Print
Email
Share
Cite
Council on Foreign Relations
Washington, DC
[Note: Unless otherwise noted, the prime minister’s remarks are translated from Arabic]
VIN WEBER: Turn off your cell phones, please. Unlike most Council events for those of you who are regulars at these, you should note today’s meeting is on the record, not off the record. This evening, the prime minister is going to make introductory remarks. I’ll engage him in a very few very questions. He has had a long and tiring day and his remarks will be relatively brief, but he does have time to spend with us to engage in questions and answers.
I think, for those of you who arrived late and missed the announcement, tonight’s meeting is being simultaneously translated. To listen in Arabic, please turn to channel five. To listen in English, please turn to channel six. We will finish as close to 7:30 as we possibly can to try to try to honor the prime minister’s schedule.
Ibrahim Jaafari has been for 40 years active in the Dawa Party in Iraq. In 1980, he went into exile under the repression of Saddam Hussein, first in Iran and then in Britain, where he served as a spokesman for the Dawa Party.
He’s been an active member in legislative candidates for the United Iraqi Alliance in the recent elections. And if you read some of the materials on him, you find out in the surest sign that democracy is taking root in Iraq, that they’re proud to point out that polls show that he is the most popular politician in the state of Iraq. [Laughter] He’ll undoubtedly come to hate the polls in Iraq as much as we do here in the United States. It is a pleasure for me to introduce our guest tonight, Prime Minister Jaafari. [Applause]
PRIME MINISTER IBRAHIM JAAFARI: I greet through you the American nation and all that it has given to the Iraqi people and to the world during this difficult phase. It stood, America stood by the Iraqi people in helping it to overcome all difficulties and trials.
Ever since Saddam came to power, from 1962 to 2003, and despite the geographic distance between the people, between the land of Iraq and the land of America, although I’m sure you have followed very carefully through the channels and the media the reality of what is happening in Iraq. And the education of that which has lived on the ground and he who lives in Iraq and witnesses what’s going on is always different to people who only hear about what’s going on. And many politicians who come to Iraq see a vision and an image that’s totally different to what the media portrays.
I would like to talk to you during this period and take questions as well. I would like to talk about where Iraq was before and where is it now, and what is our vision of the future for Iraq.
What has happened in Iraq during this short period of what has taken place are many steps and important steps in Iraq. First of all, Iraq has witnessed a qualitative change and freedom which have taken place in Iraq. At the time when all that was in Iraq was one dictatorship, one leader of a state, who was also the leader of the party and a military leader as well, and the person who was the head of the media. And this is how a dictatorship was encompassed in the character of Saddam Hussein and ruled with an iron fist.
Whereas today there are so many parties, political parties, and many political gatherings and many political figures and a diversity of media that speaks freely. We do not claim that we have reached full maturity and this is the last—we do not claim that this is the last step in democracy. However, despite the short time that has passed, we have strived and accomplished tremendous achievements.
There is a quality of change in the participation of women in Iraq today. Today parliament has over 80 women, members of parliament, out of 300—out of 275. There are, therefore, 81 members of parliament who participate in the National Assembly. There are six ministers in the cabinet, and there is one woman who will be deputy prime minister with me in the cabinet.
And this, even in your society, is a record. It is true that women participate more in this society. However, you must agree with me that there is a qualitative improvement and increase in the role of women in Iraqi society. And when I say this, I do not mean that women only attend just to be present. Indeed, they are very active in society, participating fully in every aspect of political life and every aspect of all other lives, all other aspects of life in Iraq.
The Iraqi woman has strived and sacrificed, and many women have been executed by Saddam Hussein and have sacrificed and given a lot for the cause of freedom. And many have been forced to go into exile, and many have disappeared as a result of the oppression of Saddam Hussein. Whereas today, Iraqi women participate in a real way in the political process, in the parliament, and also take a role in the government. And we are certain that the Iraq parliament reflects the makeup of the Iraqi people. The demographic changes and variety in Iraq are tremendous.
All political factions are available. All different religions are available. There is a variety of political ideology. Sectarian and religious varieties are all available in the small size, the area of Iraq. This variety has been expressed in the government and in the parliament. As far as the government, it has been recently formed in the last two months and has the whole variety of all sections of Iraqi society.
