This House believes that all foreign troops should leave Iraq immediately

TIM SEBASTIAN
Ladies and gentlemen, a very good evening to you and welcome to the latest in our series of Doha Debates sponsored by the Qatar Foundation. To get out of Iraq now, or as George W. Bush insists he'll do, stay the course until the job is done. Those are the choices now facing the American-led forces in the country, and the subject of our debate tonight: this House believes that foreign forces should leave Iraq immediately. Across the world, and especially in this region, opinions are sharply divided on this issue, and our panel tonight reflects some of those divisions. Speaking for the motion, James Zogby, known to many as a television face on Abu Dhabi TV, but his day job is President of the Arab-American Institute which he founded in Washington D.C. He's also co-founder of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign and he's been Executive Director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. Also for the motion, Reg Keys, who stood for election in Britain on an anti-war platform after his son Thomas died on military service in Iraq in 2003. He staged a much publicised one-man protest at the Iraq War, and is a founding member of the group British Military Families Against the War. Well, speaking against the motion, Ali Al Bayati is Consul General at the Iraqi Embassy in London. He joined the Foreign Ministry last year after nearly 30 years' exile from the country. He's also a former spokesman for the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the best organised of the Shia Islamist parties. Also against the motion, Raymond Tanter. He's professor of Political Science at Georgetown University. During the Reagan and Bush Senior administrations, he was the Defence Secretary's personal representative to arms control talks in Europe, so he knows about playing for high stakes. Ladies and gentlemen, our panel. And now let me call on James Zogby to speak first in support of the motion.

JAMES ZOGBY
Thank you, Tim. Thank all of you. I come before you tonight in support of the proposition that the US and the United Kingdom should leave Iraq. I don't take the position lightly, and therefore I have prepared comments that I want to make because I want to be as clear as I can possibly be. I am committed to the people of Iraq. For decades they've suffered. They suffered from evil leadership, from external interference, and they suffered from neglect. I'm also concerned about my country, its image, its values, and especially our young men and women who bravely answered the call to serve, and many died, and many lost limbs, and many are suffering mental health problems in the process. It's out of this commitment to the people of Iraq and my own country that I say we must leave. From the beginning, this war was, as Congressman John Murtha recently described it, 'a flawed policy wrapped in illusion.' Its initiators gave no thought to the consequences. Instead, they were driven by a messianic, infantile fantasy. I debated them, I remembered what they said. Shock and awe was all it needed, seven days, there'd be flowers at our feet, we'd create a beacon of democracy that would flourish throughout the whole Middle East. They told the Congress 90,000 troops was all it would take, $2 billion was all it would cost, 6 months tops was what it would require. Blinded by fantasy, they compounded this mistake with so many others: failing to provide security and services for the people of the country; dismantling the apparatus of state and military; allowing rampant corruption and cronyism; betraying American values. We're almost a thousand days into the war, 2,200 Americans dead, tens of thousands of Iraqis dead, anger at America at dangerously high levels, $300 billion spent, 60% of Iraqis unemployed, many without water, without power, and sectarian conflict rampant, and an occupation that is corrupting my country, its values and putting at risk Iraqis who work with us. A thousand days later, no plan then and no plan now. Instead, what my government has done is dumbed down its definition of victory and is now preparing to draw down troops. I don't want to give them another thousand days, nor do I want them to reach the point where they decide to leave as unilaterally and irresponsibly as they went into the country in the first place. It's time to send a message: it's time to leave but not leave before the hard work is done. And so at the conclusion of the election, we should announce our intention to redeploy all of our forces in six months' time, and during this 6-month period, we should do what we can to use the leverage that we have to build for example on the Arab League initiative and seek to create a UN mandate that will provide for a regional conference with permanent standing as a framework for security, reconciliation and reconstruction. When we leave, Iraqis will be empowered to solve their own problems and solve them they must. Iraqis will have greater legitimacy. Their government will be empowered and legitimate and not viewed as an agent of the occupation. As a result, the insurgency will lose. They'll stop being a target of opportunity which they are today, that is the government is a target of opportunity for insurgency and for outside terrorists. Should the Iraqi government require security and training assistance, this can be sanctioned by the permanent political entity that will have a UN mandate, and other countries will then come in because they won't be coming in under a US umbrella, they'll be coming in to respond to the legitimate concerns of an Iraqi government. It will not be easy, that's clear, but because the United States and the United Kingdom have become part of the problem of Iraq, what's also clear is they can't be part of the solution. If you support this resolution, you send a message. You send a message that it's time for the US and the UK to leave but to leave responsibly, and to do in the next six months what they've failed to do in the last 33.
TIM SEBASTIAN
James Zogby, thank you very much indeed. What Arab League initiative? They've been conspicuously silent and conspicuously inactive.
JAMES ZOGBY
Well, actually they haven't been, Tim. There was a meeting held in Cairo ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
Oh, they meet and they talk, but that's it.
JAMES ZOGBY
No, they brought together Iraqi groups, they brought together the surrounding countries. It was a useful discussion, a very useful discussion ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
What have they done apart from talk?
JAMES ZOGBY
But the point is, they haven't the mandate or the power to do what is required. It needn't be the Arab League, but it ought to be the UN.
TIM SEBASTIAN
It hasn't got the agreement or the consensus, that's the point.
JAMES ZOGBY
The point is that there wasn't an agreement or consensus in Eastern Europe when we created a regional security pact that did provide stability in Eastern Europe. This region requires a regional security pact and it can come about but it can't come about under a US/UK umbrella, and that's the problem right now. The US has become a target and has become such a source of anger in the region that it hasn't got the legitimacy to do. That hurts me as an American to say that, but the reality is, that's where we are.
TIM SEBASTIAN
'Those who advocate an early withdrawal do not know what is at stake. The huge investment in blood and money sacrificed by the US could be squandered.' That is from the Iraqi Foreign Minister. Why do you think you know better than he does?
JAMES ZOGBY
It is not a question of squandering the blood. The question is ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
He thinks it is. My question is, why do you know better than he does?
JAMES ZOGBY
I'm speaking as an American. I'm concerned what my country has done. I'm concerned with what my country is perceived of in the region. I understand the Foreign Minister, he's Kurdish. They've lived under an American protectorate for 15 years and they've benefited extraordinarily, but the rest of the country is in a very different situation. I respect the Kurdish people and their concerns for autonomy. I understand at the same time that Americans are dying, Iraqis are dying, and bad blood is being spilled all the way around.
TIM SEBASTIAN
But you do know better than the Foreign Minister who wants the troops to stay for the moment.
JAMES ZOGBY
As an American, I know that my country hasn't a plan, didn't have a plan, the dictator's gone, the job is done, it's time to leave, the Iraqi people have to solve this on their own. We've become like methadone right now for various sects in Iraq. Look, when we have to go in and Americans go in and liberate prisons in Iraq and find people tortured, it hurts, but at the same time what hurts me even more is that we don't have the legitimacy and credibility to complain, we did it ourselves. This is bad all the way around. It was conceived in sin and no good can come of it, that's the problem.
TIM SEBASTIAN
James Zogby, thank you very much. Let me now call on Ali Al Bayati to speak against the motion please.

