and you begin to see human trafficking in north america. so this is the one case of culture. >> question, please, not statements, ok. >> ok. based on historical factors. >> thank you very much. we'll just try to get as many questions out there and have a discussion of all of the questions. .

>> like health workers. but if like we work on the human traffic issues. >> we need to among - you know like people. like managers. sex workers and all types of

people. we need to work with it in society. but we could deal with trafficking issues ourselves. government regulation is most relating to like our funding issues and involvement on human rights issues. dealing with the population. >> yes, sir? >> hi. my name is david and my knowledge is based basically in domestic trafficking. i was hoping to get to the institutional mentalty in china towards labor in general. factory labor where you see a lot of exploitation and also the

actions that can be taken that the chinese deals with the most. stronger stances on labor issues. i don't know if i can speak to a chinese mentality or the government. i do know that there are huge forces in china recently emerging, that are creating a rule of law situation is important and see labor law looked at broadly as a key element of the rule of law. and that is quite a work in progress. i also know that it is very, very difficult to keep a pace in

a legal sense with you hyper energy tremendous pe neural system of trafficking. mr. keith described vividly how nimble they are and what the profit levels are on labor trafficking and i would imagine they're the same in sex trafficking and the level of these and the agents and the escorts and the occasional people that just get a cell phone call and pick someone taken them from point a point b is astounding and that's the inherent problem and it's also a problem because asia, where this is one labor market you have all these jurisdictions so if the criminals are in thailand the

victims are in china and the united states. how does anyone local prosecutor ever get a wrap around that? i think there's a real puzzle not only in china but in the united states on how to deal with that but there's a broad consensus it's growing problem that needs to be a dressd with vigorous prosecution. two countries or three countries, one problem. >> thank you. mr. brown? please? >> actually this question is for mr. brown and stories and research has been out about child labor in china. i believe you also talked about the enforcement problems and we know there's laws that protect worker's rights and we talks about this before but what - how do you think the chinese

government can do to make inspections of facilities better. to make inspections of the facilities more rigorous. what roles into you think the united states government can do to facilitate this process? >> i think - i want to take two seconds here to preach a bit and i hope i'll be for given but i think the problem of trafficking, as i say. depends on complimentary, parallel, legal gaps in the sending country and receiving country. so it's very hard to take a superior attitude and to instruct people about how they should, what goals they should obtain. and it's such a common problem but because the trafficking and the labor mark set so dynamic,

mr. keith again point together the down-tick in trafficking and smuggling as to maintain the distinction as china factory work burdened and then the up-tick in labor migration into the united states and europe in china. it extremely responsive market and know bureaucracy or prosecutor, no labor ministry or expectorant. you can't begin to hire enough. we do have a job crisis and i would urge - with 40,000 unemployed lawyers in manhattan be put to work. even if you absorbed everybody, you would never be nimble enough and that's why you need grass roots and, mb o's and informal

labor institutions and trade unions and all these labor institutions and i'm sure this is true of the advocacies on sex groups as well. >> thank you. please? >> i have a question for doctor john. this year, fairly recent the ministry of public security announced a 7 month strike hard campaigns to focus on a number of crimes including human trafficking. also last year and this year the ministry of public security has made human trafficking and also the issue of sex workers and prostitution a play score focus of campaigns. in your opinion regarding policy rhetoric. has there been any change to consider those sex workers that

are trafficked or anything in terms of the discussions over - you know the campaigns to be here considerate of these trouble? >> thank you. mr. headley who do you want that directed to? >> yeah, i don't - i mean. someone can confirm - i don't think there's been a different policy from my original research which was in 1997. that's when i started my research. as i mentioned during my talk my recommendation would be to create alliance and partnership between the sex workers and organizations to identify the victims that are trafficked into the sex trade. i think that's the most activ

effective way. the communities know everything. they say if people forced in the sex trade the sex workers that volunteer there would know before anybody else about it. there's a little understand i think about these women's real lives by policy makers and officials at the top and social workers and i think it's not only a problem in china. i think in many, many countries around the world there's this issue and confusion between prosecution traffickers that think of the women as victims rather than agents and that's the basis for collaboration between the two organizations. >> thank you. now that the senator had to step out. i'm charlotte moore and i'll ask a quick question of mr. keith, as we've learned day, the

problem of trafficking nos no cultural or regional bounds. we see in many societies in china and in the united states. our government has made serious efforts and we now have a trafficking persons office at the state department. we had implementing legislation. and the trafficking persons act and legislation and we've also had, you know, funding, immigrant sorrys is a. trafficking visas. funding forng o's to help here and a former doj prosecutor heading office state department. significant work. my hundred something we could to a lot better at what we're doing now. could you talk a little bit about what you've seen on the ground in new york city when you did your investigations about how implementation at the local level at the united states how we could do it better?

