of subcontracting government functions to a private facility, you're right that happens in a lot of countries. i think it's a different problem that again is not unique to china. mr. lee has money and lawyers and the weegers and ngos and others do not. >> my sense is that as we move ahead there may be a series of conditions the senate may want to place on this particular agreement. i would encourage members and staffs to work with us to see if that's the case. again, want to thank you both for transparency always answering questions the way you do. thank you for being here. the information the record will be open until thursday afternoon, so if you receive additional questions answer them properly. thank you for your service to

our country. with that, house foreign affairs committee will hear about how to handle humanitarian and security needs. on cspan310:00 a.m. eastern. later in the day, senate homeland security hearing on border security, focusing on infrastructure and fencing which we will have live on

cspan3 at 2:00. this sunday night at 8:00 eastern on first ladies influence and image, we look into the personal lives of three first ladies. rachel jackson, emily donaldson angelica van buren. rachel jackson was called a bigamist and adulterer, since jackson's 1828 presidential campaign, died of heart attack before he took office. his niece emily donaldson becomes white house hostess, is later dismissed as fallout from a scandal. when widower martin van buren becomes president, his daughter-in-law, angelica van buren is white house hostess. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on cspan's original series first ladies, influence and image. examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the position of first lady and their influence on the presidency, from martha washington to michelle obama

sundays 8:00 p.m. eastern on american history tv on cspan3. as complement to the series, cspan's book is available. first ladies presidential historians on the lives of 45 iconic american women providing liechl stories of these fascinating women creating illuminating inspiring read. available as hard cover or e book through your favorite bookstore or online book seller. dan lamothe is a national security writer for "the washington post," joins us to talk about jade helm 15 and some of the concern it sparked in certain corners of the internet as well. dan lamothe, first what is jade helm, when and where is it taking place? >> jade helm is a brand new exercise beginning in june. it includes about 1200 special operations troops. going to span a good portion of the southwest, texas, utah southern california a lot of other areas in between, and

really what the military says they're looking to do is kind of work on how they interact around the public. some of it is covert, they'll be in civilian attire and trying to blend in. they've done other exercises similar, but this one sticks out because the scope and size is larger. >> why is the scope and size larger? why is it different from other ones in the past? >> you'll see 100 or 200 troops or something like that but what this say is they're looking to prepare for long range inserts where you take a helicopter from for sake of argument utah and land in texas on things along those lines. they're trying to prepare for future operations that may or may not come up overseas and i think we can take them at face value on a lot of that.

>> is there specific places they're expecting to fight overseas, trying to recreate in some of the states where exercises are taking place? >> they would never tell you which operations they're preparing for, but i think we can safely say they read the news, they're tracking events like everyone else. so yes, they're looking at where they may operate in the future. when we talk about where the military is likely to deploy, they're always trying to be aware of where they may be needed in the middle east africa. they're pivoting to the pacific, doing more there all of the time. i think really any of the above could be possible. >> why is this particular exercise raising concern among people who are worried about what the military is doing in this country? >> i think it comes down to the way this news first came out in march. there were briefing slides posted on the internet with lack of context i thought.

it was cast as this devious exercise that if it want going to be martial law this summer it was going to be something where they're setting the stage for future martial law, and i think a lot of us who cover the military, spend time around the military, we really have a hard time seeing that. you know there are things where you can look at it and say hey, they didn't tell the truth on this or that, the way a war is going or something like that, but this exercise is routine. >> explain the map that's causing concern, here's the labels of different states in red labeled as hostile, blue permissive, then uncertain in brown. explain this map. >> that map is, i mean, they're kind of setting the stage for what they plan to do. so one of the things that really caused concern is they did label texas, utah, part of california

as potentially hostile. really that's a rehearsal. that's preparation. that's make believe in a lot of ways. they set the stage for what they might have to do in a fictional country and they will you know a plan around that in this exercise. couple years back i covered an exercise called bold alligator. it was sort of the same scheme. they had an assault that went ashore from the atlantic ocean and they called it a treasure cove scenario. you had the same sort of thing a portion of the southeast was labeled as potentially unsafe area for american troops. they're just trying to work around okay, we need to pick a place, prepare for it, assault it and take over it. it is all dress rehearsal. it is not to be taken seriously in most people's eyes to track these issues seriously.

>> talk about some reaction from elected officials for jade helm 15. the governor of texas submitting a letter to texas state guard, putting them on alert to watch this training exercise, from governor greg abbott's letter we can read for viewers, during the training operation it is important texans know their safety constitutional rights private property rights and civil liberties will not be infringed by monitoring the operation on a continually basis, state guard will facilitate communications between my office and commanders of the operation jade helm to ensure adequate measures are in place to protect texans. >> i mean, i read that letter. i think a lot of people tracking the military read that letter and said he's trying to play a middle ground here between taking the concerns seriously as far fetched as they may be

and just doing nothing. so he looked and said hey if we're going to have hundreds or whatever of troops in my state i think it is important to know what they're doing. i would like to have communication with local authorities. that i think is fair. but where the concerns were raised and where he received some mockery is by using texas guard as opposed to local police or something else like that which is common. it had the appearance of okay, i am going to use my troops to watch your troops. and i don't know if that's the message to send. >> what's the conspiracy for those that think a conspiracy is going on? >> there's a range here. one of the most common is that the american military is going to take over a portion of the southwest this year just take it over. in particular texas had been labeled as an area that's hostile and texas is an area that, you know, they're going to

come in probably going to take our guns all the things you would expect in a federal government takeover. but there's no real sense that that would happen and at the same time you look at the numbers of troops, 1200 troops spread out over the span of six or seven states. that doesn't really give you any kind of man power to do that sort of thing. >> our phone lines are open for those that want to talk about jade helm 15. the lines, democrats and republicans. start with dan in texas. markum, texas. dan, you're up first. >> caller: yes, i am a vietnam vet, i served in our military in vietnam as security specialist. smithsville when they had a town meeting with these people, they

said that the commander used excuse that they were using this for terrain. the only problem is we have bases all over the united states and most of the time when we do these exercises, they fly us to areas we need to practice in, so actually they're lying to the people that they need to use the terrain for the training exercises. we was always flown to where we needed to be trained for whatever area we was going into. so this isn't true what they're saying. >> the concern is about the military using public lands and private lands as part of the exercise as opposed to keeping it to the military facilities around this country? >> caller: yeah. i don't really understand what the reason is for the exercises.

that's why people think it will be a takeover because obama doesn't like texas. as a matter of fact, states that are standing up to washington are on our borders. this is grounds for the federal government to come in try to do something against the people. >> dan lamothe do you want to jump in. >> i would say that's part of the miseducation here, here. special operations command and u.s. army special operations command, i think they got caught by the surprise with the way the news was coming out. they were trying to say hey, here's what we're planning to do. i think the news got out in front of them and they've been trying to make people feel better after the fact. i would say part of what he says is fair. the military typically trains on bases. they've got bases that spand multiple acres, including texas.