ALI AL BAYATI
Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, your highnesses, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank the Doha Debate team first, but let me say this: tonight Iraq's future is in your hands, and the future of the woman in Iraq is in your hands, so please vote for stability, security and after all, democracy. Ladies and gentlemen, the unmitigated disastrous policies that were adopted by the previous regime, resulted in eight years of war against Iran, it resulted in the use of chemical weapons against the Kurds in the north, the crushing of the uprising in the south, and the crushing of the uprising in the Ramadi, in the west of Iraq. Those policies have resulted in a regime that defied the whole world. The coalition forces went against the regime, they removed it and subsequently Iraq went under occupation. That occupation ended legally by United Nations Resolution 1546 on 30th June 2004. An interim government came in power. That government had a duty. The duty was to have a general election on 31st January 2005. Eight-and-a-half million people went to the ballot boxes defying all terrorist activities in Iraq. The interim government came and went, and now we have a transitional government for one year. The duty for that government is this: first is to have a constitution that is ratified by the Iraqi people, which they did on 15th October 2005. The constitution, it's one of the best in the Middle East. You go and look at it, human rights and so on, woman rights and so on. The second duty, it's a general election that will elect a permanent government that will be a constitutional government that will stay in four years. That constitutional government will have the right to ask the multi-national forces to leave when it sees the situation suits. If the multi-national forces leave immediately, we're going to have a vacuum. That vacuum will be similar to the vacuum created by the removal of the regime which created Iraq being in the situation which we had of an occupation. We don't want that. We want the Iraqi forces to be up and running, to have enough arms, to have enough practice in order to have security and stability in Iraq, and to be able to run and attack all the terrorists who are anti government, who are at the moment attacking government places, attacking innocent people, attacking women, children, and so on. Ladies and gentlemen, I ask you to vote for security and stability in Iraq. Thank you very much.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Ali Al Bayati, thank you very much. What security and stability do you have when people are being killed hand over fist in your country? How can you interpret that as security and stability?
ALI AL BAYATI
The vacuum that was created by the occupation resulted in no security at all because they have completely demolished the existing system, they demolished the police, the army and so on. We've got to rebuild that.
TIM SEBASTIAN
But you haven't got security and stability. The troops are there and you have no security and no stability, so what are you asking people to vote for?
ALI AL BAYATI
We have security in 15 provinces out of 18 provinces.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Really? With attacks up from 150 a week to 700 this year, up from 150 last year to 700 this year, that's security?
ALI AL BAYATI
What can you do against attacks against innocent people? There was an attack in London, there was an attack in the United States.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Not 700 a week in London.
ALI AL BAYATI
There was one attack in London on 7th July, we lost 59 people, all innocent people, so the attacks in Iraq ....
TIM SEBASTIAN
What you lose in Iraq on a daily basis.
ALI AL BAYATI
We lose it on a daily basis because of the scale, the force that the terrorists are using at the moment.
TIM SEBASTIAN
But my point is, you have no security and stability, and your constitution which you think is pretty wonderful has not protected anybody, given them security. It's a piece of paper that is not respected by the insurgents.
ALI AL BAYATI
The democratic political process that's going on will ensure the stability and security given enough time for the Iraqi forces and the Iraqi security forces to have enough practice in order to keep security.
TIM SEBASTIAN
How much time?
ALI AL BAYATI
We need enough time to have it up and running.
TIM SEBASTIAN
How much time?
ALI AL BAYATI
It is difficult to put on because if we put a time, we will be playing into the hand of the terrorists.
TIM SEBASTIAN
One year, three years, five years, how long?
ALI AL BAYATI
Let's wait and see the outcome of the election, let's wait and see the outcome of the Iraqi forces finishing their training and we will see.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Ali Al Bayati, thank you very much indeed. Now let me call on Reg Keys please to speak for the motion.

REG KEYS
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you. We hear talk of a war with Iraq. From my perspective, it's never been a war. Saddam didn't want to go to war with Britain or America. It was an unlawful invasion, an occupation of a sovereign state. We hear the word 'democracy' used on this platform. It was never about giving Iraq a democracy. In February 2003 Tony Blair, the Prime Minister, made a speech to the House and he actually said that, 'Saddam Hussein can stay in power, he can take a final option and stay in power if he hands over his weapons of mass destruction,' and I add weapons of mass destruction he did not have. He also misled Parliament with such quotes as, 'Evidence gathered over four years was extensive, detailed and authoritative.' 'Weapons could be deployed against UK interests in 45 minutes, the programme being active, detailed, growing, up and running now.' We also have a quote from Dick Cheney, 'The regime possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons, we also believe nuclear weapons.' Nothing was further from the truth. We had British forces deployed into Iraq on a falsehood, the oath of allegiance these young men sign betrayed, their patriotism exploited. My son died believing Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. He died for a lie. That is difficult to come to terms with, a lie by my own Prime Minister. So where do we go from here? We have Iraq on the brink of turmoil. No exit strategy was in place for withdrawal of troops. In parliament, there was a total debated time of 700 hours over fox-hunting, 700 hours about killing foxes. The total debate in time given to going to war with Iraq, 'war' in inverted commas, and mass killing of people, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, British troops, American troops, 7 hours. 700 for fox-hunting, 7 for war. I would say a phased withdrawal of coalition forces will be the soothing balm of reason. We have to break this spiral of violence. We have Iraqi killing Iraqi. We have UK forces, American forces, killing Iraqis. We have Iraqis killing coalition forces. Somebody has to blink first, and I would say to our leaders, 'Take a lesson from the history books.' 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam before a withdrawal. All my adult life, I've known troubles in Northern Ireland and the continual bombings in Ireland and on the UK mainland, and eventually somebody sees common sense and decides to sign the Good Friday peace agreement, which did allow killers and bombers to walk free, but for the greater picture. We now have a stable environment in Northern Ireland, the troubles are now greatly reduced, and we are moving forward. We look at Russia. They tried to overthrow the Mujahideen, fighting from caves in the mountains in Afghanistan. It didn't work, and they eventually withdrew. It's not a case of if you kill enough of the bad guys, they will go away. How can you have George Bush's war on terrorism? They're not in any line-up on a battlefield wearing a uniform. They will lie dormant for months, then suddenly strike. You cannot win a war on terrorism, so I would say to you this now, the honeymoon period in Iraq is over, a phased withdrawal of coalition forces replaced with a UN peace-keeping force of Muslim and Arab extraction. Thank you.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Reg Keys, thank you very much. You talk about a honeymoon period but actually there's a huge mess that's been created in Iraq at the moment. You blame British and American forces for it. Is it the right thing to do, to create a mess and then get out and leave them to sort if out by themselves?
REG KEYS
Well, there have been inflammatory remarks by Dr. John Reid, Defence Secretary, who said, 'We're not going to wave a white flag.' There's no case of waving a white flag. The former leader of the Conservatives, Michael Howard, said, 'We're not going to cut and run.'
TIM SEBASTIAN
But you want them to leave. I'm asking whether it's right for them to leave and leave behind the mess that you believe they're created.
REG KEYS
Oh, there is chaos there.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Is that right?
REG KEYS
Yes, because the longer they stay there, then the longer the attacks on the coalition will go on. People that are assisting the coalition forces will be targeted as insurgents. My son died in a police station where there were 50 armed Iraqi police, who fled for their lives, because they would have been killed alongside the six Royal Military Policemen as collaborators, so if you take out the coalition forces, there's nobody to collaborate with, and hopefully Iraq will start to heal herself.
TIM SEBASTIAN
And what about the Iraqis killing Iraqis? Who helps them with that particular, because they're the majority of casualties?
REG KEYS
Well, you will get that because a lot of the Iraqis are killing Iraqis because they see them as collaborators. There's no magic answer here, there's no panacea for these ills, but ultimately Iraq will have to sort her own problems. The longer the coalition stays there, the more it will exacerbate the hostilities.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Do you really think elections would have taken place in Iraq if the troops hadn't secured a modicum of safety for voters?
REG KEYS
I think eventually, but maybe not as soon as what's going forward.
TIM SEBASTIAN
So it was good that they were there then?