There is also qualitative change in making use of all the natural resources in Iraq. As you know, Iraq has tremendous natural resources. Iraq is a land that is rich in oil, rich in agriculture, used to be called the land which is black as a result of the intensity and the thickness of foliage. And it is the cradle of civilization, whose civilization extends back to 3000 BC; the total length of civilization being 5,000 years. Abraham originated from Iraq, and many religious sects and faiths started in Iraq. And so Iraq has tremendous potential, and Iraq is the land of tourism. The political dictatorial systems in the past have transformed Iraq into barren land, and now we are again making use of all the natural resources available to us.
All these qualitative steps we expect to bring to fruition very soon. For example, the constitutional process, which we consider extremely important, especially in the Middle East and especially in Iraq. The constitution to be considered extremely important because it represents principles and concepts and guidelines for people to follow. And the constitution is the foundation upon which all laws are built.
It is true that some countries do not have a written constitution, such as Britain, and in other countries the constitution is written by a very few people. When the [U.S.] Constitution was born, it was born in the land and at the time of change—Adams and Jefferson—and then began to develop bit by bit until, in Abraham Lincoln’s time, many amendments, up to 16 amendments, had been made in 1860.
And therefore, we are now in the process of writing the constitution, and the constitutional committee is about to be completed. On the 30th of January, 2005, elections took place. Many people thought it would not take place, and it did take place. And now elections have taken place, and they have proved everyone wrong, despite the shortage of the period. Iraq has taken many, many steps on the political front and many other fronts. And therefore, there is a tremendous difference between what has gone on before and what is going on now. And the achievements continue to be fulfilled, day after day.
The constitution—many thought that the exceptional security circumstances and the lack, and the relative lack, of security prevented people from taking part in the elections. Even though the elections produced a tremendous turnout of eighty-five-and-a-half percent, which despite the difficult security situation was nevertheless a tremendous turnout. And had the security situation been better, we would have had an even larger turnout.
One of the families in Iraq who came to vote was met by terrorists, who wanted to throw a grenade. One of the youths, Iraqi youths, jumped on the person who had the grenade. That person was martyred, and that family that came to vote continued to vote. They stayed where they were. They voted. They stood their ground. They stood fast. And this is the way that the Iraqi people show their determination and their courage and their stamina and their enthusiasm.
They are committed to the political process. And these political processes would never have taken place unless the Iraqi people had such strong will to bring about democracy. And this would never have come about had it not been for the friends of Iraq from America and the support that America gave to the Iraqi people. And through the support of America, we have been able to get rid of Saddam Hussein and to bring about the political process and take very important steps towards the political process. And as a result of support of America and other Western nations and all the other nations, we have got the incredible results that we have had from the elections, and the political process changes carries on one step after another as a result of the help and the support that we have had from our friends, the Americans who have stood by us through this very difficult, greatly difficult, step.
And we acknowledge that the blood of your sons have mixed with the blood of our sons, and paid a very high price and the sacrifice to bring about an atmosphere of democracy and freedom. And any society that wants to come out of dictatorship into freedom and democracy must pay a price, pay sacrifice, as did the revolution of George Washington. There were many sacrifices then, and any revolution that brings about a better state always involves some sacrifice and must pay a price. This is the way things are.
The historic stand of the American administration, the American people, in standing behind the Iraqi people, will never be forgotten, and as a humanitarian standpoint, a brave humanitarian standpoint. And therefore, let us be clear that it proves that human rights and the striving for democracy is not just a slogan, but is a reality where the American people are willing to sacrifice to bring about these tremendous humanitarian values. And this is something that we should all be proud of, and especially yourselves should be proud of supporting democracy and human rights.
And maybe the fight against Saddam has ended; however, the fight against terrorism has not. Terrorism is not limited to any particular geography. The geography of terrorism is the geography of humanity. As long as there is humanity and there is terrorism, the enemy of humanity is terrorism.
Terrorists have the mentality of the caveman. They see any civilized human being as a legitimate target who deserves—who, in their view, should be killed. Terrorism strives to eliminate civilization, to eliminate democracy, to eliminate freedom. It does not have any boundaries or borders. It knows no boundaries or borders, as you saw when New York and Washington were affected by terrorism.
During the Second World War, after the events of Pearl Harbor, America lost 300,000 soldiers. However, it did not lose more than 10 civilians. But during the acts of terrorism on the 11th of September, 2001, 3,000 American civilians were killed in Washington and New York. So the threats and danger of terrorism are real, and we must all come together in confronting terrorism.