there are tens of thousands of troops at ft. hood alone. i's not accurate to say that the military never trains in public areas. one exercise that comes to mind is robin sage. it's a culminating exercise that green berets at the end of their training goes through. and that spans multiple counties in north carolina and they do the same thing on a smaller scale where they set a scenario you know, they work through the scenario. they're wearing civilian attire. they have an arm band that identifies them. and that has gone well for years. you know there was one example i think back in 2002 with that exercise where, you know there was a miscommunication and you actually had a law enforcement official who thought that two american soldiers were you know basically out to get him based on the way they were acting and the lack of communication. he was not aware of that exercise. and in that case the deputy

opened fire on the american troops and shot two of them. but since then there haven't been any of these incidents. i mean really, they're trying to work through, you know how do we blend in. that's what special operations troops do. >> enough questions about this that secretary carter recently had to respond to one at a pentagon press briefing last thursday. here's the response from defense secretary carter. >> we're very responsive to any local officials who want to know about our training. we are very transparent. we've tried to be very transparent in this case and answer all questions give all information about what we're doing, about the need for it. and once again, i want to express the appreciation that we have to communities across the country who host our troops. it's very important. >> and we're talking about jade

helm with dan lamothe from the post. he's the author from an article earlier this year. he's here the answer your questions, take your questions. brenda is up next line for democrats. st. louis, missouri. brenda, good morning. >> caller: good morning to you. when i first heard this i thought what a big joke this is. i could not believe that people who are united states citizens would actually take that serious. all you have to do as a republican is try to scare everyone. it is not an obama. ebola is coming. obama is taking over. obama don't like texas. he's a united states citizen just like the rest of us. i just thought that was so unbelievable. and at first i just thought it was a joke and how easy people can be brought into things. and start believing something else. the first time something happens in the united states that's the first people they're going to call is the military up, then

they will trust them. >> that's brenda in st. louis. let's go to our line for republicans. bea is weight in texas, flat creek, texas. bea, good morning. >> caller: good morning. hello. >> go ahead, bea. you're on the washington journal. >> caller: hello? >> i thought we lost bea. sheila is waiting now in mentor, ohio. line for republicans. sheila, good morning. >> caller: hello. i don't know if, if they know the law. it says that you cannot have any army navy marines, air force doing the thing that jade --

>> jade helm go ahead. >> -- yeah is doing. >> are any laws being broken by the military in how they're going about this exercise? >> no in no serious way. one thing that's relevant here is there's this sense, this message that's been pushed out that hey they're going to be operating in large scales on american, you know, public property and, you know, basically they're going to be coming through our streets in large number of troops. do we want that. i think what the reality is, is that even in these states you're going to be hard pressed to find them. they're going to be in small numbers distributed over very wide areas and in a lot of cases, they're going to be operating in for example, private ranches where they've been given permission. these are areas where the land sprawls miles with one owner. if that one private owner wants to give access to his ranch his

farm, whatever, i mean, that's fair game. >> houston texas is next. roger is waiting, line for independents. roger, good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> go ahead roger. you're on with dan lamothe. >> caller: yeah about that jade helm thing. >> yes, sir. >> caller: the government tells us that -- the secretary of defense up there speaking. the one thing that most texans has a problem with is how many times have obama lied to us about other things. you can keep your health care you can keep your doctor. he's lied to us about a lot of things. his appointees are up there. you had the speaker of the majority senate up there. he was up there lying about mitt romney. how can you trust them if they lie about everything? >> didn't lamothe on the trust

issue that's come up here. >> the trust issue has been underscored by this and a lot of that is fair. you look at things like the surveillance, the nsa stuff. some of the things the american government was going you know that did involve american citizens that just weren't known. and i mean, they're going to do what they think is best for security. but at the same time, kruyou know there is a lack of credibility on the security issues that has been underscored by this. they can point to those things critics can point to these things and say you don't tell us the traut on this why should we believe you on that. >> do you think this dperexercise has blur into the political ring then in. >> absolutely. in this case you've got -- this takes a couple of things that don't usually square off against each other in political debate. you've got a military exercise and typically conservatives are

very much for the military. and in this case the military has supposedly been aligned with the federal government and the president. and the president does not see eye to eye with the same critics. it's easy to see and wrap your head around the mental gymnastic to believe that the american troops would be carrying out an exercise against the american people. >> a press release, a very long prez release. here's part of it. once i observed the map depicting the states and locations, we was rather a appalled that the hostile locations have a republican majority. games or kpesh sizes to consider any u.s. city or state in hostile control and trying to retake it the message becomes suspicious. the map that we showed a recreation of of the exercise

needs to change, the names on the map need to change and the tone of the exercise needs to be completely revamped so that the federal government is not intentionally practicing war against its own states. >> i think one thing that was interesting to me when i looked at the map i mentioned the treasure scenario, that was where one state was labeled garnet, another one was labeled amber. and that was where they had other names. they don't do that. with that said one of the reasons they supposedly picked these states texas in particular texas does have a long history of being understanding of the mill tear and pro-military. the reaction in this case has been very much the opposite. >> roger is in des moines, iowa on the line for independents.

good morning. >> caller: good morning. vi a question here. does a 2010 pentagon directive number 3025.18.list as defense part of civil authorities. in google it says it's an attempt to give obama authority to violate the posse come kaz zi attack. now i called my congressman and we went over there. and it doesn't really say what google says. however, it says we can do this and they can do that. and then i asked a simple question, what is the title of we and what is the title of they. who has the authority to do that. they could not give me an answer. >> dan lamothe do you know the document that the caller is referring to? >> i don't know the document he's referring to specifically.

but what i would say is there is hundreds of years of history here in which really -- i mean with a couple of isolated understand accidents that are not. i think interment camps in world war ii are where a portion of the american people were not treated the way they otherwise would have been. there is no real history to say, hey, you know, they're going to -- for example one of the rumors here is that there's trains that have shackles that we're going to take people away. i mean, that's new world order stuff. i don't see that happening. >> the headline from the "the new york times" on this from last week, military exercises stir conspiracy theorists. can you talk about where the theories start snd. >> yes. there's a number of websites in particular that peddle in this. they will take a grain of truth and spin it any which way they

want. you know, but a lot of these places, some of these same individuals that are talking about this are people that say 9/11 was an inside job, for example. and you look at that and it's like if you go back over the history of what some of these websites, some of these individuals have said, a lot of it seems to be out in left field. >> let's go to pine bluff, arkansas. ken is waiting, line for democrats. ken, good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> go ahead, ken. you're on the washington journal. >> caller: oh, good morning. i think that this is just all just crazy to me, you know. the army is trying to take over texas. i think that congressman hasting of florida when he said texas is a crazy state i really believe

it. i don't see how your congressman could really think and the people of texas most of the people of texas who voted the guy in really think that obama is trying to take over texas. that's all i have to say. and y'all have a good day. >> bill, on twitter asks what the heck is texas governor greg abbott and senator ted cruz doing playing sirius with conservative wing nuts on jade helm. >> governor abbott and you know the senator, i think they both they spoke out on this. they were asked about this. a lot of the concerns come from their own state. i understand that they would have to address these issues. senator cruz, the way he framed things, it's like well, you know it's hard to believe you know, the federal government so i understand why people would be concerned now.

