, frankly, to be very obviously concern is very many people were about the the wake debaathidebaathification with the handle because i think it was taken up much too close to the election to be handled in a nonpolitical way.

and so i spoke my mind on it, will continue to speak my mind. i think my job is to make sure everybody in the country understands the u.s. government position. and frankly if you're a diplomat and have been accused a few times in your career of interfering in someone else's internally there's, you're probably not doing her job very well. so yeah, i made it pretty clear. i had, i that subsequent discussions with prime minister al-maliki. i think we addressed issues as they come up and believe me they come up. i think we're going to have to, you know, since we don't know who's going to win, we have to work with all the parties there. and we're doing that. i completely disagree with your notion that our quote leverage is down to zero. you know, these are very difficult issues. i can remember when i was just,

you know, having sort of a semi-vacation working on north korea, i would occasionally hear my colleagues in any a near east bureau talk about the issue of the hydrocarbon law. and they kept telling, i would sit there and the senior staff meetings and on returning to the person next to me and say, why do they have to call it a hydrocarbon law? can't it just be an oil law or something? but it was at a time we're supposed of maximum leverage. so why did we get the hydrocarbon law done? i will tell you, it is a tough issue. the kurds have a very different view of it. bureaucratic questions. you've got to have a national oil company, how are the kurds going to play in that? are you going to have a ministry? who is going to staff that? how are you going to do that? it's a tough issue involving iraqi interest in iraqi politics. so no, it didn't get done and. frankly, we change tactics

earlier this year, and really press the iraqi's to try to go with an open bidding system, these plexiglass boxes. and i got to tell you, it's worked. leverage to me as i said earlier, i think the major leverage we have is to say, iraqi's, work with us. because if you work with us, you will be a member of the international community. you will go anywhere in the world. people will respect what you're doing. they will respect the alliances and the structures of your foreign affairs. if you go with iran, well, that's another route, but that doesn't lead you very far. i think the power of that vision, of being a u.s. partner, is a very powerful one, and really is one that will enable us to get things done when you talk about leverage. i think the idea of just using leverage and sort of a negative sense, we have troops there and

somehow we can somehow harm you, i think is really a loosely. i think we need to demonstrate our commitment to a long-term relationship. >> i am from the washington institute. ambassador, thank you for the presentation and/or service. those statements made by iraq officials, whether they single out iraq or vice president biden. and the long-term health harvell do think there are two u.s.-iraqi relations? is going to be a trend in the future from your perspective? >> i don't think it's a trend and i don't think they have been that numerous. abie through the magic of the internet, they get repeated a lot but not by the people who sent them. i think as often the case in these issues, someone says

something and then the echo effect is greater than what someone has said. we'll have a problem in dealing with the maliki government. we work with them every day. general odierno and i have a weekly meeting, sometimes i meet him alone. sometimes general odierno meets him alone. we are very productive relationship with the maliki government. we look forward to a productive relationship with whoever replaces the maliki government, including another nokia government. so i'm not concerned with the. this is a question. there in the campaign. there in the middle of a campaign, so sometimes you will draw in a foreign source for some campaign issue. so you know, it's not a problem, believe me. i've been around a lot. i've been around long enough that i can handle someone criticizing me in the press now. it just happens. deal with it.

>> i am with cnn. i would like to ask you to spend on two issues that you brought up in your remarks. first of all i know that you've been working since you took office on the issue of the arab states, a coming more supportive of iraq. could you expand on exactly what you would like them to do and some of your discussions, on why they are not doing this and what are the prospects, what does iraq need to deal to gain that support? and then also on the issue of the band candidates, usage of kind of work past this and moved on, but do you see this as specifically something that prime minister al-maliki day to quash out some of his opposition because some of those people have been in parliament and did seem to have some political support in the country. thank you.

