mr. serwer and mr. dunne. these are free americans each of whom have served this country honorably and day. each of hmmm has significant experience in iraq. i should point out that the remarks that i am making today, the views i expressed to they are my own. they do not represent those of any institution with which i am now or have previously been affiliated. my central thesis today which i think will get a debate going, excuse me, will be that while the u.s./iraq relationship is governed by a strategic framework current policy is not consistent with that agreement. rhetoric aside the obama administration continuing the policy of the bush administration, i want to emphasize that continuing the policy of the bush administration has abandoned the promotion of democracy in iraq as a strategic objective. second, rather than promoting development of institution of government in a democratic framework the current policy also in my judgment a continuation of the previous administration, let me start that again. rathe

mr. serwer. >> good afternoon.it's a real pleasure to be here and and a privilege to share the podium with ambassador feltman and ambassador istrabadi. after two such striking presentations, you'll wonder where i'm going to locate myself. last night it's going to be in the middle. but i hope all is the surprise you, but i hope a rational middle. i too am going to start off with tony blanket statement. iraq today is less violent, more democratic, more prosperous than anytime in recent history. there are actually some indications that violence, especially al qaeda and iraq violence is up since late last year. but even if true, tony statement sets a very low bar and the games are certainly still reversible. if our goal is and here i quote, a sovereign, stable, reliant self-reliant country with representative government that could become a partner in the region and no safe haven for terrorists, we're just not there yet. we have a lot of work to do. on security, iraq still endures unacceptably high number of attacks. as

mr. serwer. each of them has served their country and has experience in iraq. i should point out that the remarks i am making today, the views i expressed are my own. they do not represent those of any institution with which i have been affiliated. my central thesis, which will get a debate going, will be that the u.s., while the u.s.-iraq relationship is governed by an agreement about which the ambassador alluded, current u.s. policy is not consistent with that agreement. first, rhetoric aside, the obama administration continuing the policy of the bush administration. i want to emphasize that, has abandoned the promotion of democracy in iraq as a strategic objective. second, rather than promoting the development of institutions of government in a democratic framework, the current policy -- let me start that again. rather than promoting the development of institutions of government in a democratic framework, the current policy is that of supporting the current incumbent prime minister of iraq personally thereby isolating itself, the united states isolates itsel