"That means that several things will immediately follownot months or years down the linebut, immediately: An agreement with relevant forces in Iraq, for a disengagement of U.S. forces from conflict with any part of the Iraqi population. This means the immediate withdrawal of U.S. military forces, into designated bases. That's the withdrawal from Iraq; the withdrawal of U.S. forces from continued, active military engagement. And, if nobody comes in there to shoot at them, they're not going to shoot back. That's the first step.
"Now, the second step, as I've indicated, is to say, 'We decide that we want the United Nations to be a responsible agency, for supervising this area, while we're trying to get Iraq reconstructed.' This means that the Ba'ath Party officials, except for some people who may be objectionable to all concerned, will come back into full functioningthey should have never stopped functioning; the civilian authorities in Iraq, which were functioning, unless they have some objectionable thing about them, personally, which all parties agree on, they come back to their jobs.
"That means, we now have some hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, who are now working, to carry out the reconstruction of their own country. Our job, in the United States, is to cooperate to ensure that that reconstruction is successful. We recognize, of course, the right of Iraq to build a military force, to rebuild it, as a capable defense capability, for the nation of Iraq. In other words, we're going to give them back their country, the way it should have been done, at the end of the so-called hostilities. Their country.
"This will only work, if other things are done at the same time. ...
"That means that we have to have a kind of agreement, among the nations of the region, which ensures that a peace, once achieved, will be stable. And peace can be had right away, if forces in Iraq agree, and this means, of course, Sistani and company have to be brought into the picture. You've got to unite the Iraqi people about the rebuilding of their own country. And they have to reunite themselves. We can't do it from the outside. We've had enough of Bremer, and his ideas.
"That means we have to have an agreement with the region, as I've laid out. You must finally say, that Southwest Asianot the 'Middle East': that's a British colonial termSouthwest Asia is dominated by Arabs (although it's not entirely Arab), this area has to have its own policy. ...
"But, they have to make an agreement. So therefore, we say, 'What kind of agreement?' We have one experience which worked. It worked in 1648. And remember, from about 1511 to 1648, Europe was bled, almost bled to death, by religious warfare, orchestrated by those who were trying to maintain, and go back, to the old feudal system! This was led by the Spanish and Austrian Habsburgsbut also by the Venetian bankers. And Europe was torn, in orchestrated religious wars, organized largely by Venice, the Venetian bankers, and led by Spanish troops! It was one of the greatest crimes against humanity! You want to talk about anti-Semitism? Talk about Tomás Torquemada, the Grand Inquisitor: An anti-Semite who wanted to kill every Jew! Hitler was simply a copy of that.
"So, this kind of thing was going on, until 1648. When Cardinal Mazarin, from France, who had been the Pope's peace negotiator earlier, led in reaching an agreement among the powers, called the Treaty of Westphalia. Which agreement was based on giving the 'advantage to the other' by agreement: That is, no decision shall be made, which is contrary to providing a benefit to the other nation, or the other people. And therefore, to establish a community of commonality of interest, based, not on saying, 'What do I want, from them?' 'I will give them what they need. And, I expect them to do the same, for me.'
"We have to have that kind of peace in the Middle East. We have a long period of religious warfare, and similar kinds of warfare, throughout the region. A warfare which is going back to the time of the Ottoman Empire, and earlier. The British have been in there since the beginning of the 19th Century, running wars, managing the area by getting people to shoot each other, within the area. This kind of thing.
"You have the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which has been going on for a long time. You can't get peace, by negotiating by contract, contract terms under those conditions. You have to bring to bear, a principle, which will bring about peace. You have to use the very shock, of the horror, which people have gone through, the insecurity, the nightmare, to say, 'Do you finally want peace?'
"And that kind of shock, creates a revolutionary situation, in which people say, 'You're right. We were wrong. We were shooting each otherand what did it get us? Now, we're going to have peace.'
"And the United States has to be the sponsor of that idea. And foster agreement among nations. Use the United Nations, and every other asset in the book, to bring nations in this region together, and to foster the idea of a general development program, including economic development, for the region. ... The Middle East can be an area of richness for the future, but we have to conquer the sand. We have to bring in water. We have to develop power. We have to develop agriculture. We have to turn wasteland, into land for habitation.
"We should be the sponsors of thatso the minute, that the President of the United States, the Executive branch, says, 'This is the policy,' it all begins right there, that day, that minute; the wheels go into effect immediately. And the United States troops will stay there only, to the extent that the free consent of the Iraqi people wants them there, to assist in the security and reconstruction."