>> on the regional issue, you know, i personally am engaged in iraq, not engage in the region but i know the assistant secretary, geoff feldman, has been very much engaged with the region. and most recently secretary clinton. in fact, i think is still there today. and part of our message and secretary clinton made this very clear at the doha forum is to try to encourage factors to reach out to iraq. now, why have they not done so, why is, why we talking about this, what is the problem? i think for some of them, they wanted to see iraq standing on its feet with a full sovereignty and not being somehow a state that depends on the united states. for its daily existence. well, clearly iraq has reestablished its sovereignty, it. invested up of very confident security service, security

forces, their army that they have institutions that are functioning. clearly, iraq is a sovereign state, and i think for anyone who is concerned about that, they need not be. they need to engage directly with iraqi's. there is some view that some of the sunni states have been reluctant to engage with and iraq -- with what will probably continue to be a shia led state, although i want to emphasize that this is not a win or take all system there. and just as there are important sunnis in the current government, there will be in the next government as well. this is not winner take all. so i think part of it has been to try to encourage other states to work with iraq, even if there is a potential that will continue to be shia led, as opposed to the sunni led which is what you see in almost all of the middle east. some countries have understood, have come to, have worried about

iranian influence there. what i think some of the same countries have also been very engaged in iraq, because they understand that the best way to deal with ironic interest in iraq is to show some interest themselves. and so it has been gratifying to see country stepping up and working very cities we are diplomatically in iraq, if you look at turkey's relationship with iraq, it is better than it has been in many years. if you look at egypt, they now have a strong and busy, very active ambassador. we like to see more of these, and i think we will continue to work on it. i think, our hope is in a no hope is not a basis for policy, but our hope is that after the elections and after the seating of a new iraqi government, however that long, and by the way it could be just weeks but it could be months. but after the new government is set up we would hope to see other countries in the region.

second question was on -- what was the -- lisa? >> on al-maliki, whether his decision to overturn or the candidates, a political move on his part, which i to quash some of his? >> well, i think if you look at enough of the other shia led coalition, they were very strong on this anti-baathist point. [inaudible] >> well, i mean, our concern was that they were pushing what is a major and extremely emotional issue just before the election. and in our view, inevitably politics crept into this. you will have to ask prime minister maliki whether he was supporting it because he wanted to go after other politicians, or whether he was supporting it

because he knew that the voters that he was trying to attract, especially voters that he would try to attract away from other shia, from the other shia coalition, whether they would want to see him take a strong view on it. so i would say, you know, this is shocking, but i would say politics did play a role in this overall situation. and that's why we had some concerns about trying to take a commission that had not been heard from in quite a while and make it front and center, just weeks before the election. and we registered those concerns and i think ultimately, there was a decision, which ultimately the iraqi at large have accepted. i might also mention that today, or this morning in baghdad, the five major coalition representatives of the five major coalitions, sat together and agreed on a code of conduct.

which i don't think we even have here in washington. [laughter] >> the last i checked. and you know, the coalition, one of the points of this code of conduct is to accept the results and accept a certain parameters and how you go after people, and ask you violence which in fort lee is something that needs to be repeated in iraq. so i think we are on into the middle of the elections. and if you went out there, you would see as i mentioned earlier, these campaign posters, you know, the ballots don't have the actual names of the candidates, the names of the candidates are posted in the $50,000 locations. but people know what number they will be. so they want to make sure the voters understand, checkbox three because that's my boss, or something.

this is politics. and democracy, and frankly, they are inspirational. >> from one of the overflow rooms, we have a question. we have several questions that one is can you elaborate what the role of the u.n. in iraq in the medium to long-term? >> i think the u.n. role has been very important there. and i do believe that when the u.s. can work with the u.n. where we can come up with a common agenda, when the u.s. and u.n. work together we can really move mountains. and i believe that we've got a very special relationship with the team there. this is a former dutch politician who knows a thing or two about parliaments. he also knows a thing about remaining calm through turbulent political season. and i think we very much need that right now. i think the key objective for the u.n. is there, they have a

number of system programs that they do through -- for several, undp, the u.n. high commissioner's, i mean, i went out to a place in last weekend saw where you had sunni and shia refugees being returned, and the undp -- or hcr had build houses for them to return to. these are very important issues. but on a political level, the u.n. office is going to be dealing with a couple of other issues. one is the issue of trying to help iraq overcome its chapter seven status. now, the u.s., by article 25 of the security agreement, is required to assist iraq in overcoming chapter seven status. that is a status of being a threat to peace and security in the region. and this is tied up in a number

of iraq's acceding to a number of u.n. security council resolutions in the early 1990s. it is not easy, but we are working with the u.n. on those things. that the u.n. is also engaged with kuwait as well. so the whole chapter 70 next is is a political thing that you and is working. and funny, and i think very importantly, the u.n. is taken on the jobs of dealing with the disputed internal boundary questions, those 15 features with kirkuk. and both of these instances he called a number of us together, including the british and the french ambassadors. and we had kind of brainstorming sessions on how we can get through the chapter seven issues, how we can get through the dibs question, do you start with kirkuk, which is arguably the most difficult, or do you try to put the most difficult for last or do you say, if we

