Not only to meet its own needs for power and industry, but to be a major exporter by pipeline. Well, thank you for that. Back to iran. You mentioned, i mean, i gave you so many questions and i realize that, but that what we do as academics. Im trying to learn to be in this business. You know, because you need to really test whats there and that, you know, how doing from how to go from talking to students to experts, thats a different story. But let me follow up on my questions and your answers. People talk about two scenarios that are plausible. The demands of the protesters and many people in Political Parties, especially those who have their eyes on his job, and they think realistically they can have it. There are those more interested in reform. They think the resignation of the government of the Prime Minister will put iraq through a long tunnel, the parties would not be able to form another government for a long time. Then continued protests, and protests mean a lot more destruction. , and they think realistically they can have it. There are those more interested in reform. They think the resignation of the government of the Prime Minister will put iraq through a the parties would not be able to form another government for a long time. Protests, and protests mean a lot more destruction. The country will be halting its activities for a long time. People,l hurt so many especially unintended victims who are waiting to have government. And the business as well. Men on theneed ground to meet the protests. Theeen these two, resignation of the continuation of the government and the parliament, and have them be the agents of change and reform, where do you lean, and what do you think is the more realistic and plausible scenario . Well, i think its important to always keep in mind that ahmadi became Prime Minister as a compromise solution and that there was no single block that nominated him. It was an agreement between the southern block. And they got together and chose somebody who was seen as an independent. In other words, not belonging to either of their political groups. And the outset, this looked like a sensible arrangement. And he arrived as a Prime Minister with a legacy of a political system that has been hobbled and dysfunctional and certainly not highly regarded by the population. So he did come with this badge or he had to deal with this baggage. The fact that he didnt have the backing of a single major party, rather than being an asset has now proved to be a liability because theres nobody defending him. And even who originally was a great backer came out openly a few days ago and said, he should resign. The problem is, there are mechanisms. I dont think that the restignation of the government is going to create this vacuum. The problem is not that. The problem is what is going to replace them . And if you are looking from the perspective of the protesters, it is not enough for one individual to be scapegoated and to resign if in fact the replacement is going to be also somebody from the powers that be. They are looking for radical change. I hate to use this term. They want to see a paradigm shift in the politics of iraq, okay . So the resignation on its own, unless its tied to a much more farreaching and Broader Vision of reform, is not going to help. The dissolution of parliament and early elections, if we follow the same electoral law with the same or a similar type of Electoral Commission and the same party law, Political Party law, and thats an important element, if those remain unchanged, we are going to reproduce the same type of parliament. All of those are not going to be the type of reform that people want, and theyre calling for. And not only the people, but it has been very clear about the type of farreaching radical reform thats required. We have the resignation in lebanon, okay, fine, and this is probably a tactical move because there are others in the government that he wanted to get rid of and so as he resigns, the entire government falls, and so on, so he can get rid of some faces, but in iraq, its different. You cant have one man resigning, only to be reproduced by somebody similar. And so, what do i see . Perhaps a resignation of the government. Hes offered to resign once a replacement is found, according to the speech by the president yesterday. Letter heame from a sent on the 29th. That is how the frame of now, the talk is, lets go back a few days. Were talking now in terms of days in iraq because every day, every hour seems changed. There was discussion and an agreement that they should find a replacement. There were reports by reuters and others that on wednesday in baghdad, met with them and said, no, you should not change so there are all sorts of interests at play here. And the picture is becoming more complicated. Will he resign . Will he not resign . If he resigns, who will replace him . So on and so forth. I think an orderly transition with reforms in the electoral law, in the commission, in the party law, early elections based on those, and a caretaker government, whether its a government thats under him or somebody else, to see it through a certain period of time is, to my mind, is the most orderly way to do it. Now, the problem with the president s speech, as you mentioned, is it was a little short on details, but i understand because theyre going through consultations and processes, but more to the point, it had no timeline. If, as some people have suggested, elections should take place in two years, i can tell you that thats not going to be satisfactory solution. There has to be a short timeline in order to light a fire under people and to keep their focus. So is it going to be a revolution . Is it going to be an evolution . Perhaps by mynature im more of an evolution, that needs to be anchored in solid steps of reform, legislation, followed by elections within six months may be, and then a review of the constitution. And the president s speech, everything