Iraqis inside Iraq, as a result of terrorism, see women kidnapped, raped, beheaded for only a hundred dollars. This is what terrorism means. The terrorists go on TV, and they admit to their crimes. For each decapitated head, they take only a hundred dollars in wages. These are the type of criminals and terrorists that we are talking about, limited to a very, very small minority. But the horror of the crime and the heinous nature of the crime are indeed tremendous. And, therefore, it is incumbent on all of us and all the humanitarian feelings and forces of people to stand against terrorism.
There are also quantitative changes in political awareness, as well as an improvement and a qualitative change in the security situation. We have put together an operations room as soon as we came to power that involves the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Interior, as well as the MNFI, the multinational forces. We are getting tremendous information on terrorists. Security forces are being trained to ever higher and more competent levels and capabilities. And in many areas and in many operations, Iraqi forces are taking the forefront and taking the lead against terrorism, with MNFI taking only a supporting role. The liberation of [Australian hostage] Douglas Wood is an excellent example of Iraqi forces going on the offensive, receiving tremendous information from the population about terrorist activities, and arresting suspects.
The sheikhs of the Sunni tribes in Mosul are beginning to hand over terrorists to the government, and at last people have a way of tackling terrorism and are informing on them. We are arresting many, many thousands. Before the formation of the government, there were about 12 to 14 car bombs going off a day. And after the Operation of Lightning in Baghdad, the level—the number of car bombs has reduced to a 0.6 number of car bombs a day. There may be two car bombs, two car bombs a day. There might be none for one or two days. The general trend is very much a downward trend.
Previously people used to avoid going out, but now people are free to roam about the streets very late at night. There is an obvious change and a qualitative difference and improvement in the security situation, and we seek to continue qualitative and quantitative improvement in the Iraqi security and defense forces.
The presence of foreign troops on our soil is not a sign of strength; it is a sign of weakness because it proves that we Iraqis cannot keep and maintain security by ourselves. Therefore, we are the first to welcome the withdrawal of MNFI, even though they have helped us a tremendous amount. And there are two views on the withdrawal of American forces and MNFI forces.
One timing serves the enemy, and that timing and that type of withdrawal involves giving a time, a specific timescale, for the terrorists. That is a sign of weakness, when terrorist will use that opportunity to attack as many civilian targets as possible and spread terror across the country. If this happens and if there is a specific time that is given for withdrawal of MNFI, then the country will be open to increasing terrorist activities, and then we would have failed in establishing democracy.
The other way to look on withdrawal is to make it conditional on Iraqi security forces reaching a very high level of competence and efficiency in quality and quantity to such a level that the Iraqi security forces are able to keep and defend the country. And in that way, all foreign troops will be free to leave knowing that all the achievements of democracy would have been maintained and will increase throughout the days. And this would be a tremendous achievement that the MNFI would have accomplished.
And I am very keen to hear your questions and your comments, and hope to leave the rest of the time for you to ask questions. [Applause]
WEBER: Mr. Prime Minister, thank you very much. We welcome your comments.
JAAFARI: [In English] Thank you very much.
WEBER: And we welcome the positive assessment of the security situation.
JAAFARI: [In English] Yes.
WEBER: I wonder if we can return for a minute. I’ll just ask a couple of questions—I’ll just ask a couple of questions, and then we’ll go to the audience.
JAAFARI: [In English] Yes.
WEBER: I wonder if we can return to the constitutional process, which you did touch on and set up so that it seems to be moving forward. I wonder if you can expand on the status of the constitutional process a bit, specifically on the completion of the committee and inclusion, particularly, of the Sunnis. And then if you can refer to that maybe in a broader context of the national mood, toward a process of reconciliation which seems to be necessary to make the country whole again.
JAAFARI: The constitutional process had several steps which must have been accomplished. The first is the formation of a committee that reflects the diversity of the Iraqi population. Secondly, the challenge that prevented some of the Muslims from the Sunni Arabs from joining the election means that they did not get the true size that they deserve according to their population size.
As far as the government is concerned, we strive to bring about, to include the Sunnis that reflects their demography and their size of population. So we have six ministers, the head of, the speaker of the parliament and one deputy minister, and one deputy prime minister, and one deputy vice president, they are all Sunnis. In the same way, we are keen to include a very full representation of Sunnis in the constitutional committee as well.