can solve our, then the other 14. so we've been working with them, with him on that, and i just really want to emphasize, you know, we need a strong u.n. presence in that country, and we have one. >> hi, j. c. bernstein from human rights first. thank you, ambassador, for your presentation. two questions. one is where does you as leveraged and on return? one of the things that obama mentioned in his camp lejeune speech was one of the most significant indicators of a stable iraq would be the return of refugees. as you're well aware the majority of refugees in the region have not returned. in fact, syria and jordan continued to receive new refugees. so where is the u.s. policy on return and reintegration? the second issue i wanted to ask about really is to people who

have experienced a tax on the basis of their sexual orientation. we've seen your letter to the council on global equality, and thank you very much for that, and their last report, reported that attacks on the base of sexual orientation are increasing. someone if you could elaborate on what the u.s. is doing to ensure protection for this vulnerable group? >> first of all, refugee returns, i don't have the statistics with me, but our statistics are very clear that there is a net influx of refugee returns. and that was one of the reasons i went to the all last week to see what is being done for these people. and in particular, what the iraqi government is doing. as you know, at our request they name a coordinator for refugee issues, because it goes beyond the migration ministry. in fact, i would on a number -- another visit, i believe it was indecent or, i went to a refugee

processing center, which was filled with people trying to return and return to their homes. and i went with the minister of migration, but you can clearly see that you can get people back to their homes, but then you have to make sure their homes are available for them to live in. so you need the police in case that needs to be an eviction. you need that social welfare to make sure there are some services, and potential for jobs. iraq still suffers very high unemployment, which is one of the reasons it is difficult to come back. last week when i went to be all i was pretty impressed that they had built several thousand of these very rudimentary homes. in both shia and sunni area. and i went and talked to people there and they were very appreciative. a number had already started adding to the structures to make them large enough for larger families.

we have a full-time refugee coordinator. marks to roll a, and he, as i said, doing this several day. if several people to work with him on it. the iraqi government is very clear on where we stand on the idp and reggie returns. very clear indeed. the problem that we have had to press on them is to make a priority. and to make sure that, i mean, they have many problems with this one has got to be on the top. there have been criticism that the iraqi's have been unwilling to do it on the eve of elections. we made sure actually that overseas voting is being well handled. in a, they will be voting for refugees in some 16 countries. we printed some 1.5 million ballots, or 1.4 million ballots

in anticipation of meeting these ballots in many different places to make sure that these refugees have a political rights. we're working very hard on that. on the issue of attacks on gays in iraq, all i would say to you on that is that is an issue. that is a problem, and we need to do more in that regard. i did send a letter, but to be very frank with you, we need to do more. >> ambassador hill, from a root there have been several questions. one was on the massive refugee crisis which of address. and other, mr. ambassador, also from beirut, how can a country have democratic and free elections while under occupation without the people feeling it will be influenced in some way by the occupying country? speaking to iraqi refugees, they paint a different picture and speak of hardship and injustice under the occupation. >> well, if you go through towns and villages and cities, you don't see u.s. forces there.

so i'm not sure what they have in mind in terms of being quote unquote under occupation. i mean, the politicians, believe me, are all iraqi at all are making the decisions that there are few of us who try to be helpful and arriving at decisions. but these are iraqi decisions. so i'm not sure i share the premise of the question there. i will say that, for example, today grand ayatollahs astarte put out a statement urging everybody to vote and urging that all people should be prepared to vote. i lose track of time but i think was two weeks ago i was in anbar and i met with all of tribal leaders come most of whom are sunni. and they told me that they've had the word out through their own network that everybody

should go. i met with another group of tribal shieks at my home for lunch the other day. in fact, just before i came here. and they, too, had the same message to all their voters. one of the people actually banned for fastest bass connection to a guy named also had a statement to the effect that people should vote. so i would assure the questioner in beirut and maybe looking at me now, that if he is an iraqi, he should go find one of the polling station because they are active in 16 countries. i'm sure lebanon is one of them and he can pick up a ballot and he can vote. no one is going to intimidate him in that process. >> i'd like to ask you, i know you spoke a lot about the debaathification, the process. but i just want to ask you, the point have a statement from