and to a degree i guess that's fair when you consider, you know, some of the other things i've mentioned, the surveillance and issues like that. but at the same time, i think it's important to note that you also have conservatives like former governor rick perry who basically looked at this and shook his head. the vision even within, you know, groups that are typically pretty unified against the president here, it doesn't hold true. >> robert is in north port, florida. line for republicans. robert, good morning. >> caller: morning. dan, i think that there's a good cause for paranoia here. our government cringes at the mere thought of putting boots on the ground in any foreign place. however, these boots in our domestic soil aren't supposed to raise any questions? i think not. also, our current government has zero faith and zero respect with

our police agencies. okay? thirdly, our government detests the southern viewpoint that our borders merit to be protected and sealed. >> so -- >> caller: given this, plus the fact that our government is buying more ammo for a government that will not even consider boots on the ground and only drones, the government is buying more ammo than at any time before. it's unprecedented. given these facts dan, i think there's very good cause for people to say, something smells fishy. >> i guess i would say sir, that when you look at you know -- okay yes it's absolutely fair to say that we have an aversion as a government now to putting boots on the ground in a foreign country. or even calling them boots on

the ground. i don't know if that's fair right now based on the situation in iraq. but at the same time we have been doing exercises of this nature. you know, i mentioned robin sage, the marine special operations troops, bold alligator, another example of where you've got, you know, dress rehearsals essentially for what could be military operations overseas. how can you expect that at some point the military would be ready for an operation overseas that could come up whether or not the federal government likes it or not if we're not actually preparing and practice for contingencies that might come up. >> historically are there other operations that have caused this level of concern in this country, training operations? >> i'm not aware of anything quite this serious or quite this hysterical. but with that said there was a 1999 i believe operation in

which there was some urban preparations that the military did in san francisco and around that area. and that brought out a lot of you know a lot of frustration and anger, what are they doing on our streets. the interesting thing in that case, it was largely a very liberal tone to the criticism. and in this case it's quite the opposite. >> we have a special line for texas residents, if you have questions about jade helm 15 taking place this summer what are the dates for jade helm this summer? >> it spans ten weeks beginning in june. really through the summer. whether or not it's all those locations at all of those times we don't have that level of detail. >> we have a special line for texas residents if you want to call. otherwise lines for democrats republicans and independents. just about 15 minutes left with don lamothe with the washington post. national security writer there. how long have you been with the post? >> about 15.

i've been embedded in afghanistan three times, i was with foreign policy magazine. >> and dan lamothe here with us for about 15 minutes. dan is up line for democrats. good morning, dan. >> caller: actually independents. i want to preface my statement on i agree with due diligence and keeping an eye on what's going on. but, you know, with the amount of what we call it news that gets put out between the internet, the kind of crazy conspiracy stuff that goes on i guess i just -- i think that a lot of times issues like this too much credence is given to the fringe of view points and

the fringe view points become the norm or what we're actually looking at as opposed to when journalists people that are supposed to be kind of finding out what's really going on and letting the public know that's what you know, what free speech and a free press is supposed to be about. when you allow a quote unquote free press or you know journalist quote unquote journalist to propagate stories and to fan flames of this sort, to me this is exactly what you end up with. and when elected officials get involved in this stuff, i think that we should look back at the constitution and say, wait a minute. some of these people that are saying some of the things that they say as an elected official

should also be put on notice that hey, that's against the constitution. >> dan lamothe. >> i think he hits on an interesting debate that even my colleagues have had on this exercise in particular. and that is how much play to give it. you know how seriously to take it. how much of it you know do we perpetuate this conversation about jade helm being something other than what it is, an exercise. >> did the letter from texas governor greg abbott to the texas state guard take it to the next level here? >> i think it definitely did. i wrote about jade helm, that article you mentioned, back in march. that was when i had a couple of veterans that tipped me to it saying hey you should check this out partly because this is on websites that we spend time on but also partly because we're concerned. i talked to them and said, okay

i'll look at it. i did the home work on it and i thought man, they're making a leap here without a lot of logic. we laughed about it afterwards and they say okay, i get it, especially when you point out the context of the history of other operations, other exercises that have a sense of a familiar flavor. once the governor weighed in and said i want my own state guard monitoring this, it had the look of, you know, well the state guard, he's commander of chief of those troops. he is the guy that can activate those troops. and you know, to say that they would, you know, stand toe to toe with the american military is just way out there. but at the same time the fact that you would activate your own force like that, you know even a small number to monitor this, it had the look in a lot of people's minds of okay we're going to you know take this

seriously and you know we'll be ready in case something, you know, bad or evil happens. and that's really hard to see. >> what has the response been from other lawmakers to statements from louis gomer or the actions of greg on bot. here's a ad on politico, joe manchin, please come to west virginia. >> you've seen that a number of cases, utah as well. labeled hostile on this map. officials in utah said i see nothing wrong with this. we plan to participate. will do whatever we can to help. the diversity in reaction is very interesting. >> tom is in new jersey, line for independents. good morning tom. >> caller: good morning, gentlemen. thank you for c-span. can i taukt about the coincidence of drills with

real-world events? here's an example. president reagan's assassination attempt. at the time that occurred there was a presidential succession drill occurring. are you familiar with this in. >> not familiar with the facts of that, no. >> caller: let me try another one. on 9/11 there was a number of drills occurring some of which interfered with the air defense ons that day. are you familiar with them? >> where do you go to read up on these issues? >> caller: where do i go to read up -- well webster harvey's book of "synthetic terror" has a great list of the drills. i think, you know to be fair and to be open journalism the people who are concerned about these drills to my way of thinking have a really good reason to be concerned. the national defense authorization act says the military can arrest people, keep them in custody until the end of

hostilities and not give them a lawyer, not give them a trial not charge them. . this is the law of our country. and you know, this is not traditional constitutional governance. >> let's go to freddie, line for democrats. you're on with dan lamothe. >> caller: thank you. good morning. >> morning. >> caller: i think this is as crazy as anything i have witnessed in my 65 years of living. and it seems to me that those people are the one who are maybe concerned with these drills are old white men who dislike obama. i mean obama is trying to free those captured prisoners down there in guantanamo. and now you've got an american conservative angry about that. >> question for you. is there any chance that this

operation gets canceled if this concern continues to mount or if there's more pressure from political officials? >> there's been no indication that they would change their plan. i am curious, i've asked the questions, waiting for the answers for more specifics. because i think it becomes interesting how you go about, a, keeping the american public safe with an exercise like this just because you have aircraft involved. but also sort of because of the potential implications. i mentioned the shooting with robin sage in 2002. that's something they don't want a repeat of. that's why they share this information ahead of time to make sure that when somebody hears blank gun fire there's not a freak out because of that. >> another comment, get the public accustomed to military on the street. got time for a couple more calls. chuck is in des moines, iowa

line for democrats. chuck, good morning. >> caller: good morning. i wanted to express my opinion on a couple of things if i could. this jade helm thing i think i agree with the last calling, i believe, or the one before that. i think this is just completely ridiculous. doesn't even merit discussion. one other thing i've been hearing, i don't know how many times they keep saying obama lied to them about keeping your health insurance, keeping your doctor. he did not lie. he didn't have anything to do with the insurance company canceling them. if they had to cancel them, they would have kept their doctor and their insurance. >> chuck, we'll stick to jade helm for the last couple minutes we have with dan lamothe. chris, fair view oregon, line for independents. >> caller: good morning.

i'm served as a sergeant in the united states armed forces and familiar with a lot of the disaster response currently that we have. dan i was hoping maybe you could elaborate for the viewers who might not know what could be expected from the jade helm as far as check points, you mentioned aircraft. what kind of things can the civilian population expect from this exercise? >> i think, you know, noise would be the first easy answer. you're going to hear aircraft overhead. you're going to potentially hear blank gun fire. in terms of what -- i think -- you know, the presence is going to be relatively minimal. i mean when you start talking about 1200 people spread out over seven states eight states i mean, you know, they're looking to do, you know long range movements where for the same of argument flying people from utah to texas. that's several hundred miles. and those mirror things that you might see in real life, in real,

you know, in real operations. but you know, the specifics, you know, we're still trying to get more details on what this could resemble. and i think those are coming in time. you know this operation is still several months away. but i think we can look back on what's occurred in other places. there's been role players where you have people who are hired or volunteer to you know, play you know play being the other side. they're the quote unquote insurgents. those sorts of things that have happened in those other exercises i referenced. i think they're likely to happen here as well. >> jason from ohio is next line for democrats. jason, good morning. >> caller: good morning. thank you for having me. morning, mr. lamothe. my comment regarding jade 15, we already own texas and everything else. there's no reason to retake it. if this was a military takeover