as we've talked about the chinese in terms of implementation at the local level? >> sure. it's a big issue. i would echo what you've said about promising trends in terms of the extent that the u.s. is putting resources behind this and taking it seriously as an issue. coming up with mechanisms to look out for victims of trafficking. one thing i'll say about how it plays out at the local level is i think that the - when these types of businesses arise and they seen elicit - kind of ethnic businesses often contained in a particular ethnic neighborhood and exploit often the newly arrive nd that noird. they tend to catch law

enforcement by surprise and the case of the fujenese in new york and i'm sure you can centralize this. but with the case of the fujnese. in the late 80's a series of gangs began to become much more prominent in new york. there was a lot of violence associated with that. the snake had hard times getting up and going so you had the safe house situations of earlier. a family that calls the police and says, my cuss is here. he's being held somewhere in queens in a basement and they've said they're going to cut his feet off if we don't pay this amount of money in this amount of time. initially, the issue was that law enforcement didn't really understand where this province

was. chinatown had already ways been in their behinds predominantly can to niece and they didn't have the funl on dialect speakers that they need. they were pulling cadets out of the police academy. it was amazing. when the f.b.i. got involved they would get title three wire answer the and not have anyone to listen to them. these people could have been speaking in code. it was also a matter of getting people to trust law enforcement. you have somebody that reluctantly comes in and agrees to cooperate with law enforcement and testify before a grand jury and get an arrest. the person in question. this trafficker or gangster gets arrested and gets out on bail and goes back in the neighborhood. coming from an environment in china where competit corruptiona

police problem. someone bent on revenge. this spectacle of having bad guy arrested and having him pay money to come back to the neighborhood was terrifying. there was a big learning curve in terms of law enforcement getting to know the people in the neighborhood and community and learning the language and the culture. the community sort of being educate about u.s. law enforcement and social service and community groups and who's there for you. who you can trust. i mean it goes to a point that's been made but this is a slow effort and a multi propping effort and you need to know of all the available resources but i think that's the only way in this country we're going to be able to deal with this problem. not just at top level policy making but down on the ground in the streets and communities. >> great. thank you so much. please?

>> i'm steve mare that w marsh also work for the commission. this is multi layered and multiple dimensioned and it's easy to inflate things and simplify them too. in china, not in the u.s. or another country but wheres the break through point on this? we have strong economic issue and title issues and government issue and we have legal issues. if we're watching it here and we want to understand where the place that's more important to have change take place that will have a ripple effect on how and where this problem can continue? what should we watch for and try to encourage in this obviously is something that anyone might have something to say about. thank you. >> anybody want to take that?

okay. >> so, i think that there are many, many, many channels. you know government dialogue on policy. i would imagine , i think social sources through society - there are many my grant worker associations around china so it might be a good thing to reach out to a population. so labor organizations can work with like - my grant relations. i want to say managing the economic knowledges. so there's many migrant workers but there's not many ethnic worker organizations. i think recently. chinese government, the ethnic

committee has you know passed some new policy to encouraging the organizations from the ethnic communities. i think it's time to develop and help develop my grant worker in ethnic minority organizations. especially among like minor populations. i think it's really important. so health organizations are important. yeah. so that is - my perspective. >> so you think what observers should be focused on is civil society and whether or not it can row bustly operate and to it's job? >> yeah. we work with a broader community in a drug-user and sex-work community. we can observe what's going on. but we also have a conflict, you

know in our law because we need to establish a good relation - working relations with networks so. our general purpose is to follow health. not overwhelming human trafficking issues but we with push it so one day we can enable ourselves to walk on the traffic issues. >> i want to thank everyone for being here. our audience, i hope you will vice it a china commission's website. we have daily updates. you can get on our mailing this. this has been an extraordinarily interesting panel. thanks doctor earl brown and doctor yen young and we have a number of ph.d.'s here. are you one too?