yourself from general odierno that iran is influenced ahmadinejad in this process, puzzles questions for iraqi's that how this can go on and these candidates have been banned and elections but in terms of legitimacy and transparency, do you think anyway this is going to affect voter turnout in people's confidence in the process? and if i may very briefly, just ask you about the status of detainees, iraqi detainees with the u.s. forces. i know this is something to have been working to reduce. could you give us the latest numbers and if there are any problems in reducing the numbers? thank you. >> first of all, the numbers are coming down, and releases are being made. they move past lower than 9000 last summer, and i want to say 7000. [inaudible] >> six or 7000. and it's a process that's continuing. we've turned over a number of facilities and we have closed some other facilities. so it is very much a process that is continuing.

i think the debaathification, as i indicated to you, it's a major issue there. and you know, it is right there in article seven of the constitution. is not an issue to hide under the rug. no matter how many carpets you have in iraq, i mean, you have to deal with it. the problem was it was dealt with very late, and it was dealt with after the onset in effect of the political season. and so i think the process in the eyes of many iraqi's raise questions. raise questions as to whether it was due process and whether it was something where it was not politicize. i will say that when you look at the list of people, these were not all sunnis. and i think that is a bit of a misunderstanding that people have that somehow this was targeted list of all cities. the effect of it though, in political terms, was i think many cities were concerned

perhaps proportionally more concerned about than some shia were concerned about it. i will say, you know, again, it was easy to work through. there was a court of the seven judge panel that was sequestered. and their cell phones taken away, which is a real denial of birthrights in that country now. and they worked assiduously to get the remaining eight. you recall that start with a list of 500. they send it back to the political parties, or the coalitions with whom there are about five. and many of them with new names because they saw that these people were, in fact, or did have baathist connections would make them in eligible to be seated. and they substituted other names. so that brought the name that to some 250. then there was further scrubbing, and i think some 50

were taken off because they simply were either wrongly named or were patently, you know, had nothing to do with the baathists, with baathist connections. finally, as i understand they came down to about 140 names and the judges adjudicated that list. the initial problem was that they are looking at this 500 list, and the concern was they would be able to adjudicate that. so some people are saying why don't you just wait until after the election as one solution come with the understanding you don't actually see people but once people are elected, you are doing with a much smaller group than, say, 500. you may be due with 20 or 30 a maximum. so it was decided to do it ahead of time. and i think, you know, it has worked and i think we are moving on. >> thank you. thank you, ambassador.

i'm with the turkish daily newspaper. i want to ask you to elaborate more on the turkish role in iraq. in a previous elections, turkey has helped to persuade the sunnis to be part of the election. do you see them helping out this time around this election becomes as, and second of all, you said in your remarks that turkey's relationship is better than it has been. i guess it is more targeted to turkey's relations with the iraqi kurds and the kurdish region in the north. but as you start to draw down the u.s. troops, out of iraq, what are the new concerns that you have? or what have you defined your concerns in the turkey iraqi relationship. thank you. >> i think first of all, i think turkey is very active and are active in a positive way in iraq. first of all, the turkish

ambassador is one of my closest cooperators, we work a lot together. and the absolutely share our goals, our diplomatic, strategic goals for relations, good relations with iraq. during the time when we had very difficult moments in the election law, we were working together on trying to make sure that we could get the election law through so we could get on with the date for the election. and you know, using or certainly in keeping with our diplomatic status but reaching out to iraqi politicians, of all kinds what it was the turkomen who are concerned about their rights in the kirkuk area but also the sunnis who were always have a concern that somehow more numerous shia are causing or could be a reason for concern

that we have worked very well together. general odierno was there just a couple of weeks ago. user come to but a senior american ambassador from the embassy to work with, sit down with the turks and talk about some of the challenges posed by cross-border activity on the part of pkk terrorists. we have very much work together on the issue of a trilateral mechanism where turkey, u.s. and iraq deal with some of the security questions in the north. and we feel that, not only have we been successful through this mechanism in reducing the threat posed to turkey by some of these pkk elements, but most important, there has done a security relationship between turkey and iraq on these matters. and i think this is something that will have an enduring

benefit to turkey's interest, and frankly, to iraq. turkish oil companies have also been engaged, not only in the kurdish areas, but in iraq proper. and i think we can see every day just trucks and trucks of turkish consumer goods, et cetera, coming into iraq. so it is amounting to i think a more important relationship for turkey, and a relationship that i think helps turkey leverage its position in the region. so we see a lot of positives and we continue to work very closely with our turkish friends and allies on that. >> voice of america, thank you mr. ambassador. the question is regarding a follow-up for the united states to answer a question. what's the role of turkey?

