.org/products. >> people did not want to think that roosevelt's conservation as a policy as much as a passion. he put aside almost 240 million acres of wild america. . .

>> christopher hill spoke with reporters at the state department for 25 minutes. >> so, this is i think round three today of the state department briefing. but delighted. one of the things we'd hoped to do is, when we have some of our key leaders from around the world in town, that we'll find ways to bring them to you as we can. ambassador chris hill is one of our most seasoned diplomats. as you know, he is now the u.s. ambassador in iraq. he's here for consultations this week. we thought it would be a good time to have him kind of update

you on the current situation in iraq, and i'm always delighted to welcome chris because, among other things, he's one of the state department's finest red sox fans. >> thanks a lot. it's a pleasure to be here and not talking about north korea. [laughter] >> [inaudible]. [laughter] >> that was a preemptive strike. but i'm back for a few days of consultations and some personal travel and will be getting back to baghdad next week. obviously it is an important month because we're getting to one of the major milestones of the security agreement that is the out-of-the-city milestone. our combat forces will be out of the remaining urban areas in iraq.

it's an important moment because, as we go forward with the the security agreement, we will also be moving ahead on what they call the strategic framework agreement. this is an agreement which will really govern or relationship for we hope decades to come, involve our educational exchanges, economic relations, various political exchanges, things that we work on internationalally. so we want to make this strategic framework agreement really the essence of the relationship and to get to that we need to get through the remaining elements of the security agreement and certainly the one dealing with the provision dealing with our combat fours out of the urban areas is obviously a key element of it. >> i have a question about iran, actually. you've met with the iranians several times about issues

specifically related to iraq. what do you anticipate your role being with the iranians? >> it's hard to say. frankly, the issue hasn't come up as of now. i've only been there a couple of months. iran has a great interest in iraq. we certainly feel their interest in iraq, you know, their a historical neighbor of iraq and obviously those two countries will have a relationship going forward. as i said at my confirmation hearing, i think it would be best if iran did all it could to respect the sovereignty of its neighbor. >> looking at the the change in the iranian activity in the last few days -- >> with respect to iraq? no to my knowledge. >> in terms of being more helpful in terms of iraq, have you noticed a change? >> i think, obviously, this is

a serious relationship with iraq. it has gone through ups and downs in recent years. obviously, we are interested in iraq having a better relationship. we have addressed that issue with the iraqis and will continue to do so and see if we can be helpful. as the iraqi prime minister said to me, we will try to coordinate what we're doing with syria. but making iraq have a better relationship with its neighbors is a key element of what we're trying to do in that country. >> have you noticed fewer foreign fighters crossing over? >> i can't really gauge it in a matter of days or weeks. i think we have to take a broader view of what that is. >> about the sent come visit to

syria -- >> i'm not in a position to discuss that. i'm not here to talking about syria relations. we have other people to do that. except insofar as it relates to iraq. certainly the iraqis have welcomed our interest in a dialogue with syria and have expressed an interest in making sure that we're coordinated, and we are. >> can i ask you about the renewed violence over the last couple months in iran. it definitely seems a concerted effort by the sunni extremists to go after the shia. they've been quiet so far, the shia, not retaliating. but there is a huge concern that there would be, if there was like a major bombing, that there would be a huge, renewed sectarian round of violence. >> i think, if you look at overall levels of violence in iraq, you will see an overall

trending downward. this trending downward includes some of the events that took place in recent weeks. i must say, as someone who is new there, and when i see a couple of rockets at the green zone, those are a couple of rockets too many for my taste. but people who have had the benefit of more time there always tell me it's nothing compared to last year. so, when you see the aggregate numbers put together by the u.s. military, you see there is an overall trending down. now, the the real question is whether some of these attacks, in one case an attack on iranian tourists, actually, whether these talks on obvious shiites are ones that are going to be reciprocated. certainly you've seen some attacks on sunnis. whether it is concerted or not, it is obviously in our view an attempt to stimulate tensions