REG KEYS
I'll never agree with the war, I'll never agree with it.
TIM SEBASTIAN
No, but their presence now, we're talking about the presence now. It's good that they were there to supervise or at least stand by while the elections took place.
REG KEYS
Absolutely. They are providing security for the elections which could have been provided by the Arab League of Nations. They could have provided the security.
TIM SEBASTIAN
But they didn't want to, did they?
REG KEYS
No, but were they asked, were they invited to get involved around the table?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Yes.
REG KEYS
Well, I'll go along with that then, but yes, it's a good thing that the security has been provided. Once the elections are over, let's set a date for a phased withdrawal.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Reg Keys, thank you very much.Now let me call on Professor Raymond Tanter to speak against the motion please.

RAYMOND TANTER
Thank you very much, Tim. When Tim introduced me, he said that I worked at the Department of Defence. This is true but I also worked at the White House on the National Security Council staff, and one of the things I learned at the White House is that when you go to the Pentagon and give a briefing, the generals say three things. They say, 'Professor, tell us what you're going to say, say it and then tell us what you've said.' So what I'd like to do is to tell you what I'm going to say and say it and tell you what I've said. First of all I'm going to talk about a vacuum, building on my colleague's metaphor about political vacuum in Iraq, to discuss a race between two clocks, and then to talk about dominoes and how they might fall if there were a sudden American withdrawal from Iraq with respect to the vacuum. Iraq is not in a political vacuum. You have Syria in the west, you have Iran in the east, you have Turkey in the north, and you have Saudi Arabia in the south. Now, a US-led regime change in Baghdad helped to create this political vacuum. Now, it doesn't matter who's right or wrong with respect to how we got into this war. We're there now, so the issue is if there is now a political vacuum, do you want a greater political vacuum, were American troops to precipitously withdraw from Iraq? I say no. Why? Because the vacuum would be filled by additional foreign fighters flowing in from Syria, additional foreign fighters flowing in from Iran and Saudi Arabia, and it would give Iran a foothold on the future of Iraq, and the last thing I want to do is to give Iran a greater sense of leveraging political outcomes in Iraq. Now, what about the clocks? There's a race between two clocks right now in Iraq. One clock is the political process. The political process clock is there because of the armed forces. There would not have been elections January 30th 2005, a referendum October 15th, and elections again on December 15th, were there not the armed forces present. So, what's the second clock? The insurgents' clock. Which clock will win? I would say that the purpose of military force right now is to speed up the political process and slow down the insurgent process, and I think that is in fact what is happening. The political process is creating distance between the Sunni Muslims on one hand and the foreign fighters on the other hand, eventually therefore the insurgency will dry up. The third point has to do with what I call the domino theory. The stability of the Gulf States depends upon the stability of Iraq. Iraq is not some faraway distant land, and you cannot have stability in Iraq in the long term if you have a precipitous American/British withdrawal. My colleague Jim Zogby mentioned that he was in favour of American withdrawal. Who isn't? All the American forces are in favour of withdrawal, George W. Bush is in favour of withdrawal. At issue, ladies and gentlemen, is time. Do you withdraw suddenly and unleash the forces of uncertainty with respect to Iran and Turkey and Saudi Arabia, or do you withdraw in an adult-like moderate manner? Thank you very much.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Professor Tanter, thank you. Professor Tanter, explain something to me. George Bush says, 'When our commanders on the ground tell me that Iraqi forces can defend their freedom, our troops will come home with the honour they have earned.' Let me get this straight. The US will stay until the Iraqis can assure their own security when the most powerful army in the world at the moment can't secure them either. You're asking the Iraqi Army, which exists only in a rudimentary form, to do what the most powerful army in the world can't do. It's a little much, isn't it?
RAYMOND TANTER
No, not at all. Counter-insurgency is not what modern armies do. Modern armies do deserts, they don't do jungles very well, they don't do cities very well. You have people blowing themselves up, the foreign fighters blowing themselves up.
TIM SEBASTIAN
So you're saying the US Army can't do the job it's been put in there to do.
RAYMOND TANTER
The United States Army is not a counter-insurgency force. The United States Army, the mission was accomplished when the President went on the Lincoln aircraft carrier and said, 'Mission accomplished.'
TIM SEBASTIAN
The mission of an occupying power is also under the Geneva Convention to assure the safety of the civilian population. That they have signally also failed to do, haven't they?
RAYMOND TANTER
And Mr. Sebastian, Tim, if there were a precipitous American withdrawal that would endanger, endanger I repeat, the safety and security of the non-combatants.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You don't think they're endangered enough as it is when up to 100,000 of them have died in the last 2½, 3 years?
RAYMOND TANTER
At issue is who's responsible for the deaths? America never targeted any non-combatants. Non-combatants are targeted ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
America was responsible for their security and failed to deliver it. That is a fact.
RAYMOND TANTER
Non-combatants are targeted by suicide bombers, foreign terrorists and Saddamists who are coming in from Syria ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
So why stay a signatory to the Geneva Conventions if you can't live up to their provisions? I think they'd like an answer.
RAYMOND TANTER
Well, the issue is not the signatory of the Geneva Convention. America is not only a signatory of the Geneva Convention, America is enforcing the Geneva Convention by being an occupying power. Where else, what other country do you have such representative institutions growing up except under American and British occupation? You didn't have representative institutions growing under Saddam Hussein. You have a parliament that's been elected in Iraq.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You have elections and widespread violence. Are you calling this democracy?
RAYMOND TANTER
Tim, there's a difference between majority rule and minority rights, and what I like about the Iraqi constitution is that the Iraqi constitution brings in liberty with majority rule, it brings in federalism with minority rights in a very, very conscious way. I'm proud of their constitution. I've read it.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Liberty for those who are blown up daily by the roadside?
RAYMOND TANTER
The roadside bombs, by the way, come in from the east. They come in with high technology that Iran is sending in, I think is very, very problematic and very troubling to me, and I know we will get into this later. I will yield the floor.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Professor Tanter, thank you very much indeed.

TIM SEBASTIAN
All right, I want to now throw this open to the audience and there's a gentleman right in the first row, you have a question.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Thank you. To the gentlemen who are speaking against the motion, it seems that the majority of the arguments are surrounding democracy and the involvement of Turkey, Iran and Syria, and as well I think Mr. Al Bayati commented something about the security of women. Clearly under the occupation, people that are most affected are those that are most marginalised, the women, children, people with disabilities and those that live on the margins of society, so I think that if Mr. Bayati was seriously concerned about the well-being of Iraqi women in Iraq, that they would have had a much more pre-thought out plan as to what the effects of the occupation were going to be.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Can we move to a question please?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Yes. My question to Mr. Al Bayati then, if you're so concerned about the involvement of neighbouring countries in Iraq, and that is the primary reason behind your support for the occupation, why is it then that the political factions that you personally represent are so allied with Iran and have been over and over supportive of creating a particular form of government in Iraq that Iran would very much like to see?
ALI AL BAYATI
There is no support for the occupation. Not a single Iraqi citizen, not a single person on the globe will support occupation. What we support is democracy, pluralism and federalism in Iraq. If you're talking about the neighbouring countries, the principle is this: we don't like anybody to interfere in the politics and the internal politics in Iraq. On the other hand, we don't intend to interfere with any political internal affairs of any other neighbouring countries. The previous regime did that. We are against it. Thank you.
TIM SEBASTIAN
He was asking about your party which is supported by Iran, isn't it?