is it the same helpful as you mentioned? >> yeah, i think turkey shares our view that we need negotiated solution to that. to the issue of kirkuk. there are a number of ideas that are filled out in the report of about a year ago where they laid out solution, should the special status, what kind of, should be a new province, how should it be handled? i think it's not a question of coming up with a solution in advance. itsy solution of encouraging a process which will lead to a solution. i know that turkish government has a capacity to be influential with a certain parts of the equation is there, especially the turkomen for example. but that's not all.

it is just in keeping with the diplomatic interest in seeing that a television in a neighboring country is resolved in a peaceful way. you know, i can tell you how kirkuk will come out but i can say we are all very much engaged in making sure it comes out in a peaceful way that is acceptable and that stresses, consensus within the kirkuk region and we're going to work very hard on that in the months ahead. >> this is from the representative from the iraq foundation in the overflow room. who ask, what measures are being taken to ensure that transparent of the election? >> well, first of all, we're doing a lot of things there, but what you've done is doing especially is to work with, work with the election commission, the iraqi's have, under general ayden have the lead of course for election security, and the

u.s. is supporting u.s. military and is very much supporting that. we have had -- we had in the recent at the american embassy where we invited all foreign, foreign diplomats there to make sure everyone understood how this is being organized. and especially, how the international election observe observers, our embassy is organizing some 26 teams of election observers. each team needs its own security mechanism. so these are not easy to do, but we are really doing quite a lot. the ballot is, you know, unami has real experts on this. we have some us-based ngo's that are also assisting. so i think the iraqi voters will not find any surprises when they enter the voting booth. they will know very clearly what their responsibility are as

voters and how to mark up their ballot. >> and from the american iraqi oil. one of them was about the biden visit last time, which the second about what influence you have after the election. because i think you don't have influence now at the election, but you have influence after the election. for mister biden visits, which in view of the iraqi, give negative effect, especially the iraqi people, they don't want somebody in their affair in their way. and i hear that another visit

from mister biden to iraq. i wish it will be very careful, especially mr. biden has project for iraq before he come to vice president to divide iraq two or three parts. and thank you. >> okay. well, first of all i can't share the premise of your question that somehow the visit of vice president biden was perceived negatively. it was actually perceive very positive. had an excellent meeting with prime minister, the president. excellent meeting with the speaker of the council of representatives. i thought it was very important visit, very useful disappear key did not go for the purpose of telling them what to do. he didn't go for the purpose of telling people in iraq what's going on in iraq. he did talk about how iraq is

being perceived outside, which is really a fair thing to do to explain to iraqis that what you do is being looked at from outside. and here is the perspective from outside of what you are doing. so i think he really very much went as a very long-standing friend of iraq. i can assure you, as we look forward to getting past the election and onto government formation, that the u.s. has a great interest in a successful process. but our interest will not be -- it will be expressed in appropriate activities. so we will, we will be helpful in this process, and helpful and consistent with our obligations in the strategic framework agreement to try to work to overcome the isolation of iraq, but also to help iraq in its development of democratic institutions. so i can assure you, vice

president biden's trip was very, very well received by people. >> odds are, what was the other question? [inaudible] >> and we will, we will exercise our influence. [inaudible] >> we will exercise our influence appropriately and consistent with our diplomatic standing. and we will try to be helpful to see that iraq can stand up a government and stand up for government that has the support of its parliament in support of its people. but that is for the iraqis to do. that is not our job. our job is to be helpful in the process. [inaudible] >> i'm sorry? [inaudible] >> know. it is not for us. is for the iraqi people to decide whether they want to elect that it's not our job. we have enough jobs.