and we're pleased to say it has not had the desired effect. the overall level of violence continues to be low. we don't see any re-creation of militia groups. they're still out there but there is certainly no growth in that pattern. whether we continue to have this -- you know, these positive trends, i think it's hard to say, except that we've worked very hard to make sure that there is dialogue among the various political groups in the country. we continue to do what we can to help people get together. that is a country that's gone through six years of very, very painful violence, where everybody has lost a loved one, and one never wants to predict when people are sick of this sort of thing. but since arriving there in the last couple of months, i do believe that people are trying

to work their way through a political process. >> but you don't see -- i mean, the violence is down, but the last couple years the violence seems to be more from the insurgency and from al qaeda. you don't see a renewed level of sectarian tensions that gives you pause that there might be -- >> no. we don't, actually. what we do see, in anticipation of parliamentary elections, which are now expected to be in january, we do see a lot of joking for political -- jockeying for political positions. these sorts of things are actually healthy. in general what we see is a tendency to want to work within the political system. but i don't want to sound polly annish about that because these are trends that are fragile and need to be nurtured every day.

>> your predecessor talked about this a lot, whether the the violence in iraq, the gains you've seen over the past year, are irreversible or not. do you share that assessment? you think we've gone over the hump? in mosul, where a lot of recent violence is taking place, do you think the u.s. troops will be able to pull out of mosul -- >> i know we are going to comply fully with our obligations under the security agreement. we signed that agreement and we will absolutely comply fully with it and that means pulling all combat forces out of the cities. and i think what's important to understand is that, in most cities, our combat forces are already out of the cities. so this is not some brand-new model that we're not sure how it's going to work. but to some extent, we've left the best for last, that is

baghdad and mosul. i was up in mosul a few weeks ago and, to be sure, it's a city that has a lot of tension in it. to be sure, there are various groups, whether it's the kurdish population there or the sunni or -- and i want to emphasize this as well -- christian groups that have concerns about what life will be like in the future. again, i think the way forward is through political dialogue. i met with members of the provincial council, i met with members of the kurdish delegation that is boycotting, i met with the governor and others. i think we just have to keep doing that. whether this is irreversible i think to some extent will depend on whether the people are prepared to continue to work at this. i have no doubt that iraq is a better place for the fact there is less violence and i think that's an insight most iraqis have every day. >> is there any contingency

plan in case the violence escalates after the withdrawal? >> again, i don't want to discuss contingency plans. i'm not in charge of that with respect to security. what i am involved in is to make sure that we are complying with the security agreement. this is something that we want to do and must do and it's something that's expected of us. >> egypt [inaudible] do you have any indications that saudi arabia might be ready to do this? >> not yet. obviously this step by the egyptians to send an ambassador is most welcomed and i look forward to being there to welcome him or her. i think we really want to see iraq reattached to its neighbors, as my comments earlier on syria would suggest. and so we believe it is in

everyone's interest to be present in iraq, present diplomatically. we believe it's in everyone's interest, whether they're interested for economic purposes or for regional stability. and anyone with an interest in regional stability, anyone with an interest in iraq's sovereignty and development as a healthy democratic state should be there. >> do you have a sense of what is holding the saudis back? >> again, you'll have to ask someone who lives and works on saudi arabia. >> [inaudible] president obama, did he ask you to -- >> again, i'm not in a position to comment on what went on between the president and king abdullah. >> is there any resolution or any advancement of the problem of solving kirkuk and also the oil revenue sharing? >> i think there is a lot of discussion within iraq on oil

revenue sharing and not so much revenue sharing but overall exploitation of oil. i know the government in baghdad has had renewed and i think positive discussions with the kurdish regional authority on this matter. i think you saw some fruits of this just a few weeks ago when oil from kurdish areas was exported out through the main palestine -- pipeline and whether the revenue sharing went according to the u.n. formula of 17%. i know that the iraqi government is working very hard to see what can be done to boost oil production and they are in touch directly with international oil companies on this. there has been a lot of discussion about where the so-called hydrocarbons law is, and if you ask various political leaders in iraq, you get different answers as to the