ALI AL BAYATI
The reason the party was in Iran, because there were only two countries that opened their doors to Iraqis. It was Iran and Syria, and this is why you have the biggest communities for the Iraqis in Iran and Syria and then some of them have fled to different countries like Great Britain. Now, that is why most of the Iraqis went in Iran, it is the natural place for the Iraqi opposition to go there, but we don't have any influence from the Iranians on us. Our decision is an Iraqi decision. I'll give you a very simple example. While Iran has a lot of problems with the United States of America, we were sitting with them and talking to them in the opposition. The opposition have their own views on the political agenda in Iraq, nothing to do with any outside country.
TIM SEBASTIAN
All right. Gentleman in the third row.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
I agree that foreign troops should leave Iraq immediately but the question to the panel is, if foreign troops were to leave today, would this lead to a more stable, democratic and transparent Iraq?
TIM SEBASTIAN
James Zogby, what do you think?
JAMES ZOGBY
I made the point very clear. I wasn't calling for them to leave today. I didn't want them to leave as irresponsibly and unilaterally as they entered. They have six months to do the job right, and that is to leave responsibly by empowering a UN mandate to a regional security arrangement that can provide Arab and Muslim and other forces in the country to help the Iraqis, so that there isn't a vacuum, and number two, to create the political framework because if you have Iran, Syria, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, all the Iraqi parties and the UN sitting at a table, working out the political differences, you're in a much better position than having a US-led occupation trying to solve those differences and intervening as we regularly do in the constitution writing, in the setting of deadlines that the Iraqi people didn't want, etc. We need to let the Iraqis solve this themselves with the surrounding countries, not under the table as they're involved right now, but sitting at the table openly, being balanced by other neighbours and other countries in the region so that we know what everybody's agenda is. No-one's calling for an irresponsible departure from Iraq. We're looking for an adult, to use my opponent's argument; we're looking for an adult way of leaving and a mature way, and doing in the next six months what we didn't do in the last 33, which is participating in a political process that leaves Iraq better than it's currently going right now.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK, let me bring Raymond Tanter in here.
RAYMOND TANTER
James Zogby, if you announce that you're going to leave, what you are signalling to al-Qaeda in Iraq, either al-Qaeda should hunker down and wait until the date certain has occurred and then go after Iraqi troops, or you launch widespread attacks against American forces in order to get the credit, the credit for having ousted the American forces.
JAMES ZOGBY
We're losing more Americans every day now than we were a year ago. The point is that they already are. Here's the issue: if we announce we're leaving, the Iraqi government has a new and greater legitimacy than it's ever had before, number one. Number two, the insurgency loses its legitimacy and its credibility with those who it's currently supported, and number three, we will see other countries stepping to the table who currently will not step up to the table because they don't want to come in under an American umbrella, and one final point, with regard to the Gulf ...
RAYMOND TANTER
Did you purposely ignore my points about al-Qaeda in Iraq or did you forget that?
JAMES ZOGBY
No, no. They are evil, they are evil and they are enemies ...
RAYMOND TANTER
The al-Qaeda in Iraq will either hunker down or they will ...
JAMES ZOGBY
... but they are not the major part of this insurgency and we cannot ignore that reality. The baloney that's being offered about this being largely foreign is simply not true. There is an evil force in Iraq that is foreign, that is pursuing an aggressive anti-civilian agenda. They can be eliminated, and they will be eliminated by the Iraqis themselves. They're not going to be eliminated by us.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Ali Al Bayati.
ALI AL BAYATI
What I say to you is what I say to both my friends here; let the Iraqi people say what they want to say. It is up to the Iraqi government that's coming in to decide on the future of the multi-national force in Iraq. Allow the national assembly which is going to be elected, which is a constitutional one, decide on a time-table, then this will be the right time for the multi-national force to leave the country.
REG KEYS
Ali, as long as the coalition force is there, the violence will continue. They will always be a target. Now, if we announced a phased withdrawal, a given time-table, Iraq's political, religious and tribal leaders can all be approached and they can appeal to insurgents to lay down their weapons and let's have a soothing balm of reason I like to put it, and hopefully we can then see Iraq progress. She's had a mortal blow with this invasion but Iraq can mend itself.
TIM SEBASTIAN
All right. We've got a lot of hands up. There was a lady at the back.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
America and British armies invaded Iraq unlawfully in order to establish a system which would revolve around law. And what America was not, and Britain was not able to do in three years, how do we expect it to be done in 6 months, in such a short period of time?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Raymond Tanter.
RAYMOND TANTER
Look, at issue in this debate is not why and how the war started. At issue is what to do now, and my colleague Al Bayati says, 'Listen to the Iraqi people,' and I agree with that, and I also say, 'Think about the consequences of withdrawal for your security, for your security.' The smaller Gulf States will be under the tutelage, the suzerainty, of a nuclear armed Iran if there were a precipitous American withdrawal, if America's power has not determined a positive outcome in Iraq.
JAMES ZOGBY
Do not for a moment think that you will be less secure. You will be more secure, because here is the problem. America has lost such legitimacy because of this war. You need America and America needs to provide a protective umbrella in the Gulf. I agree completely, but we have lost such credibility that we've become a target even in the Gulf region. That is a danger to you. The sooner we end and end the occupation respectably, responsibly and maturely, the better off we'll be to be able to work with you as a partner.
TIM SEBASTIAN
James Zogby, let me hear from the questioner again. Which side do you come down on, by the way?
AUDIENCE Q (F)
I think they should not leave immediately.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Why? Why do you think they should stay for the time being?
AUDIENCE Q (F)
Because Iraq at the moment is not economically, or its infrastructure is not as strong at themoment, and if those armies leave, then I think this idealistic time which will be presented, six months, it's not enough, and I believe that we ...
REG KEYS
Well, how long do you think they should remain there for? In nearly three years, we've got resulting chaos on the streets of Iraq, the equivalent of a London bombing every day virtually in Iraq, when will it be safe?
JAMES ZOGBY
And terrorism is spreading throughout the world.
REG KEYS
Absolutely.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
But don't you think it's going to be more insecure? Iraq is going to be much more insecure once America and Britain, the British Army goes out. There is more chance ...
JAMES ZOGBY
No, 'Democracy is messy,' George Bush said that the other day. It never comes easy, but the point is that it also never comes under occupation. People need to work this out among themselves. As long as America is there as a target and people who work with America are a target, then Iraq will remain insecure. If America leaves, the government has more legitimacy, and other countries that are not a target can better provide security assistance than America can right now.
TIM SEBASTIAN
All right. Can we please keep the answers relatively short. There are a lot of questions out there. Lady in the second row.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
OK, this is a question to Mr. Ali Al Bayati. If Iraqis don't respect each other enough and murder their neighbour, how can America force them to respect human life?
ALI AL BAYATI
Can I say to you that the Iraqi people respect each other like any other nation. We have lived together for centuries in this country. Those people who don't respect the Iraqi people are the same people, the people who fought Saddam, who were murdering Iraqis, who went into Kuwait, raped women, annexed Kuwait. It is those people who are carrying all the insurgency inside Iraq. The Iraqi people ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
They were Iraqis too, weren't they, they were Iraqis too?
ALI AL BAYATI
They were Iraqis too but they are terrorists, they are people who were in government, they were subjecting people to torture, death and so on, so it is those people who don't respect any other people regardless of who they are. But the Iraqi people, you know them and I know them. Ask any people about the Iraqi people and you will know them. They are peace-loving people, they lived with each other for a long time. It is only the minority who are causing this problem.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Gentleman at the back.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
My question is to the gentleman opposing the motion. Now, I think you are using the excuse of rebuilding Iraq or stabilising Iraq as an excuse to stay forever. I mean, what measures, what strategy did you have to withdraw from Iraq? You're not rebuilding the Iraq infrastructure. The way you build the Iraqi Army, you based it on tribal, you based it on a religious basis, you're not putting together a homogeneous Iraqi Army, so you're not taking serious steps to rebuild Iraq, and also you are interfering in the Iraqi affairs every day, so you don't have even a strategy to withdraw from Iraq, and I think you're just using it as an excuse to stay forever.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Raymond Tanter.