Another thing that is related to the constitution—many principles of the constitution have already been discussed in TAL [the Transitional Administrative Law, Iraq’s interim constitution]. Therefore, we do not need much time or effort to reach the final constitution. We aim to achieve it by the 15th of August, and we strive hard to put efforts to achieve that timetable. We have created a ministerial committee, which I head and which includes eight ministers, in order to back up and support and bring forward and push forward, striving for the completion of the constitution.
This ministerial committee will do its best to complete the constitution on time and be a support to the constitutional committee and the assembly. Many of the principles in the constitution will have—will be united and will have much commonality with the constitutions of the world, especially concerning the main principles such as human rights, freedom of speech. This is as far as the constitution is concerned.
QUESTIONER: Thank you very much. Mr. Prime Minister—
WEBER: You can answer questions seated if you want. You have a microphone on. Or you can stand, whichever you prefer. But you don’t have to stand if you don’t want to.
JAAFARI: [In English] Yes, sure.
WEBER: Okay. Let me just ask one more question, and then we will go to the audience. In terms—and I think it’s on the same theme of how do you unify the nation.
Much of the security of the country today is in the hands of militias. It seems ultimately that security has to be guaranteed by a united Iraqi force and not by independent militias. Can you address that challenge a bit more?
JAAFARI: As far as the unity of Iraq is concerned, what do we mean by unity? We mean the human unity Iraq, to make Iraq of one sect or one nationality, then I’m sure this is not what you mean is to make—[inaudible]--and neither is it possible to do that, and democracy will have lost its value.
But if you mean by unity to find a common ground that forms the common Iraqi identity with all the diversity in terms of sects and religions and nationalities, then this is something that we strive at. And as in many countries where there is diversity, as there is in America here, at the same time there are very positive, patriotic, nationalist feelings. And this is our aim, what we mean by the unity of Iraq.
Therefore, you see within ministries there is the Kurdish and the Shi’a and the Sunni and the Assyrian, but each and every one of them knows that as a minister, they have an identity, their special identity. However, as a ministry, the ministry is for all of Iraqis; its doors are open to all Iraqis without prejudice. Therefore, a Shi’a minister cannot convert his ministry into a Shi’a ministry, and neither can this happen for a Sunni minister. Ministers are for all Iraqis and to serve all Iraqis, and that is our understanding of national unity.
We have had tremendous benefit and have tremendous response from this, and all ministries strive their hardest to achieve the best result in serving their people as Iraqis. There can never be any form of civil war or conflict because we, as a society, are intermarried and very close to each other, and we are like one big family. This is as far as national unity is concerned.
As far as militias are concerned, I believe that militias do not represent or pose a danger now whatsoever. However, sometimes if the situation were to continue, it might pose a problem. There is a militia in Kurdistan which is the peshmerga, but we consider that to be an exceptional situation as a result of the law of federalism. We believe that the presence of militia in Kurdistan at this stage is something that is acceptable.
There are other militias that are present in Iraq. To this day, they do not pose a problem whatsoever. And we ask these people who have a militia background that they join the Ministries of Defense and Ministries of Interior, but they join as members of Iraqi defense forces, not as militias. And as such, they will be incorporated in a united Iraqi defense force and will serve Iraq without an identity that belongs to any form of militia. This is the way that we are dealing with militias.
WEBER: Thank you very much. Let’s go to the audience for questions. First of all, a note. At the end of the session, please keep your seats until the prime minister has exited. When you are recognized for a question, please wait until a microphone comes to you. We have people with microphones, do we, around the room? Right. We’ll start up here if we can a little bit and work our way back. And when you’re recognized, please stand, state your name and affiliation, and try to keep your comments and questions brief so we can have as many people as possible. Where are the microphones? Why don’t we start right there, and then we’ll go over here, and then we’ll move back.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. George Sigalos, Halliburton KBR Companies. We are at work doing a significant amount of work in your country for the U.S. and coalition forces. My question goes to testimony [before the House Armed Services Committee] that occurred on Capitol Hill today. General John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said he did not feel that the insurgency is winding down or weakening. Could you respond to that?