tsk. tsk. it's been an outstanding group and i really appreciate it. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> next. secretary of state hillary clinton talks about middle east peace talks and live at 7 am your calls and comments on "washington journal". next week, we'll show you the continuing investigation into the deep water horizon incident as ocean energy management and the coast guard hear from key personnel from bp. live, all day from houston texas, coverage begins live 9 am eastern on c-span two. secretary of state hillary clinton says direct talks between israelis and palestinians begins in washington and wednesday. the state department has set a one year time limit on the talks. at this briefinging, we hear first from secretary clinton follow i'd special middle east

envoy. form mitchell. this is 35 minutes. >> hello. today we're joined by your colleagues in martha's vineyard and they'll share the q and a dutys with you. >> i don't like that idea. [laughs] >> i will a point a negotiator to deal with that. since the beginning of this administration, we have worked with the israelis and palestinians and our international partners to

advance the cause of comprehensive peace in the middle east, including a two state solution which ensures security and dignity for israelis and palestinians. the president and i are encourage i'd the leadership of prime minister and president habas and share their commitment to israel and palestine living side-by-side in peace and security. after proximity talks and consultations with both sides, on behalf of the united states government i've invade the prime minister president and council authority president to meet on december second in relaunching all negotiations to resolve all final status issues that we believe can be completed in one year. president obama has invited the

king of jordan to attend and others in view of their critical roles. they're commitment to peace will be e sent toll our sauk success. the president will hold bilateral meetings with the four leaders followed by a dinner on september first. the quartet representative tony blair has also been invited to the dinner view of his important work to help palestinians build the institutions of the future state. an effort that must continue during the negotiations. i've invited prime minister yet nahu to join me here at the state deve department to try to relaunch reno goekss. it's important that actions by all sides help to advance our effort, not hinder it.

there have been difficulties in the past and there will be those ahead. without a doubt, we will hit more obstacles. the enemies of peace- keep trying defeat us and derail the talks. but i ask the parties to persevere. to keep moving forward even through difficult times and to continue working to achieve a just and lasting peace in the region. as we've said before, these negotiations should take place without pre conditions and be characterized by good faith and a commitment to their success. which will bring a better future to all of the people of the region. george? >> thank you.

>> i'll be pleased to respond to any of your questions. >> as tempted as i am to ask about roger clemmens, can you tell us what was the turning point here? what was it that got the - overcame the final snag to get them to come back? >> we believe it's the recognition by the parties themselves. by the leaders. prime minister yetena the best outcome is agreement that results in two states. living side by side in peace and security. and that the only way that can be achieved is through direct negotiations between the parties

in which the united states will be an active and sustained participant and with full support of our many friends and a lies around the world includes the quartet. >> what was it that got them - you've been trying do this for months now and why, how is it that today you've gotten to the point where as three days ago you weren't? >> i think it's the cumulative result of the efforts made over that time. and the recognition by the parties that this is the right time. we will be active participants and there is broad support as you know by members of the quartet and others around the world in the end the decisions will be made by the parties themselves. >> senator? >> why don't i letcj talk?

>> can you talk about the talks and will they discuss territory, refugees or gerald ford jerusal all in parallel? >> all status issues are on the table? it will be for the pieties themselves to decide the manner by which they should be addressed? >> yes. without a doubt there will be more obstacles. what will those be? what are the main sticking points that are going forward? >> we are all the well aware that there remains mistrust between the parties. arrest due of hostility. - developed over many decades of conflict. many previous efforts that have been made to resolve the

conflicts that have not successed. all of which takes a heavy toll on both societies and their leaders. in addition, we all know that's with all societies, there are differences of opinion on both sides on how best to proceed and as a result, this conflict has remained unresolved over many decades and through many efforts. we don't expect all of those differences to disappear when talks begin. indeed we expect they will be presented, debated and discussed and that differences are not going to be resolved immediately. but we do believe that peace in the middle east comprehensive

peace including but not limited to an end to the conflict between israelis and palestinians is very much in the interest of israelis and palestinians of all people in the region. it's in the national security u interest of the united states and there mfor we'll pursue tha with patients and determination. we know it will be difficult and we know as secretary said, there will be obstacles but we'll proceed as i said with patients. perseverance and determination. >> palestinians and israelis and they have been down that road many times before. what in your opinion this time around that engenders hope and optimism to give these talks into it's intended end and what