RAYMOND TANTER
The strategy that the Bush administration is moving toward is to move American forces closer to the border of Iran and Syria, away from population centres in Iraq, to make sure that the American forces are close enough to come to the aid of the Iraqi forces but far enough away to give the Iraqis a sense that they are in their own country and not under occupation. That is the strategy that I think the Bush administration is moving toward.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
But I think the army you've built is not from all the Iraqi walks of life. I mean, the army is full of a certain religious type and you are using them against the other religions and opposition, so you are not really building a homogeneous Iraqi Army that will take care for Iraq, and you're using this Iraqi Army or so-called Iraqi Army to attack their own Iraqis.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Let him answer that.
RAYMOND TANTER
No, I'll yield to my colleague.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You're being unusually shy.
RAYMOND TANTER
The Iraqi Nationalists are in the Iraqi Army. They're armed militias that are integrating themselves into an Iraqi National movement called the Army. The Army is one of the most important institutions in Iraqi society, and I'm bullish, I'm optimistic that the Iraqi Army will help to stabilise that country, and as the Iraqi Army stands up, America's can stand down.
TIM SEBASTIAN
That sounds all very well but in September the American commander said there was only one fully combat-ready unit in Iraq, one single one out of 115 battalions. Who's going to stand up? One unit?
ALI AL BAYATI
Can I answer that? It's talking about combating, it's not talking about people who are ready to combat, and they are two different things.
TIM SEBASTIAN
I don't understand the difference.
ALI AL BAYATI
The Iraqi Army and the Iraqi forces and the police are being trained up to a standard. Some of them haven't reached that standard in combat, but they are coming up to it soon.
TIM SEBASTIAN
After 2½ years, you have one unit out of 115 battalions, that is fully combat-ready. That is not great, is it?
ALI AL BAYATI
Talking 2½ years of different stages into political process, the Iraqi Army is coming up. You look at first, the operation was only by the multi-national forces but now it's joint forces and eventually it will be Iraqi forces only.
REG KEYS
Can I just quickly make a quick point? I think what the coalition has failed to take on board here, Ali, is the strength of tribal and religious culture in Iraq. Now, my son was engaged in training Iraqi police. On completion of training, they would be given a brand new Kalashnikov, but he just felt that it was futile in a way because they would then report to their religious and tribal leaders for their duties. They wouldn't do what the British forces wanted them to do, and they would not arrest anybody from their own tribe.
ALI AL BAYATI
Well, that's only right if they don't ask what the British forces do, it's what the Iraqi people want them to do.
REG KEYS
Yes, but they won't carry out their duties as their training ...
ALI AL BAYATI
And that's what I say; you have to listen to the Iraqi people to carry out their duties.
REG KEYS
Well, this is what I'm saying, if we can't build a secure ...
ALI AL BAYATI
You can build a secure Iraq. You can build and train the forces but don't expect them to listen to everything from you.
REG KEYS
They resent being trained, Ali, by the coalition.
ALI AL BAYATI
You have to listen to the Iraqi government ...
JAMES ZOGBY
It is pathetic we're having this discussion right now. Before this war started, and it is important to talk about the beginning, before this war started, we asked the administration the question, what are the consequences of this war? What are the terms of commitment? What are the costs? They lied about all three. The lie was not the weapons of mass destruction. It was that they did not know or did not tell us the unravelling that would occur. My point to you is, 33 months later, no plan then, no plan now. When you vote on a resolution like this, you send a message and that is that they had better understand that people expect more from them and better from them and quicker from them than 33 more months of the same stuff. They should have known this before they started it. They never cared about the people of Iraq. One month after this started, I had on my television show a live audience from Baghdad debating with students. We said to them, 'How's the situation now?' No services, no power, no security, they could not go out on the street. It's still the same in many neighbourhoods.
TIM SEBASTIAN
James Zogby, be brief please.
JAMES ZOGBY
The point is that do not reward the US or the UK with support for an indefinite stay. They have to learn to do in the next six months what they failed to do in the last 33.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Gentleman in the fourth row there.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
I just have a simple question. Both of you who are speaking for the motion have said that somebody else will replace these troops. If the UN has been targeted already, the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, journalists, humanitarians, what makes you think that, you know, a multi-national force from France and Spain and Brazil or something like that won't get targeted as well?
JAMES ZOGBY
Actually what I think is necessary is an Arab and Muslim force, the only one that will work. It has to come in under the mandate of the United Nations and yes, it may be targeted, but the point is that it will be viewed with more legitimacy. When I'm being asked to listen to the Iraqi people, unfortunately or fortunately my brother and I happen to be pollsters, and we've polled in Iraq, and the simple answer is that for the last 3 years, we were getting the same consistent answer, 80% see us as an occupation, and almost two-thirds want us out now. That is the bottom line and therefore someone else has to provide the security because we've become the target and others who have less at stake and who are needed more in this region, you need America to be respected. It is losing credibility by its behaviour.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Let the questioner come back here.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
But is that to say that Egyptian and Syrian and Iranian forces ...
JAMES ZOGBY
Not Syrian and Iranian but there are other countries that have less at stake..
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Like who?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Reg Keys, you want to come in here.
REG KEYS
The crux of the issue here is that whoever comes in to assist with Iraq's regeneration, they have to be invited, whereas before the country was barnstormed and whipped into shape with the bomb and bullet. You have to have been invited.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
By who? Who are these people?
JAMES ZOGBY
A legitimate Iraqi government.
REG KEYS
By a legitimate Iraqi government.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
How are you going to make that?
JAMES ZOGBY
It's being done while we speak. There is a democratic government being elected. I agree with that. The point is that they are not well served right now by the United States and the UK being there, that's the unfortunate reality. It hurts me to say it but it's true.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Let's move on. Lady in the second row.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
I would like to ask Mr. Zogby, what do you believe is the main reason or the real purpose of the Americans going into Iraq?
JAMES ZOGBY
I actually think that the reasons given were not the reasons. It was not about weapons of mass destruction. It really was about wanting to establish American power, and I think that they believed that they could do it. The Project for the New American Century, many of the people who wrote the paper were people in the Pentagon and people in the White House who actually engineered this, wanted to show that America could do it and therefore establish itself as a power that could not be questioned. It failed. We ended up weaker, not stronger. Our strength does not come from our bullets and our guns, it comes from our values. We're losing our values. After Abu Ghraib, after torture, after rendition, we are losing them. I want us to get back to who we really are as a country.
TIM SEBASTIAN
I want to ask Raymond Tanter what he thinks the war was about.
RAYMOND TANTER
Even though that is not the issue at the table, I'll be happy to speak to it. Weapons of mass destruction were thought by every intelligence service in the world, including this one, that Saddam had biological and chemical weapons and was trying to get nuclear weapons. Those intelligence estimates were wrong. Once the troops are there, at issue was, what do you do? Someone said to me today, 'Oil?' The United States was getting 2½ million barrels of oil per day under Saddam Hussein. The way America gets oil is to do it the old-fashioned way, is to pay for it. You don't invade a country to get oil, you buy the oil.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You sir, in the second row.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
My question is for Mr. Al Bayati. You said that the Iraqi government is looking for security, but the problem is if you were aware of it that during the invasion and now, the US government has tortured a lot of people in prisons and we're all aware of that. We've seen those scandals in the prisons, and you're talking about security in Iraq? You're talking about people not being killed? There are some innocent people killed. There was a wedding that the US government bombed.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK, what's your question?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
My question is, if he's talking about security, what's your definition of security?