>> alexander kravis, formerly of the aba. ambassador, thank you for your remarks and thank you for the time taking these questions. i am wondering if you could share with us some thoughts perhaps on how after the elections, the whole hydrocarbons law of oil issue between the krg and the central government baghdad might be resolved. and perhaps more specifically, i'm, and i don't mean to put you on the spot, but i'm curious if you see the report on the recent publication on iraq's oil politics and if you might have any comments and if you have actually seen it, what your thoughts might be on having it translated to arabic. that's the basis for discussion. >> i have heard about it, i haven't seen it. but if you have a copy i would love to take it with me. i think iraq needs a

hydrocarbons law. i think the fact that there was a recent agreement about a week ago between the kurdish krg government and the iraq government at baghdad on a resolution of this issue of revenue sharing, i think is encouraging. the prime minister sent to prime minister maliki a proposal which included the text of oil deals, international firms. and that was accepted by the iraqi oil ministry. and so that's cleared the way to resume kurdish oil shipments that have been interrupted for some time. so that is all encouraging, and we hope there'll be some momentum for that to addressing the hydrocarbon law. but i don't want to, you know,

stand in the long line of people predicting the hybrid -- hydrocarbon law will happen. is a complicated matter we will see what will get done after the election. >> there is an online request for another prediction. >> i don't do predictions except the red sox won the world series this year. that was a given. [laughter] >> this is of the iraqi minister expected violence and within three months after the election. what about your expectations to? you know, i think there are fewer and fewer people who are engaged in trying to settle political matters, violently. if you look at the al qaeda which, you know, remains obvious he a threat in iraq. and engage in some high profile bombings in baghdad, but it is significant to understand they have zero support from the iraqi public. part of what happened with the whole movement in anbar was semi-people have had enough of

this type of wanton violence and essentially stepped out of that process. so i think the trend line is toward less and less violence. the iraqi secret forces are increasing their capabilities of going after these terrorist cells, these networks. but i do believe that the statistics would clearly lead you to believe that this is going in the right direction. i think the hope and expectation really is that after these elections, that it will be further impetus to convince iraqi's that now is the time to participate in a clinical process that is being run by, for and the iraqi people, and not by the foreign concern.

>> there are two people there. go ahead. >> ball mark the data, freelance journalist. ambassador, two of the main of five coalitions of prime minister maliki's have expressed interest in transitioning from consensus-based national unity type of government to a majority the type of election after election. you think the composition of these two coalitions, but that more than one sects represented within them would make that a feasible option? do you think that iraq is ready for this kind of transition? thank you. >> you know, this issue comes up a lot. it is in the public debate in iraq, that should you have a system where everybody gets something or should you have a system where winners get something and losers don't.

i know that the frustrations are that when you have a system where everybody gets something, there's a concern that somehow some of these ministries don't work or they are not loyal enough to the head of the government, and therefore, it's not a good system. you know, i just think this is an example of something where, you know, the iraqi's are going to have to sort through this. i think there are two ways to try to run iraq. one is to, you know, give everyone a little piece of the action. the other is to try to do it all yourself. i believe it up to others to decide which is a better way to handle it, but i don't think it's for us to be venturing forth in telling the iraqis how to resolve what is essentially an age-old issue for them to deal with. i will say it is encouraging that they're looking at these essentially models of democracy that they have to decide on paper is for them to choose, not for us.

>> mr. ambassador, what you see as the primary obstacles to economic development in iraq right now? and what do you think needs to be done, for example, in the next six months to change that scenario? >> i think they need to strengthen rule of law. they need to strengthen contract law, things like that. i may, for businesses need to know very cleared what their rights are. they need to be assured that there are, that the court system can be adequate to dealing with the disputed issues. so i think just the rule of law infrastructure is one problem. i think another problem is just basic information, cell phone penetration, et cetera, other issues like that, our kind of inadequate right now.

when you look at the kind of astounding numbers that are discussed for the department of the iraqi oil sector, we're talking about getting up to numbers like 10 million barrels a day, and more, 12 million euros a day. that puts iraq sort of four times what iran is exporting. puts iraq at sort of in saudi type territory. but is this feasible? i think it is only feasible if they start building infrastructure in a big hurry so i think infrastructure is a major, is a major issue, a major drag on economic growth. you know, security, the problems of security i think are quite clear. but as i suggest in the last question, that is improving, probably for language skills need to be addressed. i mean, i was at university of