kind of incentive you offer to entice them to the direct talk? >> i don't want to repeat everything i said in response to the prior question, but i will say that i believe it's very much in the interest of people in both societies, that there be an end to this conflict, enabling both to live in peace and security and i believe that their leaders believe and understand that. therefore not with standing the many difficulties they face and we recognize those did i have cull this. this is the best course for them. all the questions of past efforts and failure and succeeding i'll return, if i might, to my experience in north ireland. i shared three separate sets of discussions in northern ireland spaning a period of overall,

five years. the main negotiations lasted for 22 months. during that time, the effort was completely failed and branded a failure. i was asked dozens of times about the effort failing. if the objective was achieveing a peace agreement. until you do achieve it, you have failed do so. in a sense in northern ireland. we had about 700 days of failure and one day of success. and we approach this task with the same determination to success and that's not with standing the difficulties and not with standing the inability to get a final result so far included past efforts but past efforts at peace, that did not

succeed cannot be tear us from trying again. the cause is noble and just and right for all concerned. >> michelle and then we'll go up to martha and back. >> i want to beat a sense of the time-line. 12 months is a deadline or is that - or is it looser than that and following up on the other question, what makes this for us any different from all other peace processes? >> we will only know the answer to your second question when it is completed, but i believe that, as i said in response to the previous question, that the cause is so important, so right, so just that our continued effort is the right thing to do. we're going to pursue it with determination. i believe that the two leaders, themselves.

president habas and net yah o are sincere and serious and believe kit be done and we'll do everything humanly possible to see that it is done. with respect to the first question, prime minister net yah o said in a public appearance in this country on his most recent visit to the washington, he believed it could be done in a year. president habas has said similar to me and i hold strongly having now been involved for some time in the region. so we believe it can be done within a year and that's our objective. >> not a deadline then? >> one more. >> nine months to get to the point where you can have them sit down and talk to each other. what makes you think you can get them to agree at peace in one year. at what extent is the u.s.

willing to put their place a side to move this forward? when to you think the talks will take place? >> i'll take your questions in reverse order. one of the subjects to be discussed the meeting on september first and second, and also in preparatory meetings that have occurred on a regular basis and will continue between now and then is the timing and locality of such negotiations and we certainly expect some of those meetings to occur in the region. with respect to the timing and nature of how long it took to get here and how long it takes to get in, i don't think one is a necessary determinant of the other. i like it to the first time i

owned a house and had it painted. it took the painters seemingly forever to prime the building and the walls. i kept saying when are they going to start painting? by the hour and you want some progress. after this seemingly, endless priming, they painted it very quickly. now i don't want to suggest this is as quickly, but i don't think events leading up to the negotiations are themselves decisive of the negotiations themselves. we believe that the statements by the prime minister regarding in one year are credible and appropriate and we believe that president habas share as similar view as do we and we're going to pursue that. >> what ideas are on the table in this process? >> we'll be active and

sustained partners though we recognize this is a by lateral negotiation and we have indicate together both parties that's a necessary and appropriate, we will offer brimming proposals but i repeat this is a direct bilateral negotiations wur stance and with our friends and a lyes and although no one has asked, i do want to take a moment to knowledge and recognize the enormous support we've received from many friends and a lyes. e vipt and jordan. many of the other arab states. the other members of the quartet. the united nations under secretary general moon who has been extremely helpful in the process. the european union with lady ashton as a foreign minister,

and the russia with foreign minister there have all been active and very helpful along with other european states, so it's important to understand that while the united states is playing a port and active and sustained role, we to so with full participation and full input and consultation and full discussion and we hopeful sus important from a wide variety of efforts that have been extremely important beating us to the phase and will be extremely important in reaching a conclusion. >> operator will go to take two and three questions from white house press. >> thank you. our first question comes from philip heartily with washington today. please an ask one question.

>> i apologize. of all the invited parties to wayn next month and secretary mentioned references to we wanted know the thoughts on the proposed mosque being built at the ground zero site? >> we're not here to talk of that the latter subject? >> what was the first part. have they accepted the invitation. >> we've been in consultation with both and expect to hear from them shortly. >> next question? >> next is from jonathan with the congressional quarterly. >> yeah, do both parties have to ask for the u.s. to step in with it's bridging proposals? - is it enough for one party to ask for that bridges proposal?