there's more than enough military equipment in texas to take care of the national guard and anybody else down there to start with. the conspiracies that keep coming out i believe are rooted in the dislike of this man in the white house. he's not a white bred man. he didn't be trusted. that's the gist i get from everyone i talk to. it's bigotry. >> that's jason in ohio. last question for you. your expectation for the media coverage when the operation actually begins, is this going to be the most scrutinized military drill that the military will have seen? >> i am very interested in how that goes myself. you know i think it's -- you know, it's of interest you know for us to see pieces of it to cover parts of us. hey, you know, all of these concerns let us see it. whether or not that happens, you know based on for one being a

special operation, those are typically much more -- they have a higher level of classification to them in terms of the tactics and those sorts of things. i guess we'll have to wait and see on how much we're allowed to view. >> have you ever heard of a reporter getting embedded in a domestic drill operation? >> yes. there's an example that comes to mind, i mentioned robin sage. there was a very good report done several years back in a north carolina magazine in which they viewed aspects of that and interviewed people who were involved, including the civilians who lived in the area who was volunteering and participating. so yes. >> dan lamothe is a national security writer with the washington post. you can check out his stories on the washington post website. we appreciate you time this morning. >> thanks for having me. >> the house foreign affairs committee will hear from people who have been targeted by isis in iraq and syria. that's on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m.

eastern. later in the day a senate homeland security hearing on border security. focusing on infrastructure and fencing which we'll have live here on c-span3 at 2:00. this weekend the c-span cities tour partnered with come koost to learn about the history anliterary life of ft. lauderdale, florida. >> this was culture tourism. when they het up their villages along the way sometimes only lean-two the buses would stop. here was a tourist attraction, seminols camping by the road. when they came in to the tourists attractions they were getting a weekly allotment of food and sometimes the remember tall of soy machines where coppinger would rent and let the people use them when they lived in the tourist attraction and

they also sometimes get fabric because it behooved the tur rust attraction people to supply them with fabric so they were sitting there sewing things making things for market. this was an experiment tall time for patch work and you can see that on the bottom this is not a design that's made it down today. this is a little interment tall design. the designs were big ner the 20s and sometimes they weren't used any longer than during that particular decade. >> you know the thing about devil's triangle and the bermuda triangle triangle, there's all kinds of things that have happened. fly 19 was a regular navigation training mission. they would take off from the base and then flight 19 they would go aes out towards the bahamas. there was an area called -- and

go 100-something miles and then make a turn back west towards ft. lauderdale. they never came back. late at night after they were sure they were out of fuel they sent out these big rescue planes looking for them and that disappeared. 13 on board. the next day they start a five-day search with hundreds of planes and ships and they never found anything. >> watch all of our events on saturday, 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span 2 book tv and sunday at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span 3. the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress to color photos of every senator and house member plus bioand dakt information. also district maps, a foldout map of capitol hill and look at congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal

agencies and state governors. order your copy today. it's $13.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org. now a discussion on the future of iraq. two sunni leaders spoke at the brookings institution saying that sunnis are being squeezed out of the political system. during this 90-minute event they make recommendation frs best way to include june anies in the process of shaping iraq's future as well as combatting isis. good morning and welcome to the brookings institution. i am ken pollack. i'm a senior fellow at the center for middle east policy here at the brookings institution and i am absolutely delighted to bring this program to you this morning. as all of you know, in the last few months washington has seen two extremely distinguished visitors from iraq. the prime minister was here in

march and just recently -- in april, and just recently we had president massoud barzani of the krg. as we all know, there are many different communities in iraq. all of them in great tension at the moment. some of them virtually at war with one another, and as we all know, at the heart of iraq's communal differences lie its sunni community. we all now know that it was the alienation of the sunni community that began after the 2003 american invasion which drove the sunnis of iraq out of the political system and drove them into opposition and helped usher in iraq's civil war. we all know that it was in 2008-2009 that with help from the united states the sunnis were brought back into the fold. a new power sharing arrangement was forged in baghdad. the sunnis were once again given their rightful place, given

political power, and economic benefits commensurate with their demographic weight, and that was a critical element in resolving the civil war, pacifying the country, and putting it on a pace and in a direction toward real progress. we also are well aware, after the painful events of last year, that it was the unraveling of that agreement and the actions by the prior iraqi government that alienated the sunni community once again and that opened the door for isis or isil, whatever you prefer to call it, to come back into iraq. today one of the critical questions facing iraq and one of the critical questions for the united states and every country in the world that cares about iraq, that sees iraq's future as tied to its own interests is what the future of iraq will be. what kind of an iraq can bring all of its communities together again, help them to live in

peace and tranquility. when you speak to iraqis in baghdad, in all other parts of the country, what you often hear from them, in fact, almost invariably when you talk about the course of the fighting so far and what it will take to defeat dash and bring peace to iraq, what you inevitably hear is what will matter is what the future iraq government looks like. to the sunni community that's of intense interest. many sunnis feel they were badly betrayed in particular by the events of 2010 and '11 and '12 and '13, when they bought back into an iraqi political system only to find that political system used against them by a prime minister who saw many of their most important members as his enemies. if iraq is going to be safe, secure, peaceful, unified, the real question is not how fast

can we defeat dash and how fast can we drive them out of the country. the real question is whether there is a political solution to be had, a political solution that will allow the sunnis to once again feel that they are full members of iraq's political system. that once again they have the political strength and the economic benefits commensurate with their demographic weight and that they are not enemies of the state, that they are not objects of persecution by the government but full partners in that government. when you talk to iraqis, you often hear, and this is a paraphrasing of something that i heard directly from one person in particular, but i'm going to put a slight twist on it so it's not a direct quote. what you often hear from them is, you're asking me to fight for the future of iraq. until you tell me what that future looks like, i can't tell you whether i'm willing to fight for it.

and for that reason i ask today two very important, very well-known, and very highly regarded leaders of the sunni community to come to washington to help us to understand the perspective of their community on these critical issues. i know that for many people in this room both of these figures are well known to you, but i also know that for some they are not particularly well acquainted with them, so let me give them quick introductions. to my farthest right, to your farthest left, is dr. rafi al issawi. he was born in anbar, trained as an orthopedic surgeon, and rose to become the head of the fallujah hospital including most famously during the november 2004 battle for fallujah. he was elected to the council of representatives in 2005 and 2006 he became minister of state for foreign affairs. in 2008 deputy prime minister of iraq, and 2010 finance minister.

in 2012 and '13, rafi came under attack by the previous government. his bodyguards were arrested. he was the target of an assassination attempt and he was forced to resign from the government. he is the personification of the events that led to the alienation of the sunni community in 2012 and '13. to my immediate right, to rafe's left and to your immediate left, a governor nujaifi. he was born in mosul. he has degrees in engineering and law. i also found out, in looking over your bio, that you were an engineer in the iraqi air force during the iran/iraq war which is something i did not know. in 2009, the governor became the governor of nineveh province and at that time, excuse me, it was a tremendously important event in iraq, and i can remember some of your early adventures when you first took over the governorship which i think were

critical in broaching or beaching the differences between sunni and kurd in nineveh province. in addition, the governor is still the governor of nineveh and his brother was the speaker of the iraqi council of representatives from 2010 to 2014. now, as again i think many in these audience already know, if there was one thing that the previous government of iraq was successful at, it was fragmenting the sunni community. there are many different voices in the sunni community these days, and there is no question that there are other people who will claim to be this or that or speak for this or that community.