ALI AL BAYATI
This is why I said we have to ask the constitutional Iraqi government that's coming now to set a time and look at the situation in Iraq, why what's happening in the north and the south and the west, and then ask the multi-national forces to leave. You're talking about the invasion.
TIM SEBASTIAN
He's asking what your definition of security is.
ALI AL BAYATI
The definition of security, that ordinary people ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
Implying that you don't have any at the moment.
ALI AL BAYATI
You are invited to Baghdad any time you want, Tim.
TIM SEBASTIAN
I'll pass for the moment, thank you.
ALI AL BAYATI
What I like to see in security is what I have seen here in this country. It's a beautiful country, it's a young country, that you can go to schools, you can send your kids to school without being blown up. There are two different issues here. We are talking about ordinary people who go to the street, and we are talking about soldiers and armies. There are two different issues here, and it is very clear when I talk about security, what we need. That security cannot be reached without finishing all the terrorist activities that are taking place on one hand. On the other hand we have to have a successful political process that will give Iraq its full freedom and its full democracy. That's what security is all about.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
But again, you're talking about the US being there, or the coalition forces. The problem is when are they going to get out of the country? I mean, there wasn't a plan in the beginning.
ALI AL BAYATI
Again I say what I have said before. This is up to the constitutional government to look at the situation and review it.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
What have the interim government done so far?
ALI AL BAYATI
Can I tell you? Resolution 1546 states clearly that it's up to the interim government if they see fit, if they ask the multi-national force to leave, they will leave, and it's up to the constitutional government that is coming now, if they see fit, to ask the multi-national forces to leave, they will ask them.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You believe they will leave if they're asked, do you?
ALI AL BAYATI
Definitely, absolutely. We have no doubt about that.
REG KEYS
No, no, no, no.
ALI AL BAYATI
Because the Iraqi people, if the constitutional government which is coming in from the Iraqi people, if they ask the multi-national forces to leave, they will leave, there's no doubt about that, but I can confirm to you and to everybody, nobody likes to be occupied. You don't like to be occupied, nobody likes to be occupied.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Well, you seem like you are liking it. I mean, exactly. This is what happened.
ALI AL BAYATI
You are confusing between two things, the existence of forces, you have forces here, there are forces in Saudi Arabia, there are forces all over the world. There are forces in Japan, there are 70,00 American soldiers ...
AUDIENCE Q (M)
But they're not killing people.
ALI AL BAYATI
Can I finish? There are two different things. Forces are with a constitution that is decided by your government, by your elected government, or by force. It is legal, the multi-national forces, it is legal now and it is up to the Iraqi government to decide on it.
JAMES ZOGBY
You know something? It's also up to us, and let me say that for a moment, because I have nephews who have served in the military in Iraq. What's happened to them shouldn't have happened to them as young kids. What's happening to our values as a country, and we have something to say about it, not just you, which is why there is a movement in America to call into question this whole thing, how we got into it and how we get out of it. We have kids who have joined, three weeks later find themselves as prison guards. Never should have happened. No supervision, no adult supervision, and the thing went into a mess. We have lost our moral standing and our kids are being demoralised and it's hurting my country.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Let's just have a reminder of the motion before the House, which is that 'This House believes that foreign forces should leave Iraq immediately,' that's what we're discussing here tonight. Lady in the third row, you have a question.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
My question is for Mr. Tanter. You said that if the American troops left Iraq, other troops from all over Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia will take its place. Why do you think that?
RAYMOND TANTER
Thank you for that question. If American troops and British troops left suddenly, a vacuum that is present would be exacerbated, the vacuum would be greater, and that would draw in not foreign troops necessarily, but it would draw in paramilitary groups, the Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Jerusalem Brigade, they're from Iran. We would have more foreign fighters coming in. I never imagine, but I might be wrong, the Turks might decide that they want to bring Kurdistan, Iraqi Kurdistan, under their wing because this is their opportunity, so the last thing I want is to create greater instability in Iraq and the way you avoid greater instability is to have a reasoned draw-down where you don't announce in advance when you are departing.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Are you happy with that?
AUDIENCE Q (F)
But if they didn't leave suddenly, do you think that vacuum will happen and other troops will come?
RAYMOND TANTER
If American troops did not leave suddenly, the political process clock would catch up with the insurgency clock. Everyone in this panel wants American troops out. George Bush wants American troops out.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
He wants them out?
RAYMOND TANTER
He wants them out because ...
AUDIENCE Q (F)
No, do you want them out?
RAYMOND TANTER
I want American boys and girls to come home. I don't want them in faraway distant lands. Every American wants them to come home. At issue is once you start a war, as Colin Powell said, 'If you break it, you own it,' and that means you have to repair it, and the repairing is under way because the political process is succeeding.
TIM SEBASTIAN
All right. Gentleman at the end of the row there.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Actually my question is for all five of you. You speak of this problem politically, religiously, etc. I just want to ask, should the US leave Iraq now or later, how would Iraq be helped economically? I mean, petrol is a source which is, if used right, could help Iraq evolve progress and maybe get on the global market. Could Iraq do it alone or does it need assistance?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Mr. Al Bayati.
ALI AL BAYATI
The Iraqi people embarked on a big operation and that is democracy. In order for that to succeed, they need all of you and they need all the international community to stand by them to succeed, and if they fail, it's not the Iraqi people who fail, it's all of us who fail, so let's stick to them and make that process succeed. Thank you.
JAMES ZOGBY
No-one is talking about America pulling out and no-one coming in. We're talking about if America pulls out and pulls out not precipitously but responsibly over a period of time. Other countries can be empowered to come to the table, which they currently will not do because they don't want to come in under American domination and under America's umbrella. They want the economic benefits of working with Iraq, they want the neighbourhood to be secure, and if everyone is participating in the political process and in the economic reconstruction, it can work. It can't work right now because as long as, unfortunately, my country is there and a target, the insurgency is hitting the infrastructure, is hitting the government, is hitting the military and is doing damage in the country. I think other countries can do a better job of peace-keeping than the current situation right now.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Do we have anybody in the audience from Iraq, as a matter of interest? You sir, how do you feel? Do you feel that foreign forces should get out of Iraq immediately?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Well, for me I want to say that I want them to stay in Iraq. Well, I want them to stay for a while to repair what they ruined, like the electricity and everything. Before the invasion in 2003, the electricity was good, it was 24/7, but now it's like four hours a day, even less in Baghdad, the capital, so I want them to stay at least to repair what they ruined and then they can leave.
REG KEYS
But as long as they're there, if they do repair it, it will be targeted again because it's been repaired by the coalition. They are seen as the infidel and the occupier, and it'll never move forward whilst the occupation proceeds, because anything they repair, it will be destroyed. My son's first duties were put on oil pipeline security. They were being blown and targeted every day, and eventually when they withdrew from that area, the attacks on the pipeline stopped.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Well, that's true but, well, that's true that the terrorist people, they destroy everything too, but, I don't know how to say it, that's true that the Iraqi people can repair it.
REG KEYS
Oh, they have the knowledge, they have the technology, they can do it themselves. People tend to underestimate the capability of the Iraqi people. Given the equipment, given the knowledge, although they've got great knowledge already for extracting the oil, they will do it.
TIM SEBASTIAN
But let's just have an answer to the key point which you made. Raymond Tanter, he wants you to repair the ruin that you've created in Iraq.