potential for getting this law through the parliament. right now i must say the discussion in the parliament is very much geared to getting an election law through, so that parliamentary elections can take place as scheduled on january 16. >> how many u.s. troops are left in the cities, specifically, how many in baghdad? >> again, i would ask that you direct that question to the pentagon. there are roughly 135,000 u.s. troops in the country. but as for their particular deployment, i'd direct that the to the pentagon. >> can i just make sure i got this straight. when you were asked about the syrian fighters coming into iraq, have you actually seen a diminishing of that number or is it not yet clear? >> i think it's too soon to gauge the numbers except to assure you that we track this issue very closely. and compared to say a year ago,

there is a substantial -- there are fewer such people coming over. now, whether there are fewer coming over because they understand the consequence of unlawful crossing of the border is greater now than it might have been in the past, that's hard to say. but the specific question had to do with the recent discussions with syrian authorities and whether there is a change in the flow at this point and i think in that case it's a little too soon to say. >> that was since last weekend, right? >> the discussions with syria were just last week, yes. so it is obviously a little early to talk about it. >> thank you. >> there has been discussion with turkey about this may be the year that they may give up arms and move into the political circle and the u.s. is putting pressure on the kurdish authorities as well as the central government. can you clarify what is going

on? are you involved in the talks? >> again, i'm not in a position to discuss that process that you're describing. i mean, this is really for our people who deal with turkey. i will say that, with respect to iraq, turkey is very active. turkey has a number of economic projects under way in iraq. they've been very much bolstering their relationship with iraq and i know, having talked to turkish visitors, there is a great deal of interest not only in the northern part of iraq but also in bolstering their relations with the shiite part of the southern part of iraq. so i see a turkey that is increasingly interested in having a good relationship with iraq and we very much welcome this process. >> president obama's speech in

cairo has produced a lot of renewed hopes for the arabs and for america and their policies there. can you reiterate for us and for the other audience that you are looking forward for the day when america leaves iraq as a one country united and sovereign? i mean, united, not like what vice president biden in the past has looked for, a division of iraq to three parts. >> we are very interested in having a long-term and successful relationship with iraq. as our president laid out in the speech, we're interested in a long-term and positive relationship with the entire region. with respect to our relationship with iraq, we

understand, those of us who work on the issue understand that, to have a long-term and successful relationship with iraq, we have to be very respectful of iraqi sovereignty. and so that is one of the real foundation points of that relationship. it's reflected in the security agreement. it's reflected in the strategy framework agreement, which governs the nonsecurity areas. so we are very respectful of iraqi sovereignty. we're very respectful of iraqi territorial integrity and respectful of iraqi unity and that's been our policy and will continue to be our policies. we will work very hard with iraqi authorities not to 0 tell them what what to do but to express our views and listen to theirs. it is important for the new ambassador to do a lot more listening than he does talking and that will continue to be my role. >> [inaudible] has requested u.s. support and the united nations to get iraq out from

chapter 7 of the u.n. charter and restore full sovereignty with no limitations remain from the past dictatorship and so forth. what is the u.s. position on that? >> the u.s., as you know, in the council, there are some eight or 10 council resolutions that deal with the so-called chapter 7 issue. coral to article 25 of the security agreement, the one that deals with this issue of u.s. troops out of the cities, there is an article, article 25, that deals with the u.s. committing ourselves to assisting iraq to get off chapter 7. if you look at the article 27, it refers specifically to our view that iraq is no longer a regional threat to peace and security in the region and on that behaves, it is our desire to help them get off article 7.

obviously, this also involves helping iraq, as i mentioned before, work to have a better relationship with its neighbors, and we would like to see an iraq-kuwait relationship that continues to improve and we will continue to be engaged in that. >> is the u.s. going to take any steps to actually do that in the council? >> we are working -- you know, as we look to these reviews, we are obviously in touch with our partners and we will see what steps we will take. again, i don't want to be stepping on the role that our people in new york play, ambassador rice and others, but we are obviously -- this is a time when we need to look at the review of the situation and make sure that we are complying with article 25 of the security agreement, but also working on -- with our partners in the u.n. and working with our

partners in the u.n. security council and the secretariat on this. >> the iraqi government says it is forming a economy to assess some of its prisons and overcrowding and prisonner abuses. being that there will be prisoners transferred, could you tell me what involvement the united states has, if any, in the assessment of iraqi prisons in regards to some of the these allegations? >> first of all, we have made a commitment and this is also part of our security agreement to transfer detainees from u.s. custody to iraqi custody. we are working very closely with the iraqi prison authorities both in terms of training and helping them with the refurbishment of prison facilities. indeed, we just opened up a new facility or a newell renovated