JAAFARI: Mr. Abizaid, when he feels that the insurgency is not weakening—I do not know the nature of this very quote that you say, but I remember during our meeting with Abizaid five or six days ago, when he came to my office, we were totally in agreement in our views. We are totally—we are aware that the insurgents or the terrorists have taken a different policy, and that they are now targeting civilian areas and civilian centers: the hospitals, the schools, the marketplaces. This does not mean that the terrorists are strong. However, they are just ruthless and know no bounds and know no principles of humanity. And therefore, they are now targeting—they are not so much targeting military targets; they are targeting merely political—merely civilian targets. And even on this level and even in this aspect, we are achieving much success in reducing the amount of car bombs that are taking place, from a number of 12 to 14 a day previously to now one or two a day, or sometimes one every other day, in terms of the number of car bombs.
WEBER: And then back there, and we’ll just keep working our way back.
QUESTIONER: Arnaud de Borchgrave, CSIS [Center for Strategic and International Studies], Prime Minister. A British publication called Foreign Report, which specializes in intelligence matters, carries a long story in its last issue, which states that you personally are concerned about the infiltration of one of your two services that comes under the Defense Ministry; that there are Saddam loyalists employed in this agency. Is that correct, sir?
JAAFARI: I didn’t understand the question properly. If you mean by this—do you mean that there are people that have infiltrated? If that’s the question, then over the last 35 years, Saddam’s forces and intelligence has been controlling the country through their intelligence network. Therefore, it is natural that there are some remnants of intelligence that remain. Now, there are many less—much less infiltrators inside the systems, intelligence and army systems and defense systems. We cannot say that we have totally eliminated infiltrators, but every day the defense forces are being purified more and more, and the intelligence infiltrations are being exposed.
WEBER: Let’s go right there to Carl, and then we’ll go back there.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. Carl Gershmann from the National Endowment for Democracy. I want to follow up on your statement about accepting the peshmerga. Can you tell us if it is possible to have a constitutional agreement if the Kurds insist upon a confederal arrangement? And if not, is it possible to reach a constitutional agreement around a federal system, which would involve a strong central state?
JAAFARI: I think you agree with me, Mr. Carl, that the problem with federalism and confederalism, the legal people have differed concerning this. And from a practical point of view, there are many types of federalism. For example, America has a type of federalism. Europe has a type of federalism. Germany also has a type of federalism. Emirates—United Arab Emirates also have a type of federalism.
The principle of federalism, we have agreed to in principle when we were in opposition, and now when we are in government. And federalism is created by the people. It is the people who decide the type of federalism and the nature of federalism. And just as federalism needs a rebirth, it needs to be protected, too. So it’s the people who will form the type of federalism and protect the type of federalism. Therefore, we do not fear any type of federalism as long as it is the people who choose the type of federalism. And it is the constitution that will lay down the principles for federalism, and the constitutional committee will bring forward proposals for the people to vote on. And therefore, we leave it to the Iraqi people.
WEBER: Let’s go back in about the sixth row back here.
QUESTIONER: Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. My name is Bernard Kalb. I have a question that is neither political nor military, and perhaps it comes under a human question, and it’s this: Where are the mothers? Why haven’t we seen, say, 100,000 mothers demonstrating in the streets of Baghdad—an uprising, if you will, against the terrorists and their killing of children, men, women, and families?
JAAFARI: The truth that you have alluded to—in our societies, people do air their views and air their grievances. They do not see that any particular body—government body has brought this about, so there is no one to demonstrate against. And these families that you talk about are also from government officials who are giving sacrifices on a continual basis. The 25 million people that compose the Iraqi population have given over a million martyrs, a million victims, and my family alone has given five victims. So these people who have grievances have no one to blame. It is not the government that is to blame for. They too are bearing sacrifices and bearing victims.
And our society is not as used to demonstrations as your society is, and therefore it is not correct to compare exactly the same way that people respond in different countries. There is much difference. We hope there will come a time when people will demonstrate, but rest assured there is no one that prevents people from demonstrating. And in many cities, indeed, there have been many demonstrations against terrorism.
WEBER: The lady right there. Thank you.
QUESTIONER: Thank you. Wajd Waqfi, Al Jazeera Television. And please allow me to ask my question in Arabic since we have translation here. [Continues through interpreter] Dick Cheney, the vice president, said a month ago that the insurgents are in their “last throes.” And Abizaid, in front of a committee, a Senate committee, said, in terms of the numbers of the terrorists or the foreign terrorists there, numbers have increased compared to the six months previously. And as far as the operations, the terrorist operations they are carrying out, this has stayed the same. So you having come from Iraq, how do you assess the terrorist situation? Do you agree with Cheney or Abizaid? And also, you spoke about freedom and democracy. Do you not think the closing down of the Jazeera offices in Iraq is against freedom of speech and against freedom of the press? And we do not find this in any other place in the West.