has to be done through the constitutional frame work because iraqs countries countries inother the region, the only way you can have change is by some means that are extraordinary. Iraq has a process in place and can serve for an evolutionary change, in fact. And joey oh, sure, please. May i comment on this. Article 64 of the constitution, which my friend knows by heart, not the article, the whole constitution. [laughter] article 64, which ive read and reread in the last few days. There are two mechanism for dissolving parliament, what they said was i will agree to a to early elections which presumes the solutions parliament. There are two ways of solving parliament, either by a vote of twothirds. Theyre never going to do that, why should they . Or by a dual request from the Prime Minister and the president. And that certainly is possible. Now, the elections are supposed to take place 60 days after the dissolution. That seems to be a short timeline, but it can be worked around. So its possible to dissolve parliament, but i would like i would have liked the president , who has actually been the person who has really been able to preserve his credibility with the population. And i think, ambassador will probably push back on the reading of it because article 64, its kind of like the constitution, you have to read it backward and forward and bring some friends to help you. Thats right, yes. And thats what it is is basically one of the readings that the ambassador has to it and he is a legal scholar of great stature, i always defer to him on those issues, basically that one third of the parliament can initiate and twothirds. Requires a twothirds vote. And the other the Prime Minister would require a dissolution of the parliament, but it has where the ambassador goes. It has after the president approves it, it has to have a two third of the parliament to approve that, but means really there is no substance to this authority that the constitution gives to the president because the parliament agree to do that, but i agree with you, 64 is really and also the ambassador always bring was it 56, i . 56 where it gives the parliament fouryear term and basically you have to interpret one with the otr. So, im sure the floor will have many questions on that from the audience. Now, joey, let me ask you in light of the same arguments that she was making, basically the United States was looking at iraq and it has two things major areas to focus on. One of them is internal politics of iraq and where it is going, all of the u. S. Investment in iraq and treasure and International Relations or bilateral relations and the potential of u. S. And iraq relations and also the regional security, regional development, what goes on in syria, turkey and in general. What is the order of concern the United States is looking at from possible threats and risks and possible consequences of what goes on in iraq if the scenario goes, god forbid, to something worse or something thats a prolonged process . Well, it goes back to our fundamental goal for our policy with iraq, which is a strong, stable and sovereign Iraqi Government because if youve got that, then youve got a great environment for american businesses to work in the oil sector or in other sectors of the economy. If youve got that, then youve got a strong iraq that can push back on, as ive said before, its totally abnormal for a special forces commander from a foreign country to be coming into another country and meeting with Political Party leaders and telling them anything. You know, a strong, stable and sovereign iraq should be able to push back on that and say get out of here. And to be able, also to project stability into places like syria by keeping a Strong Border and by enabling Counterterrorism Operations across the border so that organizations like isis cant resurge. So, thats our goal and what were putting into it is well and publicly known because we have to go up to congress and say, may we have some money to do this . So you can look up these numbers. Were the biggest humanitarian donor, the biggest donor to the Iraqi Security forces, the biggest donor to the mining assistants and have been for many years. What form does iranian assistance take . Who knows what that looks like . How much money are they putting into it . How much are they taking out . Nobody knows these things because of the way they do business and we would like to see that change and change through a strong and sovereign Iraqi Government, and i believe that thats exactly what the protesters are saying when they say they want a country, a nation, this that cant be translated into english precisely. They dont want to be a battlefield. They dont want to be an asset. They dont want to be a throughway for anybody else and we completely agree with them. All right. I would love to go for more, but i think i need to give the audience a chance to also ask and see what we can get in or where we can get the conversation going. Ambassador. President of the Gulf States Institute and former ambassador to iraq and a good colleague of joey hood. This is for ambassador rahim, but also for all of you on the panel. I have been struck that the demonstrations, the emotions have largely been in baghdad and south. One of the questions i have is what is the attitude and participation in the kurdistan region, in nineveh, in anbar, and how do they view and participate in this protest against government inefficiency and how are they participating in the discussions of potential potential reform . Thank you, ambassador. Actually this question is so central to the problems that ail iraq. And ive been thinking about this and trying to disentangle. First of all, let me just say preemptively, that theres been from the students in support, there was also a letter of support signed by about 100 kurdish members of the kurdish intelligence here in support. So, where there have not been protests in kurdistan, there have been statements