baghdad, and i could see that they are doing a lot there. and it is rather, you know, it is discarded as a as an american ambassador i can get around universities now that i can talk to students and to what they're saying, at what what what they would like to do. would like to do with their lives. and to go to the university of baghdad and have english-language students and also computer science students and engineers talking about they would like to have more distance learning opportunities with american universities. i must tell you i've seen a few memoranda of understanding of american universities and i have noticed that they have not been implemented and i plan to be in touch with those universities and get a movie on these things. these are not just for signing ceremonies. these are to carry on and get something done. so i think the education system, which were iraq is very proud history of needs to be revitalized and i think that is something that really is a good

fit for what the u.s. can do. and it is a key thing for what we are doing in the strategic framework agreement. iraq already has the largest ogrin in the region. but we got to do more. a lot of this will be possible when we get security. get more security. >> i'm with al-jazeera. mr. ambassador, you did mention to coalitions have recently agreed on a code of conduct with the election. despite the very concerned about a possible coup d'état if not all iraqi's a great on the final outcome? >> and i don't see any signs whatsoever of any coup d'état. so i've got a lot of worries in iraq, but that's not one on the top of my list. you know, i think there has been a real strengthening of civil governance in iraq. and so i don't see any immediate danger of that.

>> john barry, newsweek. thank you, ambassador, for your presentation. >> is that sarcastic? >> in america who we say riveting, we don't mean it. [laughter] >> two countries divided by, like us is. can i ask you to turn it around and reflect on what you've learned or what we should learn about the capacities of the u.s. government, and of the international coalition. particularly and this is for reconstruction and rebuilding, huge national project. >> that is the subject of a future book. these -- you know, is a long -- is a long and complex question as to what we've learned, but i will tell you, you can go into

these countries thanking you understand them before you're there. and you need to be really respectful of the history, respectful of emotions as i suggested earlier on this the best issue. respectful of the fact that you may have a solution that is pretty obvious, like is some sort of out your great equation, but it doesn't mean the other guy is going to buy it. i think you also have to be respectful of the time element of political solutions, that is we have a certain timetable, and i can't be sure that the iraqis always always share our timetable. so when we say you must get an election law done by december 13, or whatever, there is action is sort of, says who? [laughter] so i think solutions get there, solutions are reached, but they're not necessarily reached in that we would consider a

timely way. the main thing and these, the sort of issue and many others, is you have to go into with a real sense of humility about what you are dealing with. and also, don't, you know, things happen for a reason. i mean, the first question, the first question when you confront some nasty dictator is not how you get rid of him, it is how did he get there in the first place. and that certainly affects the answer to the question of how you get rid of him because you may want to get rid of him, but you should first answer the question how he got there in the first place. and i think often when you go into that question, things will be better for you. so i don't know. i mean, i went in with a very, very aware of my limitations in terms of the region. i had worked in the western ottoman empire but i hadn't worked in eastern empire. so was kind of company to see

some of the same patterns that i've known so well in the balkans, covering in the sense that i was familiar, familiar with them. but every day you are there, you feel, you have a handle on something and then you feel you don't. so you just have to keep at it, and i just think the united states is tremendous responsibilities around the world, but we also have a responsibility to try to understand things and conduct ourselves with the humility that some of the complexity of some of these problems. i don't know, that's a couple of lines from what i hope will be someday a book. >> probably the last question from some of our overflow room. the sunni community in the early election, what percent of purchase a patient expect on march 7? >> i don't know the answer to that, but i can tell you, all senior sunni leaders we have

talked to, and believe me, we have spent a lot of time talking to people. a lot of time drinking tea there. they are pretty clear that they want to vote. and i think many sunni leaders, i've heard him say this, we believe we made a mistake in 2005 and we will not make that mistake again. and that is encouraging, but what needs to be done is we need make sure these elections, off and this is, you know, we will have tough days. you know, we still have two weeks or so, two weeks and two and a half weeks. so there will be some tough days. there will be violent days as well. there will be very intemperate a days, but we will get through this, and the iraqi's need to know that we're not getting through this in order to leave. we're getting through this in order to develop a long-term partner. and we believe that in iraq, we have such a partner. >> ambassador hill, on behalf of the online participants on the people that you can see, but are

looking at you know, and everyone in the room, thank you very much. this is a man who will tell us when we're talking through his embassy, that ride over there, he mentioned his iranians ordinates. he was not kidding when he says it comes literally down on his head in his front yard. this takes commitment which he mentioned. this takes bravery, which he mentioned. this is an important opportunity that the united states has come and we appreciate your time speaking to us today. so thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]