the reason that we brought you dr. rafe and governor nujaifi today is because these two men have long-standing -- excuse me -- histories as acting as eloquent voices for their community, as being committed to the peace and stability of a future iraq, and of being committed to a u.s./iraqi partnership moving forward. and we'll have questions talk show style and finally we will open things up to you in the audience to ask them your questions. for those reasons, i can think of no two better voices to help us understand the situation in iraq and with its sunni community than our two guests. we'll begin with some prepared remarks by both of them. dr. rafi has a bit of a power point presentation to give you a sense of what's going on. good morning, everybody. please join me in welcoming these gentlemen. [ applause ] >> good morning, everybody.

i would like first to thank my friend ken on this invitation and thank you all for your attendance and thank my colleague and old friend. since you are talking about my medical history he was my boss. please raise your hand. thank you very much. >> u made my comments on power point to make it easy on you for the specific topic on the situation in iraq. i agree with mr. ken. in order to talk about fighting to defeat in iraq to build back in iraq, we have to describe what's going on on the ground in iraq right now, political security and other aspects. excuse me. so now i will talk about

defeating extremism and state of iraq. for the -- both on the isis side and daish or militia side. simply i put this up to give you the impression what the exact picture looks like in iraq. we have to know the exact events and the causes that led to that situation. and i would like for you to just to focus on the next coming video which is about one minute. i divided the screen into two sides. one for the malitia. on the right side, these are the flags of the militias and the left side is the daish.

the black of isis and the yellow of the militias working in iraq and one of the leaders threatening saudi arabia and that one threatening the neighboring countries. they are identical in committing their crimes. and on this side this is the brutal dealing of the militias on that side isis are dealing with the shia on the other side. in front i would like to give you the impression these are identical criminal groups who are play in the fate of iraq. the same thing on the killing on the right side. i cover the picture because it is offensive pictures. on this side also malitia are killing sunnis. on this side and on the left side you see that the daish or isis are killing the shia. so this is the situation in iraq right now. in order to change you will come

to the practical points we will tackle on government side, on american side, how to end this tragedy in iraq. it is such an identical that this is -- on the left side this is -- is killing one of the shiite. and on this side the militia are -- is a new one. that is why we want to focus yes on short term. the real threat is isis damaging to the country and threatening the region and international community and global battle with daish. but on the long run you cannot deal with a country filled with a militia which is illegal and violent actor. now the question sunni arabs are iraq. i'm afraid this rapid presentation may not give you an expect picture of the situation. in 2003, and 2004, sunni arab divide into two groups.

one who believes in the participation of the political process, others who boycott. i am some other colleagues of mine participated since 2005. the vice president the chief of public affairs the sunni bloc in the parliament. and the foreign -- parliament and all of them are leaders of sunni and in exile now. they are outside the political process. they are wanted in political -- politicized judicially decisions. now sunnis are look is there any benefit of political participation? second, i'm talking about some legal constitutional steps taken by sunni and how the other partners dealt with the sunni. first one is participation, second, when sunni found it's difficult to achieve their goals they went towards demonstration, or before demonstration they

went to declare regions. in order to get a little bit of decentralized to decrease the grasp of the central government over them. what happened in 2011, militia enter the government building occupy the office of the governor and the governor was in -- for six months he was not capable of coming back to his office. while this is a constitution illegally, according to iraq -- so we moved into a third step which is the awakenings. awakenings to fight al qaeda. this was back to 2006 and '07. what happened almost all the leaders of the tribes who fight al qaeda have been assassinated and the government didn't protect them. after that, sunni said let us go

to the streets for demonstration. more than one year sunni demonstrated the street. what happened? the former government said thanks and attacked them and they killed them who demonstrate legally, peacefully. when sunni come to say let's come back to talk with the government to find some sort of recruiting sunni people for local national guard in order to participate in the security forces, and defeating isis and until this moment, unfortunately the draft of the national guard has not been sent or finalized in the parliament. and when it come to sunni now who stood after the control of isis in some of the big places, tribes want to fight them until the moment. thousands of people are not recruited officially by the government. keeping in mind we are talking about official legal recruitment, not war lords.

we don't need to see sunni armed groups and shia armed groups. it will end in conflict. we are talking about institutionalization of the security forces. so when they stood up to fight isis they didn't receive their ministerial orders and the weapons too. we are talking about almost 600,000 families displaced. and we are talking about 3 million people displaced out of their houses because of isis. and this put a challenge over everyone including the central government how to deal with the displaced sunni people. the latest wave of displacement was from anbar that unfortunately for that -- dealt with them as that you have to bring a sponsor. we have to bring a sponsor so some came to a dangerous and

risky situation in anbar. and we are talking about sunni complete imbalance on top of the security institutions. as a model we are talking about 16 agencies civilian and security. the 16 agencies in a sunni dominated province all the 60 leaders are shiite leaders. what sort of participation are we talking about? that's why i said sunni arabs are part of iraq. too many agreement with the previous government and with this government about reconciliation and amnesty law which is not even in the parliament and on the government side, i mean. so all this environment make the society of sunnis ask the question, is viable to be part of the political process? if it is yes, the government should include all iraqis.

this is one. and you have to be received in security forces even when you come to fight isis, what sort of partnership the government can do if the government fail to make partnership with those who are fighting a global threat, which is isis. now back to isis 2012. even knows that isis was in the western part of iraq and some good signals from the governor of anbar, former central government to prime minister isis are there in the western desert, you have to deal with them. who left isis to enter ramadi and other cities, those who are controlling the security situation. so the central government and iraqi central security forces which control the security failed to deal with the entrance of control of isis over our provinces. the question, we keep saying that iraqi security forces was not built on a proficient national model and this is the end.

you see isis controlling our provinces. the many divisions have been defeated in mosul on a few hundred of isis. isis presented itself as a protector of sunni putting in their mind this unjust dealing of the government. the marginalization of sunni. so at the beginning they are misleading sunni they will protect you. sunni started to discover that isis are threatening sunni more than anyone else. the kis placed people, millions are sunni are killed by the bombing, and infrastructure including hospitals, houses, everything bombarded in the sunni provinces. the first direct threat of isis is on sunni and then all iraqis and it's a global threat rather than a local one. and now talking about cleansing

of sunni province from isis. why i highlighted this point because talking about sending sectarian forces, whether militia or anyone else, will complicate the situation. we are encouraging everyone to keep the momentum of the people who are ready to fight isis in our province, that is sunni isis fighting. so we don't need to lose that momentum to change it into sunni-shiite fighting. which prove as i present at the beginning commit a very similar set of crimes like isis. malitia involvement in tikrit really complicated the situation. some of the militia bombarded houses, killed people. slaughtered like isis. so we were very frank with our colleagues in iraq saying, look, why you are sending from the

southern part to fight for mosul. the sunnis can fight isis. your role is to recruit them officially and give them more weapons. otherwise you send your guys to be killed and at the same time some sectarian behavior took place that give adverse action against them all of us will lose because the battle will be -- from fighting daish into fighting a civil war. we are talking about thousands of people in anbar and mosul and other provinces, thousands of them, they are coming to the camps of training even without uniforms now. this will come on american side and government what they can do to accelerate the liberation of iraq from isis and to restore back the state. fighting isis is a dual pronged approach. the other side should be political.

talking about political, it means the government program that mr. haider al abadi commit himself in front of the parliament this is my governmental program to be implemented with all other political partners. that include reconciliation, amnesty, sunni recruitment and training. and all these things are really not new topics or not new requests or demands of sunni. with the problem the government put a timetable but nothing is implemented yet. on the other side, the other threat is the militia. we talk about the men international global threat to iraq and division of the world is isis. militia, tens of militia working illegally out of the state of security force. unless we reach a point of

institutionalization of security force, sunni, shiite, christian, muslim, all these groups will find war lords who are fighting inside iraq. let us assume after post-daish you will find -- no one accept. that while putting that in institutionalized security forces not to reach a bad result. some sectarian actions of militia, including two days ago, they attacked one of the jails, released some of the criminals. they have been executed rather than killed in front of the jail. i said all these criminals, sectarian crimes will really not only -- it will prolong the life of isis. it will give them the justification they are protecting some groups and they are really not protecting.

