The Associated Press Interviews U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad
- From: Joe Avalon <javalon23@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 22 May 2006 01:07:47 +0200
Q: Mr. Ambassador, this must be a very satisfying day for you. Could you talk about your reflections on the new government and where we're going from here, in Iraq?
A: I think this government of National Unity has two positive features that makes it a very important step. One is that it completes the political transition in Iraq. And the constitution that was agreed to has gone now into effect, and that completes the phase of transition that they have been in since the U.S. forces came in here. Second is that the Sunni Arabs that did not participate in the transition period in the elections that produced the government led by Prime Minister Jaafari. They are now part and parcel of the political process. And therefore, political now, Iraq has been put on the right trajectory. Of course, there are significant challenges still ahead, but yesterday was a good day for Iraq.
Q: Do you feel that the new government will have a honeymoon, or will it be immediately faced with challenges?
A: I think it will be faced immediately with challenges because the terrorists are not going to go away, they're going to persist in their effort to promote a sectarian conflict. They want Iraq to fail, but Iraq in itself is not important for them. Iraq is one theater in a global war; that they want to provoke a war of civilization. Also, the government faces significant challenges in terms of security for the people of Iraq, particularly to reduce sectarian violence, and particularly in Baghdad. The government faces the challenge of increased services for the people of Iraq, particularly electricity. The Prime Minister has already reviewed, Mr. Maliki, a plan, has approved a plan for infrastructure security. He is planning to review the security strategy in Baghdad in the coming days. So he's off to a good start. Later today he will meet with the Security Chief of police and military. Security will be a significant challenge, as will the provision of services.
Q: Practically speaking, does he have the political authority to get the militias out of the security forces; at least we've reported cases where police are suspected of carrying out death squad type killings?
A: Absolutely. It's very important that people have confidence in the security forces, and that means that the security forces have to be vetted and re-vetted, to make sure that the people in the security forces work for the country as a whole, for the nation as a whole, that they are not motivated by sectarian loyalties, or by ties to militias, or ties to insurgents. The confidence of the people in the security forces is extremely important and with regard to some of the forces that are currently (unknown), that is an issue. And I think the next Minister of Interior and Defense will have to work hard to gain the confidence of the people and therefore, who they are, is going to be extremely important.
Q: But practically speaking, they have to really go in and remove those people. Do they have the muscle to do that?
A: Well they will have to do it, because gaining the security of the people is very important. The Prime Minister has stated that militias are a problem, of course the insurgents are a problem that need to be dealt with, and he has said that he wants to have strong and capable security forces that have the confidence of the people. With regard to militias, of course there is a need for a demobilization, decommissioning and reintegration plan. I believe that that will take a bit of time to develop, and we will work with the government to develop such a plan.
Q: As you know, the polls show that the American people, many of them believe that it was a mistake to come into Iraq in the first place and their patience is growing thin with this whole enterprise. How much time do you think you have to turn the situation around here?
A: I think that with the participation of the Sunni Arabs and all communities now in the political process, I believe that the situation will improve in Iraq, but it will not improve in the security domain immediately. It will take time. I believe that the American people understand the importance of success in Iraq. They understand that Iraq is important, but they have lost some confidence in whether we know what we are doing, whether we have the right strategy for achieving success in Iraq, and that has produced - that loss of confidence has produced - a decreased level of support for the enterprise. I believe as they see improvement in the political situation, and if that in turn produces an improvement in the security situation, I believe that the numbers will change. But that really depends on the performance of this government - that it succeeds in dealing with the violence that the people here are facing as well as with regard to the economic and provision of services, but of particular importance is the security portfolio.
Q: And if it doesn't improve in six months or a year, do you think America will have no choice but to say, "We tried," and then leave.
A: I think we will have to wait and see. I believe that given what has happened politically with the emphasis that's needed on unity and reconciliation, with improving the confidence of the people in the security forces, in terms of having the right people lead those forces, and in terms of dealing with the militias, the security situation ought to improve, and with that improvement should come greater confidence in the enterprise, but we will have to wait and see how the government performs.
Q: Would you consider yourself optimistic?
A: I am more optimistic now than I have been at times in the past, now that we have the Sunni Arabs participating in the political process, now that we have a government of national unity, but I am, of course, realistic enough to know that there are significant challenges that still are part of the picture. We need a good Defense Minister that has to be still appointed, a good Interior Minister that has to be appointed, and the security situation has to be dealt with. But I think that fundamentally, with the political participation of all communities in the political system, that Iraq has been put on the right trajectory.
Q: Five months since the election, and they still are not able to agree on a Defense Minister or an Interior Minister or a national security chief. What does that say about their chances for reconciliation in this country?