of support. In the last few days, they were also some small protests that came out in support of the protests in the south. Not their own protests, but these were solidarity protests. They were quickly snuffed out by iss, by the Iraqi Security forces. So, going back to this question, why is it happening . First of all, because in sunni areas in 2012 when they protested, they were immediately branded as terrorists, and so on, and they were mercilessly crushed by maliki if you recall. And then they were accused of being the pathway, the protests were accused of being the pathway of daesh into iraq. And so the last thing that the people in anbar or even nineveh want to be attractions of want to attract accusations of allowing terrorists to come in, so, they are very hesitant to expose themselves to these accusations, so thats one reason. I think the deeper reason is that the shia feel this is our government. This is shialed government. And this government, this shialed government and lets face it, it is, came to power in 2003 to respond to our grievances as shia. To elevate us as shia from the oppression of Saddam Hussein and so on. They have taken all the spoils, the shia leaders, we have had nothing. Basra is in a dismal state and is predominantly shia. All the south is predominantly shia. Theres a feeling that this government which is supposed to be ours and which is supposed to represent us has let us down. Now, for the sunnis, i dont think there is the same sense that this is our government. Theres much more participation by the sunnis now than we saw after 2003. And i think that the sunnis are much more part of the political process, the Decision Making process, but for the mass of sunnis, it is not yet something that they feel they can appropriate themselves. And then, of course, dont forget that all of these provinces have just come out from under daesh. They have their own problems, their own needs of reconstruction of bringing home idps. There really is a distinction, and this this tension goes to the heart of the problem that iraq faces today. I do not have the exact wording in front of me, but it could be interpreted as saying dont forget this is it just about the shia area. This is about all of iraq and all the components of iraq and that was a very Important Message to hear. I just wanted to build on something which was said, you know, the constitutional reform, electoral law reform, these may all be required. I am not an expert. Notiraqi constitution is perfect, but none of them are. Its not the only country think about what you can get twothirds vote to remove the chief of government at the moment. [laughter] but actually those will take time, a lot of time, and i dont see how theyre going to address the immediate needs of these demonstrators because actually, the crisis of legitimacy of Iraqi Government now is not one of democratic legislation or the constitution. And those were asking for, there are some, see it as we change the whole system. But what theyre really asking for, jobs, service, delivery and lack of corruption. But taking a year or two to change electoral law or change the constitution is not going to help with those. What i see with where the problem lies is in the executive, and the Service Delivery, by the government, is failing. And that needs kind of, emergency counsel self gratian, Emergency Task force on electricity delivery, giving them the freedom. If necessary, some outside expertise, and having an action plan and delivering. Delivering, and somehow keeping and somehow keeping those immune to political interference and corruption and that kind of pulling this way and that way all the parties, which has so far stymied the governments progress. Can i respond . I hate to disagree with you but i think the demands of the protesters have gone beyond asking for jobs and services. I think that was true on october 1, 2nd, 3rd. And i think, as i tried to show, they have changed. Now, keep in mind that i think it was october 4, the Prime Minister came out and said we are going to create more government jobs. The government is already in deficit, and i dont and the Public Service sector, the Public Sector is bloated. So, i dont know how theyre going to create jobs and what theyre going to pay, how theyre going to pay for them. The Prime Minister also talks about a new package, an additional package of social welfare. And in that speech, he tried to respond to the services demands of demonstrators. But i think by then, we had gone beyond that. And i dont think any kind of Service Delivery they cant create Better Health overnight. They cant create better schooling overnight. They cant create a million jobs overnight. I think that takes more time than reforming the electoral law and, im not talking about the constitution, reforming the electoral law, that having new elections and having a new government. I think that can be done in a shorter period of time. You also spoke about creating jobs and improving Services Without the interference and the derailing effect of corruption. That youre absolutely right, but i dont think its possible to do that unless you have a major reform of the political system. Always this, you have the spark and then you have the early commands, then once people are on the streets, they raise the ceiling and then, just like in negotiations, then you have to go back and this is going to be really an ever evolving demands on counter, offers and counter offers, and also there are so many moving targets and people are trying to i think we are in agreement. My point was not that you can assuage these demonstrations by the government offering to hire tens of thousands of more. My point was what they want. That, you know, changing the electoral law alone is not going to be enough. They see that as a means to an end, perhaps, but actually you cant wait for that. I heard from a senior, one of the most senior iraqi politicians at the moment, andy and he described i