JAAFARI: As far as my answer, it is not a matter of mathematics or statistics, so that I can be with Abizaid or Cheney. I do not understand politics as a numbers game, and I do not see a conflict between them either. One speaks concerning one aspect and another speaks concerning another. There is dynamism in politics, one truth today may not stand the next one. Eliminating terrorism involves securing our borders and any weaknesses in them allows more terrorists to enter the country either from our neighbor and also eliminating terrorism comes from efficiency in the system of Iraqi security forces. And also in activating the judiciary so that people see justice is being done and the criminals and the terrorists are being punished.
So to see justice being done as a result of terrorism on activation of the judiciary so that people are punished, terrorists are punished, is extremely important to give confidence to society and to act as a deterrent against the terrorists. Also, the security situation related to the services and to the economic situation, and therefore terrorism, is not separated or isolated from other aspects of life. And we like to treat the essence or the basis of terrorism, and therefore, we are in a process of activating the judiciary, bringing just punishments to the criminals, increasing the competence of our security apparatus, securing our borders. And in this way, we will truly bring terrorism to an end.
As far as the Jazeera channel is concerned, I do not think that we have anything against Jazeera. Previously, representatives of the Jazeera have come, and I say to them that the problem that Jazeera has is not with the government; it is with the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people see Jazeera as it really is, which is an instrument and a tool to be used against Iraqi people. We on the inside in Iraq, we see Jazeera as an instrument of distortion, distortion of the news, and the Iraqi people hugely oppose this news channel. I am happy that Jazeera has made several programs for [inaudible], but has Jazeera given credit or credibility or significance to the areas of mass graves? Why are only the negative aspects of Iraq aired on Jazeera TV?
And I say generally, as far as the media is concerned, the media need to justify the fact that they are reflecting—the media reflecting the truth in an accurate way. That way they will give themselves reason for existing in Iraq. And apart from that, any distortion of the truth is viewed by the Iraqi people as something that is very negative, and they will not accept this. Therefore, we ask all media channels to speak the truth. Let them speak about all the things they want concerning the government and all the criticism they want, but they must be accurate in everything they say.
WEBER: We’ll take one question here in the third row, and then I want to go to the back of the room, if we can, for the remainder of the questions.
QUESTIONER: Haleh Esfandiari from the Wilson Center. Prime Minister, you have been quoted as saying that the constitution should have an Islamic concept. Could you elaborate a little bit about this? And also, talk about women’s rights and family law within that constitution which should have an Islamic content. Thank you.
JAAFARI: As far as the content, I believe that all humanity—that all principles in all constitutions are there to serve humanity. I do not want people who are religious to give up their religion. I ask them to apply their religion in the proper way. If people apply religion in a proper way, they will find that religions have come to serve humanity.
Many people become a victim of being, of having one identity or having a limited identity, and therefore using everything to their own benefit at the expense of others. Therefore, the majority, the constitution should reflect the views of the majority. Who are the majority? The majority are Muslim. But this does not mean that we eliminate the right of others or that we deny them all other rights.
In [inaudible] and West, France and here in America, you write, “In God We Trust.” Maybe not all people believe in God. Maybe the majority believe in God. Constitutions must respect their people. If there is a majority of a particular constitution that reflects religious affiliation, that must be respected. But this acceptance of truth does not mean that it deprives or denies other minorities. Therefore, the constitution has to respect the majority, but does not allow the rights of minorities to be neglected or violated.
As far as women are concerned, I believe women are the other wing that allows society to fly. And in many areas, the role of the woman is far more effective and important then the role of man, and the mother plays a tremendous role in building society and nurturing society. And our sisters and our mothers have sacrificed a tremendous amount for the benefit of society. My wife is a woman. My wife is a doctor. How can I deprive her? How can I deny her participating in political activities? She participates in her natural political activity. My daughters are academics. They play their proper role in politics and being a certain academic, and the woman has a full right to play a full role in all aspects of life. It does not eliminate any of the full roles that women enjoy in society, and women are invited to participate fully in politics and all other aspects of life.