facility just last saturday -- newly renovated facility just last saturday. in addition, i met with the the minister of justice on sunday about the issue of the status of the prisons and of their capacity to not only receive prisoners but also to have a judicial system that has throughput, that is, gets the prisoners out through a legal process to determine guilt or innocence. so this is a very key element of what we call a rule of law initiatives at the embassy and we are very much engaged on it, and the rule of law initiative, where we have a number of personnel from the justice department, actually, several hundred of them, including some 21 professional lawyers there, and it was for that reason that just the other day or just two days ago i met with attorney general eric holder to really thank him for all the work that

the justice department has been doing precisely on this issue. >> would any member of the united states personnel be a member of that committee, or it's a cooperation? >> it's cooperation. >> ok. >> do you still have concerns about the iranian selling parts for i.e.d.'s and contributing negatively to the security in iran? we've heard about that a lot. what's the trend? >> i think, obviously, the security situation in iraq could benefit from less transborder shipments of various weaponry or explosives, and i think that goes for iran as well. >> what is the level of [inaudible]? >> again, i don't want to character tries the level of it. i would ask you to direct that pot pentagon. >> chris' next activity on his

schedule is a phone call with secretary clinton. we have time for one more question. >> and i don't know if kim jong il is [inaudible]. [laughter] >> we could talk about that at the next briefing. on corruption, i mean, that was also a big issue in the last administration and now there seems to be a crackdown on corruption so much that people believe -- a lot of people inside iraq are fearing that maliki is using it as a political intimidation. >> well, i think, you know, a lot of countries in iraq's state of economic development have so-called capacity problems, and one element of capacity problems is is a corruption problem. i think it's healthy that iraqis are talking about this and trying to address it. to the extent that there's concern about it being abused, i think that goes to the

question of whether there are proper procedures in terms of what they're doing in law and order, whether indictments are well-founded, whether there is an effort to make sure that warrants are properly executed, etc. i think it continues to be something that we watch very closely and are in very close contact with the iraqi authorities about. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2008] is >> tomorrow night is the annual radio and television correspondents dinner in

washington. c-span will bring you live coverage, including president obama's speech, beginning at 8:25 eastern time. >> how is c-span funded? >> i have no clue. >> maybe some government grants. >> donations. >> advertising for products. >> public money, i'm sure. >> our taxes? >> how is c-span funded? 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. a private business initiative. no government mandate. no government money. >> here is a news conference with a group of house members seeking a bipartisan compromise on health care legislation. we'll hear first from democrats jim cooper of tennessee and michael castle of delaware. they're joined by republicans parker griffith of alabama and joanna emerson of new jersey.

>> thanks for being here. sorry about all the crazy votes today. i'm jim cooper from nashville, tennessee, a democrat. right off the bat i want to be clear, i support health care reform. i support health care reform this year, as does everyone on this stage. we all share the goals laid out by the president in his june 2 letter. i believe that every american should have high-quality, affordable health care. and i believe that reforming health care should be congress' top priority. let me repeat that. health care reform should be congress' top priority. we should get it done this year. we are not here to slow it down. so don't believe the phony talking points that you're being circulated with that are saying we're trying to somehow slow down the the process. that's not true. the process, unfortunately, is

already creaking under its own weight and we haven't even seen many of the bills yet. so don't take my word for it. just read your own publications. what we're trying to do is ensure that reform actually happens. we are here because we see health care reform bogging down in the senate and we're worried about the chance of achieving it this year. what's happening in the senate worries me because, if reform does get bogged down, then we'll have to go through the senate's reconciliation process. many people misunderstand this. the way reconciliation works, it only applies to a bill that reduce the federal budget deficit within the next five years and a bill that does not really reform the insurance for the medical sector. so essentially reconciliation does not apply. essentially, you need 60 votes in the senate to pass a good health reform bill, not 51. that's a huge difference and many publications have gotten this wrong. so it's very clear that the target we should be aiming for is at least 60