and i side ie malitia and isis, both of them, they commit identical types of crime, of crimes, i mean. utilizing militia on the short term to fight isis is exactly like using -- to fight daish. is accepted to fight daish -- they are also a terrorist group. let us assume that isis later on divided into groups that fight each other. is it accept to -- no. we have to fight isis legally by legally constitutional institutional security forces that include all iraqis. on the short term all the resources should be focused on isis and defeating isis. but we cannot close an eye to the crimes of the malitia on the other side because it will pull into civil war. and when i presentation this short video, on the right side, one of the leaders of the

militia is threatening a neighboring country we are coming to occupy you. on the other side he is putting the passport of egypt and jordan saying we are coming to occupy you. both daish and malitia want to occupy the neighboring countries. that's why it's not only one threat in iraq. post-isis defeat. without having -- without institutionalization of security forces you will find everyone who is getting weapons who doesn't belong to the government will not be capable of controlling him. now some of the militias are outside totally the control of the central government. without the institutionalization of the security forces to trust the people who commit to fight isis and to bring back or restore back the state of law, there is much more tragedy.

institutionalization, i talked about it. million of displaced people need to be compensated. i don't think the central government capable to do it alone. help people. reconciliation is needed. iraq institution comes into the federal region. i mentioned when they declare a region on a level, sunni ask, what's the solution? the -- fighting -- that's not accepted. training national guard, national guard is very important. by the way, we agreed upon the national guard with the america,

and central government, but it's been change and it's waiting in parliament parliament. it's not part of parliament yet. rebuilding the armed forces to see second model of mosul. the iraqi army. defeat the iraqi army few hundreds of isis. we should not see it. the only way to rebuild the restructure the iraqi army on the background. and here with all those problems whatnotnot really accomplished. iraq is in a fragile situation. i already explain that. the political process by using policy judicial system, and agreed upon government programs,

presented -- by the way it's a good program and the head of financial parliament when i was minister of finance. i think he's trying. but trying is a bad situation. both americans, central government iraqis to stand united together to defeat that illegal violence minister objectives. the path to a democracy -- to now have a vision i think, when we need to adapt a new counter. i keep say it modify general petraeus model. when he was there, for example, he created the model of awakening because the president of the american at the time was huge, but now the president is

different, so lid fie that model, and that means creating a joint comedy, america central government, whom else, to supervise the story of recruiting sunnis and arming them directly. arming them rapidly. arming them without this democracy. these joint commodity would be overseeing, and americans supervise everything. central government will not say that, i'm not attended, and nothing coordinated with me. they will be attended in the story, and local people who complain government did not seven them or arm them also that everyone saw and they will be equipped, recruited officially again to fight isis. now after this -- as i mentioned, very rapid -- i'm sorry, i don't mean to confuse

you, but i hope the answer can put muyou much more aware. we have the central government, local people what to do, central people whatted too, and america fighting isis what to do. a lot of stuff at the central government. on the political side the program was the government, including reconciliation, counterterrorism, or things need to be implemented and, by the way, i'm talking about this i mean, restoring back balance, muslims in the security forces and other institutions. all these topics you see agreed upon. we are not talking about the new agreement, all agreed upon the implementation. on the security side should be directing to this, and access of

america, and typing isis, and do you have to dismatten and decommission militia otherwise there's a weak army weak government, and strong militia. no one expects that country to be in this model. restructuring the iraqi army talking about how it was devoted in mosul. divisions withdraw on few criminals like isis. they have precursor to be included later on in the national guard, legislation to the parliament because at the end of the day it's the local people in the national guard in control and force isis, period. the composition of displaced people because this is a very big problem now, millions of people outside their houses. on the american side, supporting political reform and recon reconciliation reconciliation, they keep support, but, i mean to start

with despite all the sunni, we say the solution should be political. all these things. in order just to squeeze an angle, would not accept this and next selection of government for negotiation agreement, the government permission agreement is an excellent program. the idea is to go over there, timetable, and implementation. assisting in rebuilding forces sectarian, provisional basis, we're talking about 50,000 soldiers. so minister of defense paid for them, and now only this point the 50,000 to be compensated by 50,000 good guys with the restructure of the iraqi army, you see? we can defeat its forces like we don't need to see that model in

order not to see the forces, and the number's increasing. the national background -- just a moment i lost -- to develop the law, i'm talking about state of law. that's restoring the law to the country, not state of law who damaged the law. >> technical assistance, the guard, dismantling, militia, we don't need to build the partnership with isis. the partnership and the frame work agreement with the state with iraq. help the central government regarding this location of many and creating a fund for displaced people. the story about arming sunni. i think the battle, i guess isis is an international one, but isis is stressing everyone so everyone should participate in that battle in a way.

sunnis in iraq are the greatest potential ally in fighting isis. i don't think anyone can liberate sunni province without sunnis. they need the united states and international community in order to fight isis. they need leaders and now on the ground fighting isis. the model, as i mentioned, the model of awakening direct army direct financing from american side encourage people to defeat in 2006 and 2007. there's talk about assuming arming sunni may use it now to fight against isis later on use against the government. the question why the sunni use -- why the sunni fight against the government, their own government, if they are participating, if why that? this is not accepted. the only way is to restore bad state of law and partnership of iraqis in order to come to this and the central government

cannot be, if the central government cannot be a partner with sunnis who a fighting, who are fighting with international community against isis, so who is the partner of the central government? so this is the situation. threat in iraq is isis and militia militia. it can be restored back again. it is difficult, but it is very possible. it depends upon all the partners. american sides, central government side, and local people and the tribes. and thank you. [ applause ] good morning, everybody.

thank you for that introduction. you are an expert on iraq, but even more, you are a friend of iraq. you may have my special thanks for that friendship with iraq and our friendship. thank you for organizing this forum. and i want to talk -- i want to take this opportunity to thank the people of the united states, all american forces, who support them president obama's administration and the congress united states congress assistance to our common fight against this. as you say here isis. i welcome this chance to express my view on iraqi's situation.

a sunni political leader as one who born of many generations of muslim fathers and mothers and legislated governor of the people in which is near a city of mosul. that's the largest -- second largest city in iraq. nearly 2 million people now illegal regime. the clear head is the battle to liberate mosul. the second largest city. iraq can wantnot be iraq without muslim. that would be like the united states without chicago or without san francisco. there are key points i want to

discuss with you. these points mean success or failure for the liberation of mosul and the world's fight against isis. success in the battle and just as important, what comes after this, is good. this in addition to the importance of fighting isis are con frequent steps towards national reconciliation in iraq. after 11 years of just talking about reconciliation, but no actual steps taken, the sunni and iraq will no longer be interested in more talk. the sunni need to see actual and concrete steps.