RAYMOND TANTER
Two points. First of all, why blame America for everything that goes wrong in Iraq? The insurgents are blowing up the pipelines, not US forces.
REG KEYS
Not before the occupation.
RAYMOND TANTER
One of the problems is the incentive structure that's been set up.
TIM SEBASTIAN
What does that mean?
RAYMOND TANTER
Yes, it's a good question. If you are a member of a tribe and the pipeline goes through your territory, you make money if the pipeline is blown up and you get all kinds of infra-structure, yes, you get money from the coalition if the pipeline is blown up.
JAMES ZOGBY
Get rid of the coalition and guess what?
RAYMOND TANTER
No, no, but you don't blame the coalition. I'm not a member, Jim Zogby, of the Blame America First card. Anyway, I'll go back to the infrastructure problem.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Well, you don't invade countries to get liked, do you?
REG KEYS
I am proud to be British and James here is proud to be American, but I'm ashamed of my country and its actions in Iraq.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Ali Al Bayati.
ALI AL BAYATI
Can I tell you something, and these are the true facts about Iraq. For 35 years Saddam never invested in the infrastructure of Iraq. You haven't visited Iraq prior to the fall of the regime, and if you were in Iraq all the electricity in Baghdad, it was drawn out from all the areas outside Baghdad to Baghdad region, yet Nasiriyah was getting one hour only a day in the heat. Basrah was getting three hours in the heat. Now the station in Nasiriyah is saying, 'This station is in Nasiriyah. We come first, you come second Baghdad, so we will get what we get from it and then we will give you the surplus of it,' so the facts of the electricity ... Now, the pipelines, you're talking about the pipelines, Saddam was paying the tribes in order to keep the pipelines running, so all the facts, you've got to get all the facts right before concluding anything.
TIM SEBASTIAN
We need to find out if there's anybody else from Iraq here. Any other Iraqi students perhaps? Yes, lady in the back. How do you feel, do you feel foreign forces should leave Iraq immediately?
AUDIENCE Q (F)
I'm for the motion.
TIM SEBASTIAN
You're for the motion.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
Yes. You said that you wish for the American troops to leave in an adult manner. Is it fair then to say that with the invasion of Iraq, with the invasion of the troops and the torturing and whatnot that has gone on in the prisons so far, was that carried out in an adult manner, so is it fair now to bring to the table, 'Well, let's do this in an adult way.'
RAYMOND TANTER
Well, torture is not US policy. Torture is an aberration. I'm opposed to it, Secretary Rumsfeld's opposed to it, and the people who authorised it should be punished. But that is not what America is. America's the John F. Kennedy statement, 'We will go anywhere to defend any friends that the light of liberty can survive.' That's what America is about, Americans going to Bosnia, going to Haiti, going to Somalia, to help on humanitarian crises.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
Well then you ask us why is America held to blame for everything that has gone wrong in Iraq today. Perhaps the answer to your question is, why did America feel it was responsible to go in and fix Iraq in the first place?
RAYMOND TANTER
Every intelligence service thought that Saddam was trying to acquire nuclear weapons and had constituted mobile biological labs and had chemical weapons of mass destruction.
TIM SEBASTIAN
I don't think that was her point. I think her point was, if you go in, you take responsibility and you also have to take the blame when things go wrong.
RAYMOND TANTER
I fully agree that if you go in and break things, you should repair them and that is what the United States and Great Britain are trying to do. That's what the $4 billion a month for the Iraq war is trying to do, reconstruct the country.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
Well, on your question of why are we being blamed now, it's completely invalid.
REG KEYS
The question was, why did you go to fix Iraq when it wasn't broken?
RAYMOND TANTER
Oh, Iraq wasn't broken under Saddam Hussein?
REG KEYS
No, no, as far ...
RAYMOND TANTER
The infrastructure was being repaired?
JAMES ZOGBY
This was not about the infrastructure. It really wasn't about Saddam Hussein. It was about weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist.
RAYMOND TANTER
That's what I just said.
JAMES ZOGBY
There was an inspection regime in place, we undercut it and we humiliated it. We used the most disgraceful language to describe public servants of the United Nations and the world community. Mohamed El Baradei suffered enormously, Hans Blix from the critique that he received from my administration.
RAYMOND TANTER
There you go again, blaming America.
JAMES ZOGBY
Look, I am not blaming America. You may not say that to me. I love my country and I love the people of my country and I love the young men and women who serve my armed services to defend me. They're not defending me in Iraq. They're making my life more at risk in Iraq, and that is one of the reasons I oppose this, because I love my country as much as I do. It hurts me to criticise it. It hurts Reg to criticise it, but we've lost a great deal.
REG KEYS
We have.
JAMES ZOGBY
The point is to send a message to America, the time is now to leave and leave responsibly. Do not leave the way you entered irresponsibly and unilaterally, do it right.
REG KEYS
The best way is to support our troops, and we do support our troops, but we have them back.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Gentleman in the fifth row.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
To those arguing for the motion, isn't the withdrawal of the troops just the easiest solution? I mean, you started the thing without the approval of the United Nations in the first place. Shouldn't you have the decency to follow up and continue and actually give democracy to Iraq?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Reg Keys.
REG KEYS
Well, it was never a bad democracy in the first place because as we've just said, that the Prime Minister said Saddam could stay in power if he handed over WMD, but how are we going to ensure this democracy if we stay there, because the longer we stay there, the more the possibility that Al Qaeda will cross the borders, the border's now wide open. Not a lot can be said for Saddam Hussein, I agree, but at least the borders were tight, the borders were secure, now they're porous. It just soaks up terrorism and the longer the coalition is there, the more they will be targeted and the less security for the region.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
It was obvious from the beginning that the task was going to be very difficult, and now people are just realising that it's very difficult. You withdraw the troops, it was obvious from the beginning that it was going to be very hard.
JAMES ZOGBY
Nobody said that we just withdraw the troops. What I said was that in the next 6 months we have an opportunity, an opportunity to withdraw responsibly, to re-deploy, I would say, responsibly, to re-deploy in the region over the horizon, I agree with that, but we need to implement a political agenda in the region, we need to implement a security regime in the region so that we provide stability in the wake of a withdrawal. No-one's talking about a precipitous pulling out and leaving a mess. We're talking about the fact that America can no longer do the job because it's become a target and part of the problem.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK. Time is marching on. The lady at the back.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
I have two questions for Mr. Ali. You said, and I quote, 'Let the Iraqi people say whatever they want to say, and the constitutional government will decide.' Do you describe this as democracy? And also you said that you don't want surrounding countries interfering in Iraq's politics. Are you not aware that by sending in the American troops to liberate Iraq, you were interfering with Iraqi politics, so why is it OK for the US to interfere?
ALI AL BAYATI
Regarding your first question about the constitution, if you have a permanent constitutional government in place, and if you have a National Assembly, elected by 10 million Iraqi people, these are the legitimate government that will take decisions for the country. The National Assembly, 275 of them, will represent the wide spread of the Iraqi people. Ultimately these are the people who will take political decisions, similar to your country here. It is the power of the government who will take the decisions, and that is the natural democracy all over the world. I don't know, do we have any other democracy?
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK, lady in the middle there.
AUDIENCE Q (F)
My question is, if the foreign troops pull out immediately and leave Iraq to rebuild and stabilise their country on their own, how likely is a civil war, considering current conflicts between different religious groups in Iraq?