A: I believe that it's very important for the Iraqis to have a Defense Minister and other security ministry leaders that they all have confidence in - that those people are unifiers, not polarizers, that they are people who are competent, who have the confidence of all major communities. And they have made a lot of progress since the results of the election became known around February the 10th. It has taken a long time and at times it has been very frustrating for me personally, working with them, to get them to agree to a government, but I don't believe that it is too much for them to take the time to make the right choice.
They face very difficult issues. There is a lack of confidence across communities. There is sectarian polarization. This has not been purely a government formation process. It also has been coming to terms with each other. I think what they have done is unprecedented in the history of Iraq, where freely elected people from different communities have sat across, tried to agree on rules of the game for the political process, on a program for the government. So I believe that given the Iraqi concept of time, which is different than ours, that they have decided to take another week to make the right choice for Interior and Defense, it's understandable, it's important that they make the right choice and seven more days - or six more days now - is not too long in my judgment.
Q: And you think it will be that quickly.
A: I hope so. That's what the Prime Minister said to me when I saw him a little while ago and I think everyone would like this to be resolved as quickly as possible. I know that's the view of the other leaders as well.
Q: Some people say already that Iraq is in a low scale, irregular civil war. Is that how you see it? Is it a civil war already here?
A: I think there is a sectarian tension, there are sectarian killings that take place, but I do not believe that it is a civil war situation. The national institutions, the army and police and government, is holding, has held, even when the level of violence was higher in terms of sectarian killing, than it is at the present time. And all the community leaders are advocating unity and reconciliation rather than declaring war against each other. But there is effort to provoke a civil war, a sectarian war. But I believe now there is a government of national unity, the ability of the government to deal with efforts to provoke sectarian conflict has increased and the prospect for a civil war has decreased. So this was a success of a strategic sort yesterday against the insurgents who want to provoke a civil war. They did not want the Sunni Leadership to participate in the government and they failed.
Q: How disturbed where you by the walk out of Mr. Mutlaq yesterday? Is that a signal to the insurgents to keep fighting?
A: I think it is part of the democratic process - some people objected to the composition of the government. But Mr. Mutlaq and those who walked out represented a very small minority - less than 10 percent of the membership of the Assembly. This government has forces that represent 85 percent or so for the Assembly. The level of political support in the government by the assembly is quite wide.
Q: But don't the Arab nationalists have a lot of support outside the Parliament in Al-Anbar?
A: There could be places or pockets in which those who walked out have support, but overall we saw in the election that Mr. Mutlaq's group only got 11 seats out of 275. And besides his group a small number of forces associated with one of the factions within the Tawafuq (Accordance Front) also joined in. So the total number of those who walked out was about a dozen or so. So that is very small. So Mr. Mutlaq, the reason he walked out was that he wanted to be part of the government, he wanted to participate, but others did not meet his terms because he wouldn't pledge in writing that he would abide by the program of the national unity government. And so he was not given a position, he and his group, in the new government.
Q: Sorry to belabor the point though, but do you think it will be a signal to people in those areas where they are strong not to accept this government and should resist it?
A: We will have to wait and see but I believe that those who have participated in the process from the Sunni Arab community by far outweighed in terms of size and numbers Mr. Mutliq's group. I'm sure he is still in dialogue with the people in the government but whether something will be worked out for him I do not know. But I don't believe that it is extraordinary, that one of the groups, perhaps one of the smallest groups in the assembly was not satisfied with the government and they walked out.
Q: What do you think Zarqawi and the al Qaida in Iraq is planning now? Or going to try to do now to this government?
A: Of course I cannot read their minds and plans and programs, but my judgment overall is that they are not happy with what happened yesterday. That they are not happy that the Sunni Arab community is participating in the political process. They must see that time is not on their side. They must be discouraged. But at the same time, I do not anticipate that they will give up. They appear determined to kill and maim people here in Iraq, as well as in other parts of the world. It's possible in order to show that they're relevant that they will seek to intensify their attacks. I would not rule that out as well. But by any measure, given what they want and what they were seeking, in terms of the political process here, yesterday was a failure for them.
Q: You've been the man of the hour for about three years now, I would say, between Afghanistan and here, and now the U.S. administration is turning to you for help with Iran. When are your discussions with the Iranians going to take place?
A: We have said that we're prepared to talk with them once the government of national unity is formed. We did not want to engage them here when discussions about the government because many would have argued in Iraq and in the region that the U.S. and Iran got together to decide the government in Iraq. The message from Iran has been, shall we say confusing. Now that the government is formed we don't need to talk, as if the talks had taken place we would have talked about the government. And really the government is something for Iraqis to decide. That was our view, and why we didn't hold them during the formation of the government. But we have said publicly, and that remains our position, we'd be prepared to consider talking with them once the government of national unity is formed.