i will agree with him most of the time, and outline only these points so we can have your question and a good discussion. i'm talking about mosul as a model, but i think what i'm talking can be for all the sunni areas. first, the people of mosul are the key to liberate mosul. the mosul people must be shown why. liberation is better for them than the regime of isis. history shows that the people are the reason armies succeed or fail. in a city of nearly 2 million people soldiers, even in thousands, or how well equipped

can do only so much. we need the people of mosul to rise up and to help the soldiers combat isis. with the people rising up against isis, i believe they will. we must give them a vision of what their life would be like after liberation of mosul. in addition, to the support during and immediately after liberation. before i tell you what i believe that the vision should be i want to tell you the planning and work that is going on right now for the liberation of mosul. we have now two training camps. in these camps american

canadian and turkish. special forces are training thousands of mosul police and volunteers. the combat skills and skills they need to have to be in the fight for the liberation of mosul. one of these two camps is for mosul police. the other is for the volunteers who are organize edd organized by commanding officers and the previous army. the army officers want to fight isis. the volunteers are ready to be part of the national guard as soon as the law for this is enacted. but the volunteers are ready to

fight as soon as they get weapons. by now, we have thousands of fighters who have graduated from these camps and are ready to fight. but they don't have weapons. they don't have the weapons they need for the fight, for liberation of mosul from isis. since last january now five months ago, we are still waiting for the promises of weapons that have been met by our government. promises are nice. but is the weapons -- the weapons that they need not the promises. the force that holds mosul after

liberation must be trusted by the people of mosul. that means the force must be from mosul and its surrounding town. if these forces can be trusted by mosul community, the mosul people would be on the side of the liberation and they cannot make a combat into mosul. liberation comes first, of course, but it's the period after liberation that will be decided for people would be watching. people of mosul can survive, and president obama last month pledged $200 million.

with this president obama, be on hand immediately after liberation, all would be tied up in baghdad's bureaucracy. in addition to the training camps, we have taken another route for liberation of mosul. we know liberation is not just a military fight. i organized a forum for sunni muslims in egypt of which -- these muslim schoolers are continuing their work against the archaeology of isis in aed kmoty established. i established a set of sales of the people inside mosul who joined the liberation force if

needed. but they have to trust that force also. i have a good working relations with most of the arab tribes in the mosul area. these tribes would be critical in the liberation of mosul, and i say also these tribes need also to trust the force. whatever work we have done we need to give the people of mosul a different vision than what they had from the previous government in baghdad. the second point the people of mosul want democracy to be for elections. the people of mosul should elect their own representative and not

end forced from outside, not by the government in baghdad, not by the extremist shia or sunni, and certainly not be iranian support ed supported houths of any kind. i personally welcome international observers in this election. this election must be free and without any interference. you may ask what is our vision after liberation? this brings me to my thinker and time point. we need awe topmy as a part of the strong iraq. the hierarchy constitution i

want to be clear, i want to keep iraq as unified. and to always follow the constitution of iraq. the articles under our institution are 119, 120, and 121. these articles explain how the provinces in iraq become a region. we just want to know what our constitution intended for people of a providence. the awe autonomy must be in two sense.

remember these words of the iraq institution when you hear anybody or anything from anybody believing that i want iraq. i believe authority in iraq should be lifted up, but not iraq itself. we need to have a balance in power and authorities in iraq, which would have a double effect. there are sunni and kurds and also protect minorities such as other minority groups. i believe this autonomy will strengthen the unity of iraq.

first, geographically by referendum in the province the geographic autonomy the province will be at least -- would have at least fewer effects. this would give the community its own autonomy with its own special constitution. this autonomy would protect minorities within the province. and autonomy will prevent iraq from interfering with the rights of the people. we tried in the past to follow up constitutional steps, but, unfortunately, the prime minister malaki dropped this

decision. second stage, i envision the pr vince province, sit down with other sunni provinces, and their own relation under the umbrella of the iraq institution. in cop collusion i want the people of mosul first we are involved in liberation of their city. second, to have a chance to choose their own representatives. third, to get chance of the referendum according to the iraqi constitution. if people choose the future

would be bright. thank you for listening and i will answer your questions and look forward to our discussion. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, both, thank you, governor, and thank you, doctor. those are both terrific presentations. in fact, you managed to cover my first four or five questions so i'm going to dispense with them and that's actually a terrific thing. i want to spend the bulk of my time with you talking about, in particular, governor, what you were talking about in the end, but also what you talk about at the end of your presentation, doctor, about what this future iraq relationship, political relationship might look like, but before i do that, i want to go back to a point that was raised in a terrific presentation. you made the point and governor, feel free to disagree with this if you do but i have the sense

you agreed with this and it's the impression that most of washington got, which is the problem is not the prime minister. he wants to do the right thing. that's the impression he left here in washington knows where iraq needs to go and wants to do it. the problem is not the want. the problem is the how. if that is something that you both agree with, i'd love to get your thoughts on how you believe that the united states might help him to better actually achieve those goals. would you like to start? >> thank you thank you very much. >> this is a very broad question. the answer liberate iraq from isis, and thank you very much. look again, ladies and gentlemen, talking about who inherited a very damaged political security situation and he's trying here, be

supportive america and arab-sunni, i agree with this but the government is not implementing according to his government and the parliament, and so some of the stories like amnesty he talks about six morpt months, for example, and now nothing. and there's other issues, et cetera, so, yes, i agree we should help him and america can help to rebuild the iraqi security forces that i talk about because without building national security forces it means iraq would be controlled totally by militia on the side and isis on the other side. this is the question, the story of arming sunnis. whether arming sunnis divides iraq, the question is, is iraq united now? more than 50% is under the control of isis. we want to bring back to restore united iraq by arming the sunnis, so when we send sunnis

and others who want to liberate isis to bring back mosul to iraq, so helping in dismantling militias, bringing back the state of law accelerating the process of arming iraqi armies and fighters, which could be sunni, according to our suggestion. central government says, look what if we push their weapons to the sunni fighters, and they may pass on the weapons. they pass on the weapons or defeat the iraqi army? you see, so this is not a justification justification. you cannot keep pushing luck on everything. you have to trust people fighting isis. this is a point restructuring security forces, militias, putting all resources of iraqi support in them in fighting isis, presenting a draft of national guard because we agree

upon local forces that catch security on the ground, in anbar, and as a local. in the southern province also. south has its own national guard. the problem is the national guard is not mobile yet. these are issues the americans can help. finally, on composition, america can also work to support because of the crisis of oil now collapsed, very difficult for government to cover all this huge number of people. the story of international strength. >> governor? >> i believe in the -- i think it would not be -- iraq is not united if we want to group and weaken the others. so what we need is to strengthen the sunni group so they can fight isis or else they return to balance the iraqi forces. u.s. can do that.

the sunni group, the kurds, and the legal shia group. the constitution. >> following up with a specific question the process of reconciliation. it was talked about and is clear every iraqi who knows anything about the real situation understands this is critical. does the u.s. have a role to play in fostering that process of reconciliation? again, we see people like you like the prime minister talking about the process of reconciliation. we don't see it happening. should it be done? should the u.s. be doing more? >> real wish for reconciliation in iraq especially when they get the authority, they didn't want to lose it. they want to keep their

authority, their power in their hand. there cannot be reconciliation like that. if we are talking about reconciliation, as i said we have to strengthen the other groups to give them the freedom to choose their representatives, so they will be in balance with the others, and that's what i'm talking about elections, and we need elections which getting all the groups of the sunni, not only me. and others may not be involved in the election, and we'll have all the sunni community inside the political forces. >> before i let you answer governor, if i could follow-up on that. don't you worry if there were elections in iraq at this point in time, that the shia militias capture a huge number of seats?