WEBER: Let’s go way to the back on the right, the woman with her hand up. Yes. I can’t see quite so well back there. Right, yes.
QUESTIONER: [Inaudible] Fox News. Mr. Prime Minister, could you tell us whether there is in fact a timetable for the trial of Saddam Hussein? And could you also clarify or amplify remarks out of your government earlier this week that suggested the U.S. has been meddling in the investigation process? Thank you.
JAAFARI: As far as trying Saddam, there is indeed some wastage of time that has taken place. I’ve spoken to the main judge that is responsible for trying Saddam Hussein. I spoke to him. Are we in the process of delivering extensive research on trying Saddam, or do we want to try him for specific crimes and get it over and done with? So we’re—in terms of the research, the research will never end, because there is not one crime that he has not committed.
He committed crimes concerning children and women and political parties and environmental crimes. He has committed all types of crimes. We do not want an extensive research. All we want is to come up with a verdict. They will then hear him at trial and the past crimes will be judged [and] will give him sentence, as in the case of [Adolf Hitler’s deputy in the Nazi Party] Rudolph Hess, who was given a life sentence [at the Nuremberg Trials].
So I believe that there are three stages of trying. First of all, receiving the evidence, and the judicial process itself, and then the sentences. And I believe that in the coming few months, we will witness that the gangs or the people that were with Saddam will be tried by [inaudible], and then Saddam will follow shortly.
WEBER: Back on this side if we can. Right there.
QUESTIONER: You didn’t answer my question about whether the U.S. has been helpful or a hindrance in the investigative process.
JAAFARI: As far as the U.S. is concerned, everything has been referred to Iraqi courts. It is true that all that has happened has happened during the war, and there is talk of whether Saddam is a war criminal or not. However, it is an Iraqi situation, and if there is any help that we need from the MNFI, it is possible we will ask for it. However, the judiciary is an Iraqi judiciary, and it is Iraqis who will deal with the trial of Saddam.
QUESTIONER: [Inaudible] from the Al Quds daily newspaper. [Continues through interpreter] Do you have real figures about the number of victims of Iraqi civilians since the invasion until now? My second point is, Mr. Prime Minister, you have mentioned that the Arab media is playing a negative role in Iraq. Do you believe that the Arab media is trying to distort the picture in Iraq and is kind of worsening the things in Iraq? Thank you very much.
JAAFARI: As far as the number of victims are concerned, up to now, we do not have a central office that has statistics of the victims. And it is extremely important to get together at one single center that gets—brings together all the victims, and I will strive to do that.
Secondly, does the media distort the truth? Yes, indeed, the media does distort the truth, and it is a double-edged sword. It saddens me to say that some of the Arabic channels encourage terrorism and aid the view that says that terrorism should be increased, and increases criminal activity whether they realize it or not, whether they do it consciously or not. Sometimes they call a criminal—they give them colorful and heroic terms, such as “resistance.” The Iraqi, Channel Iraqi has exposed many of the terrorists and criminals. These criminals go on TV and they admit to all sorts of crimes, committing all sorts of crimes, raping Iraqi women and killing them. What has the Arabic media said concerning this? How has it covered these particular aspects? There is much criticism that we have of some Arab media that are totally distorted in their view and unjust. But if you ask me, I say that there is a distortion and abuse of what is reality by the media.
WEBER: I offer my apologies to everyone who didn’t get to ask a question, but we have to conclude because the prime minister’s had a long day. I’m sorry for anybody that I obviously missed, but as you could see, we had so many people who wanted to ask questions, we couldn’t have included them all. Mr. Prime Minister, we want to thank you very much for coming to America and the Council on Foreign Relations. [Applause]
JAAFARI: Thank you very much everybody. Thank you very much for attending. Thank you.
(C) COPYRIGHT 2005, FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC., 1000 VERMONT AVE.
NW; 5TH FLOOR; WASHINGTON, DC - 20005, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.
UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION.
FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. IS A PRIVATE FIRM AND IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NO COPYRIGHT IS CLAIMED AS TO ANY PART OF THE ORIGINAL WORK PREPARED BY A UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE AS PART OF THAT PERSON’S OFFICIAL DUTIES.
FOR INFORMATION ON SUBSCRIBING TO FNS, PLEASE CALL JACK GRAEME AT 202-347-1400.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT.