Q: Will you be calling the Iranian ambassador here, or will he call you?
A: I don't want to reveal how this will be negotiated, but you know, we have said publicly that once the government of national unity is formed we would be prepared to engage them, and there are channels for communicating.
Q: And you'll talk only about Iraq, or will you talk about trying to solve the larger problems?
A: We have said that we will want to talk about Iraq, what can be done to make sure that there is not interference in Iraq. We want good relations between Iraq and its neighbors, but we do not want Iran or others in the region to send arms to militias, to train militias, to send money to militias or others who want to undermine this new Iraq. And so we have a lot of issues to discuss with them with regard to our concerns and what we envision for Iraq, and be prepared to listen to their concerns.
Q: Do you accuse them of supporting militias here now?
A: We believe that arms do come across the border from Iran into Iraq that go into the hands of militias. We do believe that there is money coming from Iran to groups. We do believe that there are - there's training that does take place by elements that are affiliated with Iran. And we believe there are other negative actions that do take place by the Iranian regime in Iraq. But at the same time, we recognize that the Iranian regime has good state-to-state relations with Iraq. What we want is, of course, for that to persist, good state-to-state relations - and for these negative activities that I talked about earlier to stop. And that's what the Iraqi government also believes, and they have suggested that should these talks take place, the Iraqi government leaders, that they would like to participate in it, and we have said that we have no objection to that.
Q: Do you foresee a day where there will be good state-to-state relations between the United States and Iran?
A: I have no doubt about that. There will be a time where there would be good relations between Iran and the United States. The Iranian people are a great people, they are - this is a proud country with a very accomplished history. The Iranian people are highly educated. They have been isolated from the world because of the policies of the regime, the current regime, in Iran. The United States has no problem whatsoever with the Iranian people. The problem has been over disagreements with the policies of the regime in Iran. Ultimately the wishes of the Iranian people - who seek to live in a proud country, with normal relations with the world, relations of mutual respect with the world - will impose itself on - the country as a whole - on the government of that country. The United States looks forward to having a good relationship, not only in terms of attitudes towards the people of Iran, but with Iran, including the government of Iran. But for that to happen there has to be fundamental changes in Iran.
Q: Does that mean that the chances for a wider dialogue can not happen with this government and there has to be a government change? A: We have problems with the policies that I have described. The United States has significant fundamental difference of policy. But as you know I don't do Iranian relations in general. I am focused on Iraq and that's my job and I do see the negative effects of the policies of Iran on what's happening in Iraq.
Q: When you look back on your time here, do you feel that you've done your job? And what do you consider the highs and lows of your days here?
A: Of course the question implies as if I am about to leave. I will still be, of course, here for the immediate future, or as long as the president would want me here. But as far as my experience in Iraq for the past ten months or so that I've been here, the highest point was the participation of all communities in the elections. And the fact that 12 million Iraqis, almost 75 percent of the Iraqi people, participated in the elections, and they were from all communities, and particularly the fact that Sunni Arabs participated, I would say that was the highest. Because one of the tasks that I assigned myself when I came here was to change the lack of participation of the Sunnis in the political process to their participation in the political process. And to have seen that happen is a source of great satisfaction. And now that all Iraqis - the Shiites, and the Kurds were very much in the political process - are working together, to see them work together, with the Sunnis, Iraqis coming together, I am very pleased with that. And I am honored to have represented the United States in encouraging Iraqis to take the steps that they have taken as far as the political process is concerned.
Q: If you were to give up your place now, and we're not saying that you are, but could you walk away and feel that the job is done and it's going to come out well, or would you still have a question mark in your mind?
A: I think there is still some important things that need to be done to consolidate this.
Q: Would you mind naming them?
A: We still have to have good ministers of defense and interior and a national security minister. That's the immediate issue and it will require compromises still that we need to facilitate and assist with. And we need to, in my judgment, get the security ministries to transform in ways that has the confidence of the Iraqi people - and that this unity government then is consolidated, institutionalized, and stabilized. I think the next six months will be truly critical for Iraq. Someone said every six months since we've been here in Iraq has been critical, but I think these next six months to deal with reconciliation, uniting Iraqis, the national compact that has been agreed to through the process of government formation, being also manifested possibly in a constitutional adjustment or amendment, I think then we would say that Iraq truly is on the right trajectory. Problems there will be because these processes of state and nation building and fighting terror take time. But the country would be on the right track. I have felt that way about Afghanistan when I left Afghanistan, but Iraq still has some ways to go.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: God of reason: America as global religion
- Next by Date: Re: Need some advice on helping kid buy apartment??
- Previous by thread: Re: Markets are like 1987 crash
- Next by thread: "I want to thank you Mr. President."
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