is that a problem? when do we do the elections? >> happens in the shia provinces, but we can also use or change the law, the election law, that each part with a big list we can get the representative from each portion in iraq. >> if this situation keeps going in iraq, the control of militia, that means they draw the political situation next in all iraq. south shia provinces, sunni provinces. that's why i'm talking about dismantling illegalization and partnership of sunni recop silluation looks like for all iraqis talking about as a position, everyone is singing about it let us make a rapid assessment of the story. from 2010 to now, not from 2005

or so. before the second offer, we met in what's called -- this agreement, there was recop silluation and restoring people and let us assess from 2010 until now and prime minister, speaker, and they are up to 2010, also, i mean, after 2000, so the story's not keep talking shouting, but the story is to implement the agreement. otherwise, if you come to the draft of the program of the dpoft. it is such an excellent one presented to the parliament. the problem that i highlighted here in front of you is the timing. it talks about this reconciliation forces should be, and no arms and groups

should be outside the control of the governor, and it mention the the program, and the question is, is it implemented? the answer is no. >> as always in iraq that is the issue. there's no shortage of the right ideas. >> there's one who is looking for solution. so at least he is adapting his allies that there's a bear in iraq. come to extinguish it. >> thank you. let's move on a little bit, because, again i want to leave time for questions from the add convince as well. i'd like to come to the great issue that's looming ahead of us. it's not the immediate issue, but the issue in front of us is the explosion and whether it's going to be mosul first, but there's app issue that's lying behind it which both of you addressed, which is critical which is the nature of the future iraqi state. a future iraqi state in which

all its communities can feel comfortable. we invited you here because we were hoping that you could -- as well as anyone give us a sense of how the sunni community is thinking about exactly that set of problems. i recognize you can't speak for 6 million sunnis, but i have to ask someone to do that because i can't fit 6 million sunnis in this room. nor would they come. nor would they get visas if we invited them. i'll ask you to act as their surrogates. starting with you, governor, because you covered it in wonderful detail in your remarks. help us to get a sense of what you think that future iraqi state will look like. you spoke today. you spoke in the past about the importance of decentralization of the authority. nevertheless within a strong federal system. now, that sounds exactly right, but, of course, the devil is in the details.

help us to understand the details. what kinds of powers are you thinking about that stoubhould be de devolve devolve, and how would that work? governor, start us off. >> maybe we can get the model. i think the political life -- there's no problems even between the ex-enemies, now they become all offense, and they can solve problems inside their awe topmy, my autonomy, but maybe there's problems within. i think provinces, like i will not say sunni region but maybe it would be happen of the anbar

or after that, after negotiation with them, but, anyway, i think we can solve our problems. we can get our security. we can get our suitable political life inside that province. in baghdad, it would be the final negotiation. it need to be that there's no -- there's not any event or any problems happen from this province to baghdad. they can have reconciliation between their people easy. maybe there's some problems with some parties or some groups of the e shia with those out in mosul. it's more easy to solve that problem in the provinces and we can get, as i said, the model, and i believe that iraq will

stay in their province and should until it becomes a federal country which would get its autonomies, allies to, their problems be inside their province. >> several follow-ups, but i'm going to turn to the doctor first for his overview. >> >> demonstration, calling for a region for occupation by militia, for example, this gives impression not partner. needs real solid confidence building. it needs not only promises, but we have to go into election plan

and detail how to restore sunni to bring them back to the political, and they are ready, but no one trusts everyone. not trusting the other, but, i mean all these things are taken by sunni on the institutional legal background. it ends with illegal constitutional movements from the government side. so this is one. second on the authorities, what sort of politicals and how iraq would look like. in fact, everyone is talking about constitution and implementing constitution, and respecting constitution. constitution, need to clarify that point. there's a central government authorities, there's regional authority, and there's a shared or mixed authorities between the two. respecting and implementing the constitution. >> let me ask the first follow-up starting with you, but asking for your view as well. as you are painfully and perm personally aware, one of the problems with the current federal system is that we've had

a corruption of the justice process, and see sunni leaders, present company included have been targeted by the central government using that judicial system. how would you think about a future iraqi system that prevents that from happening? how do we go about creating an iraqi in which you and others can't be personally targeted by this system? >> all iraqis whether to select to live together to live united in iraq, to respect authorities, now, for sure, there's interference interference. americans, you here can help a lot, and even restore everything. restore. everything is damaged. you have to restructure damaged

structures. so restoring iraq back means you have to build again. on the corruption side, in the security institutions part of this totally controlled by my militia so militia took money, and it's a vicious circle. the challenge is to restore back again the safe. it depend upon how serious iraqis are including us to rebuild iraq otherwise if everyone keep only observing iraq, only keep beating others' participation or promises without implementation, we are not move. >> governor, anything to add on the judicial system? >> i think the corruption and the -- all of that problems may be solved easier if we are near to the people, not far away from the people. now controlling everything from baghdad, they have no concern of

what happened in mosul or anbar what the people want. they want to belonging to them, not to follow the problems or corruption in mosul. that's what happened exactly before the collapse of mosul. the corruption in the army is too much but baghdad did not care with that corruption. they care that the mosul of people must belong to them so i think dividing the authorities, and we can see what -- as i said, the model and dividing the authorities even if there is a problem between some of the leaders of baghdad and there's not

not, and the autonomy. >> thank you. governor, i want to shift to another specific aspect of a future iraq that you in particular raised in your remarks. the krg ought to be a model. that's actually very helpful because i think it's one we can get our hands around right? that's something we can understand. that's a big statement. i want to ask you about a couple specific aspects of it, starting with the military and security side. do you believe as implied that what iraqi-sunni arabs look for in a future iraq is a situation where the military and security forces of the sunni provinces of the sunni regions are separate from the iraqi central army and under that vision, do you think that sunnis would be willing to have iraqi central army units in

the sunni provinces, or would they have to be split? just as the krg has one, more responsible for security and military matters in the krg and the central -- the army of the central government is more or less out of the krg. >> maybe i will have a difference between two securities. >> please. >> the security for the provinces and thus must be managed inside the province or inside the autonomy. there's no need to have interfere from baghdad with the local security in the province. there is also another situation which is the iraqi security and that, of course we need that, the iraqi army to be involved in it, and so we don't like that we have iraqi army even in our provinces. we like to have iraqi army, but this iraqi army must not involve

in local security or be involved with the people inside the province. >> so perhaps more division between the ministry of interior forces and myinistry of defense forces? >> yes. >>ed did eded eded eded eded -- go ahead, please. >> the year 2028 is only talking about the government to call for a federal forces if there is a real threat in a security situation in this province so if the security situation is good local forces with the local police and other provinces provinces, otherwise, to sechbd an army or federal army is not accepted ideas iraq, but also the institution, localized or exactly said how to do it and this is implemented now and it is the governor, only the authorized one who calls for the prime minister to send, so this

is the way of connect inging local. >> very helpful. i have to dig down, asking about where the rubber meets the road. money. do you believe that sunni arabs would envision in this future iraq system, one where the sunni provinces or sunni region or individual sunni regions would have their own budget separate from the federal budget, or would they remain a part of the larger federal budget? again, going back to the krg model where there's a separate budget that simply has a revenue sharing arrangement. governor, please. >> i think the constitution explain that very well, and we have -- we need to get our budget according to the population over the province and or the autonomy so we can follow the constitution and --

>> governor if i can -- having the governor, are there specific items that right now are handled by the federal government that you think are better handled by the provinces, but the regions, again, thinking about a future iraq in which the sunnis felt more comfortable? >> maybe i will give example for the last year i was the governor of , and according to the institution, they must get 11% of the iraqi budget, but actually, we don't get more than 1%. and that's i think one of the bigger problems you get in the province. >> as it relates to the institution and being minister of finance first of the budget

paid directly to the provinces, not regional. what's called in the constitution although it's called regional development budget now, and even if it's called regional development budget, which is investment budget. i mean, part of the investment have been paid directly to the proper, and they put it -- list the it in the mapping, the other budget is according to the law now. it's part of the central government unified budget. >> if it changes into a region, and if they talk about a budget of the region, which is different from a budget of a province. >> to follow up with that your explanation is you would move up either to a single sunni region or to multiple regions? >> i think all sunnis are talking about now