JAMES ZOGBY
I think it's actually less likely. I think that when Iraqis know that the umbrella and the target of America is gone, the prospect is greater that they find a way to reconcile and resolve among themselves, as political parties. I also do not call for precipitous withdrawal. I think that the meeting that took place in Cairo needs to become not a single meeting but a permanent standing security and political arrangement, so that the parties are in constant conversation with each other about resolving the issues. The constitution has good points but there also are some difficult issues that have to be resolved immediately following the election. The best place to help resolve those is in that kind of permanent security political arrangement, that has a UN mandate, that has legitimacy beyond the United States of America. I don't want to see my ambassador going in at the last minute and jaw boning to change it because then we become responsible. We broke it, I don't think we can fix it, but I do think that we can empower the United Nations and the surrounding countries to help fix it.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Ali Al Bayati.
ALI AL BAYATI
And that was the reason some of the people say, if you go against the regime in Iraq and change it, you will have a civil war and Iraq will be fragmented. Iraq is more united now than any other time. There is no civil war. The Iraqi society are one society, they are one family. There are intermarriages in the tribal, the tribal system in Iraq ensures that there is no civil war at all.
TIM SEBASTIAN
One family? They're deeply divided. This is a dysfunctional government that can hardly agree on anything.
ALI AL BAYATI
On the other hand, they are deeply united in fighting terrorism, 8½ million people went to the ballot boxes, 10 million people went to ratify the national constitution written by the Iraqi people, and you will see more people joining the election. That is a united family.
TIM SEBASTIAN
45% think it's legitimate to attack the coalition forces.
ALI AL BAYATI
You're talking about two different things here. You're talking about 45%, that is, we have to look at the real fact, where did that place, how did you do that survey?
JAMES ZOGBY
It's interesting because the Sunni population was almost unified in supporting those attacks on coalition forces, but you know what else? The Shia community was divided and there are significant segments of that community that support the insurgency. Look, I do not disagree with you that there is an Iraqi identity that will survive our withdrawal. I believe it and I believe that Iraq will find a way to solve its problems itself, but do not think for a minute that the American presence is secure because the Iraqi people do not support the insurgents. Too many of them do.
ALI AL BAYATI
There are two different issues here. You're talking about differences and political abuse. That exists everywhere else. We are talking about united people killing each other. The Iraqi people are united against terrorism. But the different views, political views exist everywhere, of course it exists.
REG KEYS
Political views, we don't blow each other up, they're blowing each other up in Iraq.
ALI AL BAYATI
I think you don't know what's going on in Iraq.
TIM SEBASTIAN
All right, gentleman in the front row.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
My question is to Mr. Tanter. It's always said that foreign policy is an extension of domestic politics, and I would like to bring the American politics into discussion here. To what extent, in your judgment, Mr. Tanter, President Bush does not want to withdraw from Iraq because of some domestic constraints, specifically feeling his legitimacy or approval rate will drop down. I think there is no discussion in the States about withdrawal. The discussion is about redeployment.
TIM SEBASTIAN
OK, can we let him answer the question please?
RAYMOND TANTER
Foreign policy is somewhat an extension of domestic politics and that's one of the reasons why President Bush's approval rating has gone down, because of the Iraq War. President Bush wants out of Iraq, and the way you get out of Iraq is to come up with some kind of a plan that would empower the Iraqi people to control their own destiny.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Does he want to get out for domestic political reasons?
RAYMOND TANTER
For domestic political reasons, he would love to get out. His public opinion polls rating are 40% because of the war. The war brings nothing.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
But he knows that if he gets out immediately, his approval rate is going to drop more and more rapidly.
RAYMOND TANTER
I doubt that. If President Bush went on the air ...
AUDIENCE Q (M)
I think you should consult the public polls.
RAYMOND TANTER
... and said, 'We've set a date certain following the Zogby/Reg policy,' his approval ratings would go up. In Vietnam I might add that when the bombing stopped, approval ratings went up. When the bombing resumed, approval ratings went up again because the Americans wanted out of the Vietnam quagmire and so America wants out of Iraq.
REG KEYS
Just very quickly, Raymond, President Bush has just recently stated that he will not accept anything but outright victory in Iraq. How on earth is he going to achieve this? What does he mean by victory?
RAYMOND TANTER
Victory doesn't mean defeating the insurgency. It means three things. I'll just give you one. It means simply setting up a political process that will allow for intelligence to flow to the Iraqi government and they can defeat the insurgents. Counter-insurgency is not what American great military forces do.
TIM SEBASTIAN
That's victory?
RAYMOND TANTER
Yes. That was a dumbing down version of victory.
TIM SEBASTIAN
That's a new definition. Gentleman in the fifth row.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Well, my question is, why should the forces stay, those are army forces, their language is killing and destroying, so they must leave Iraq and there must be someone who builds, someone who ...
TIM SEBASTIAN
I'm sorry, do you have a question?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Yes. Why should they stay? Why should the army stay?
RAYMOND TANTER
Why should the American Army stay?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Yes.
RAYMOND TANTER
The American Army should leave once the Iraqi Army can stand up. You cannot precipitously, suddenly withdraw and exacerbate a political vacuum that already exists. You don't want to do that. You want to be responsibly departing by land, by sea and by air.
TIM SEBASTIAN
Gentleman in the blue shirt, you have a question.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
What good and convincing examples do you have to give to the Iraqi people of foreign occupation, setting up democracy in other countries?
RAYMOND TANTER
Japan and Germany.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
What about Somalia, Vietnam?
TIM SEBASTIAN
Very different circumstances.
RAYMOND TANTER
He asked me for two examples, he asked me for one, I gave him two.
TIM SEBASTIAN
A little disingenuous, don't you think? You accept that?
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Well, I'm not convinced because Japan, it took a lot of lives to set up this democracy, it wasn't this kind of democracy. This wasn't a democracy, it was demolishing.
RAYMOND TANTER
You remember in France and in Italy and Greece, the Communists began to make inroads after World War 2, and many people started losing hope. Well, we have to stay the course long enough for my colleague and his people to defend their own representative institutions.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
Do you realise it might take hundreds of years?
RAYMOND TANTER
I've got time.
AUDIENCE Q (M)
It could.
TIM SEBASTIAN
The lady right at the back. You have your hand up
AUDIENCE Q (F)
What do you think will happen to the trial of Saddam if the troops went out, left Iraq?
JAMES ZOGBY
I think the trial will continue. I think that the trial will have created a legitimacy. I think that the Iraqi people want an opportunity to try him for his crimes. I think it's been badly handled to date unfortunately, but no doubt crimes were committed and crimes must be answered to, and I think that we do not give the Iraqi people enough credit for the fact that they can solve this on their own. They can deal with a lot of these problems on their own, and they can balance competing forces in Iraq on their own, and we have to give them a chance. We've been enabling them right now to sort of operate under a protective cover. I think that they need less of that and frankly they would benefit and they would have greater legitimacy if they did it on their own and it weren't viewed as, I mean, Saddam would not be able to say to the judge, 'You are not legitimate,' and have 40 some odd percent of the people believe him. He would be speaking to a judge of the Iraqi government with no American presence, and he'd have to answer to the crimes he committed.

TIM SEBASTIAN
All right. I know you still have a lot of hands up but we've come to the point in the proceedings where we're going to vote on the motion, that 'This House believes that foreign forces should leave Iraq immediately.' Would you please take your voting machines. If you want to vote for the motion, press button 1, the yellow one. If you want to vote against, please press button 2, the red one, and would you do it now please and press just once.
So the vote is coming up there on the screen, and the results, 69.5% for the motion, 30.5% against. The motion is resoundingly carried. Thank you very much indeed. Professor Tanter looks very shocked, but all it remains for me to do now is to thank him and the other panellists for coming. Thank you, the audience, for making your way here. We will be back in the form of the Doha Debates in a month's time. Please join us then. For now, thank you very much for coming, have a safe journey home. Good night.