>> we're getting a little bit ahead of the game now to be speculating on what may or may not occur well into the process. as i stated earlier. this is a direct bilateral negotiation with the active support of the united states and we'll make the bridging proposals at such time we deem necessary and appropriate. i don't want anyone to have the impression that we are somehow going to displace the roles of the parties themselves nor to we have any view other than that this must in the end be an agreement by the parties. >> we'll take one more and come back here. >> thank you. jta? >> thank you. one technical question. and then a real question.

on september second, are they actually - are you launching direct talks or are the leaders getting together with the secretary to discuss the relaunching of direct talks and the other thing. what role if any does hamas have in this process? >> the first question is, yes. we are launching direct negotiations beginning on september second and second question is, none. >> is the relaunching the direct negotiations without pre-conditions? >> overwhelming the parties can determine terms of reference and basis for negotiations and

they'll do so when they meet and discuss these matters. as you know, both we and the quartet have previously said that the negotiations should be without pre conditions. >> thank you. can you tell us whether they're going to start from scratch or will they build on talks and the second question is, whether israel is expected to continue, do you think they'll continue to freeze and will the palestinians continue the ban on goods. >> the parties themselves will determine the basis on which to proceed in the discussions in response to your first question in response to the second, our position onsetle meants is

well-known and remains unchanged. we've always made clear that the parties should promote an environment conducive to know go organizations and as secretary said in a statement, it's important actions by all sides help to advance and not hinder our efforts. >> sir, just to follow up on that and a previous question. your position is well-known, but the israelis when they have chosen to, having ignored it and gone ahead with settlement construction as they've seen fit to do. do you have an understanding they will not do that this time? referring to the earlier question on hamas and the quick answer that they'll have no role? how do you get around the fact even in the best circumstances that you have negotiating agreement of them playing a huge

role in gaza? >> with respect to the first question, let's be clear that, the declaration of the moratorium itself, last november, was a significant action which has had a significant effect on new housing construction that starts in the west bank. and as i said, our position onsetle meants is well-known and remains unchanged and we expect both parties to promote something conducive to investigations. with respect to hamas. let's be clear, hamas won a legislative election and they acknowledge the continued executive authority of president habas and his team and it's

entirely appropriate that we negotiate with the executive of that government. when democrats regain control of the congress in 2006, that didn't end president bush' 10-year as president. those that wanted to know go shat, did so with the legally elected and then chief of our executive branch of government and that's the situation here. >> you expect them to accept any decision made by president habas in these decision? >> it's not my decision. >> senator mitchell, is it your understanding this will be a shelf agreement, something to take place at a later date when they an or is it your understanding this would take

effect in a short period after it was agreed? >> that's obviously subject to the results of negotiations. we're not - creating limitations or restraints upon what the parties may agree to. our hope is that there will be in an agreement that will end the conflict for all-time and will result in the establishment of a viable democratic and state of palestine living side by side in peace and security with israel. >> one or two more from the phone. >> next, please? >> thanks for taking our questions. the palestinian press has reported the u.s. put the harshest pressure on the palestinians amid's the talks. why does the u.s. feel this was the time in the palestinians

view to bully them into talking considering the politics of the israel administration right now? >> the united states position has been well-known from the time that this administration entered office. we have and with do favor direct negotiations between the parties to resolve the conflict and to produce an dpreement that results in two states living side by side in peace and security. we have encourageed the two parties to enter into such negotiations and they have now agreed and we are - we believe it's the right thing to do. we think that both of the leaders believe it's the right

thing to do. and we believe that it's in the best interest of the people they present. >> within more operator from the phone. >> thank you. news talk radio? >> hello senator mitchell. you said that the peace process, as you certainly recall, the president then played a very intimate role in that. considering that many americans themselves are even confused about president obama's religious affiliation. to you feel the people of the middle east on both sides of this issue will see president obama as an honest brokering and someone that they can actually reach out to. and that same intimate fashion? >> yes, i do believe that they do and will continue to regard president obama in that fashion.

i will say from the out set, both he and the secretary of state have played an important, indeed critical role in this effort. both are deeply involved on a regular basis and deeply personally committed the cause of a comprehensive peace in the middle east. i think that is not only widely recognized throughout the region and the world, but very much appreciated and marginally throughout the region. >> total settlement freeze never happened so, i was wondering, how come these talks are considered in the region when that demand was never met? >> we believe there's a basis

for proceeding and an achieveing a successful result and we're going to pursue that. we do not take the position that if you don't get everything you want, the first time you ask for it, you pack up your bags and go home if that had been the standard applied in south africa there never would have been peace there in north ireland there never would have been peace there. in north suppose any a too. it takes patients. persistence and willingness to go back again and again and again. to not take the first, no as a final, no. to not take the 50th no or the 100th no. we're patient and determined and we believe there's a basis for concludeing a peace agreement in the region and that's what we're going to pursue. >> senator, to you understand

you expect them to enter these talks without pre-conditions? >> both the united states and the quartet have said we believe there should be direct talks without pre conditions and we also have said many times that we think that these talks should be conducted in a positive atmosphere in which the parties reframe from taking any steps that are not conducive to making progress in the discussions that the ne go organizations seriously and in good faith in all of the respects, we think there is a basis for making progress. >> it won't be based on the quartet statement of march 19th? >> the parties are the only ones who can determine what the basis of their discussions are.

and that is the case. >> so many palestinians and a rabs believe that with actual israeli government is practically impossible because of the nature statement. by setting this one year deadline you probably are raising expectations like what's happened the past. >> the reality is of course, that there are some in both societies who do not believe that the other side is serious. who do not trust the other side. who do not wish to proceed with the other side. and if we accept the premise that because some in one or both societies hold these views, that we cannot proceed then of course

what we're doing is consigning all of those people to never ending conflict. never-ending difficulties. we simply don't believe that's proper basis for any country and certainly not ours. the united states on which to base it's policy. we believe, that the best course of action is for direct negotiations that result in a peace agreement ending this conflict and resulting in two states living side-by-side in peace and security. we believe the only way to achieve that is through direct negotiations and we believe if those negotiations are conducted seriously and in good faith, they can produce such an agreement within 12 months and that's our objective. we knowledge and recognize there are many that don't believe that.

many who don't want that. many who will act to prevent that. - but their lack of belief and they're contrary views and actions cannot serve to prevent us from trying deal with this conflict. nor can it prevent the leaders of those countries who both recognize that the interest of their people. the future of their societies rests upon resolving this conflict and an achieving the kind of peace and stability and security from which they will all benefit. >> last question. >> this administration believed from the early days that it's middle east strategy and iran strategy were linked the sense that if you could make progress in one, you might help make progress in another one and vice versa. your now moving into a period of

less engagement and more confrontation with iran. i wonder if you think that's an added hurdle to a peace agreement or something that could actually help in the sense that the israelis may feel that the u.s. is going to be tough on iran and it delays fears in that regard? >> that extends somewhat beyond the area of my vechlt in the process so i would defer for a more full and thoughtful answer to those who are directly engaged on the broader issues. i will simply say that - if you look at the middle east and review it's history, over just the past half century, never behind several millennia.

you will conclude that there is no really quote right time to do this. that there always has been and always will be issues external to the immediate parties that have an e beat on what is occurring and in my adjustment what is occurring in the - throughout the region. not just in iran but other areas, all and compelling cumulative evidence to the need to act with respect to this conflict. that is to say - whether or not the circumstance you described produces the result you described, it still remain as compelling ark meant that it is very much in the narc national

security of the united states to do all we can with help and support of allies to bring about a resolution of the conflict. it helps in so many way and most importantly, it's the best thing for the palestinian people. - and for the people of israel and it's in our national security interest and that of others. thank you all very much. this has been a pleasure to be with you. cable satellite corp. 2010] . . . . >> next live your calls and comments on "washington journal" and then treasury secretary

timothy geithner and shawn donvan talk about the future of housing finish finance. >> one of the things i regret about rhetorical and political life in washington is every major figure from the president on down is here, merely reading what someone else has produced. >> he wrote speeches for the carter administration. wrote about presidents and architects of power and is editor of the weekly standard. he'll share his views sunday onq anda. >> this morning we'll talk with "wall street journal" news reporter louise radnofsky then christian science monitor michael farrell look at challenges of returning iraq war