Promoting Free and Fair Elections in Iraq: NGOs and Building the Political Process

3:00 P.M. EDT

MR. DENIG: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Washington Foreign Press Center. Welcome, also, to journalists assembled in our New York Foreign Press Center. For those whom I haven't seen today for our earlier briefing, I want to wish you a very happy New Year with every success and as much prosperity as your media organizations can muster.

For the briefing this afternoon, we wanted to get in some experts from outside the United States Government, since the efforts for the elections in Iraq are being led by the Government of Iraq, with some assistance from experts from international NGOs and other organizations.

And so we're very pleased this afternoon to be able to present experts from two of the American organizations that have been working to assist the Iraqis in their preparations for their elections. To my immediate left, next to me, is Kenneth Wollack, the President of the National Democratic Institute; and right next to him is Judy Van Rest, the Executive Vice President of the International Republican Institute.

Both of our briefers will have an initial opening statement, and after that, will be very happy to take your questions.

Ken.

MR. WOLLACK: Well, thank you, and Happy New Year to everybody. Judy and I will hopefully be quite brief and then open up to more informal give and take.

For those of you who are not familiar with either the National Democratic Institute or the International Republican Institute, let me just take a couple of minutes to explain who we are. These were organizations that were established some 20 years ago. We are the result of an act of Congress that established the National Endowment for Democracy. And that act envisioned institutions that were affiliated with American institutions that could work overseas to support democratic institutions and processes similar to the German Party Foundations and other organizations that were established prior to us.
We've been operating, now, for 20 years. The chairman of my organization is Madeleine Albright, the former Secretary of State in the United States, who was the founding vice chair of NDI when former Vice President Walter Mondale was chairman of the organization. And we work today in about 50 countries around the world in supporting the development of political parties, the development of civic organizations, parliamentary reforms, civil/military relations, free and fair election processes.

One thing -- and I'm still trying to explain this to my mother after 20 years -- but there's one thing important to note about both organizations. This is not simply an American enterprise, nor is this an American export. We do very little promoting of democracy, but rather, supporting those in other countries who are trying to make a transition to more open, pluralistic political systems and trying to assist political leaders and civic leaders around the world who are trying to build democratic institutions. There is very little imposition, there is very little instruction, but rather an effort to share experiences and expertise from other countries around the world in order to help contribute to an informed debate and discussion as these countries are trying to build democratic institutions and processes.

It is not only Americans who are engaged in this effort. At NDI, we have nationals from more than 45 countries, from traditional democracies, from new democracies, and from countries that are going through a transition process to share those experiences. So in this growing interdependent world, there are not only economic relationships that are taking place between governments, there are also political developments that are taking place between governments, and also between nongovernmental organizations and governments, and between nongovernmental organizations and political institutions and nongovernmental organizations in other countries. So this is really sort of a growing network of small "d" democrats around the world who share ideas and experiences and to learn from one another.

In the Iraqi context, we have been working in Iraq for the past year and a half, working with a broad array of political parties, with civic organizations who are planning to mobilize a nationwide election monitoring effort for the upcoming elections. And this is not a process that is geared for a particular election, but rather a long-term program for the development of political parties, the development of civic participation, popular political participation in the country and to expose Iraqi citizens to some of the experiences of those who have gone through the transition process in other countries.

Iraq has been, as everyone in this room knows, an isolated country for many years and this is a way to bring Iraq into the international community. We have no interest in the outcome of this election. Those are issues that the Iraqi people must decide. We are interested in a process and interested in the long-term development -- both economic and political -- of Iraq, and we have been very privileged over the past year and a half to work with very courageous, very committed and very dedicated Iraqis who want to build a new future for the country.

MS. VAN REST: To follow up on Ken's comments, the International Republican Institute, as Ken has described, is part of the National Endowment for Democracy family. We've been in existence since 1984, helping political parties, civic organizations, women and youth groups to take part in the democratic development of their countries.

We are currently in some 50 countries as well, conducting a variety of different types of programs. We have been in Iraq since the summer of 2003. Our programs in Iraq have, like many of our programs around the world, offered technical assistance to political parties to help them to develop an infrastructure, also to learn how to build coalitions, coalitions with other parties, which is extremely important in countries where there are many political parties that emerge after a dictatorship is destroyed.

There are more than 200 political parties in Iraq and so that gives some indication of how active Iraqis are in the political process. There are hundreds of civic organizations across the nation we have been working with to help conduct activities for this election, such as voter education, civic education, "get out the vote" type of activities.

The one thing I do want to emphasize though is that, as Ken mentioned, we are focused on the short term because the elections are less than a month away, but the overall goal of our program is long term. We will be in Iraq for a long time to help prepare Iraqis to assist them in preparing for the future: There are two more elections scheduled for this coming year, and then beyond that, there will be the need to help in establishing government infrastructures, more civic education, more advanced programs for political party and civic organizations development.

I think that it's important to emphasize that it is the Iraqis who are driving the process, and that our programs are designed to assist them. We have many Iraqis who come to us asking us for particular types of assistance -- it isn't our idea – and as a result we have a very active program. The program also includes staff from Central and Eastern Europe because of their more recent experience with democracy-building in their countries.

I think we could probably end there and begin to open up for questions.

MR. DENIG: Okay, very good. We'll go to New York for our first question.

QUESTION: Guillemette Faure, Le Figaro.

When you say you're working in Iraq, can you be more specific about what you do?

MS. VAN REST: Sure. Well, there's just a variety of things that we do. We conduct a lot of training programs, for example, with political parties on how to build coalitions, how to communicate better to constituents, how to plan to campaign. For civic organizations we also provide training on organization, making long-term plans for the future. That includes activities like civic education. We also have helped the Iraqi Election Commission, the Independent Commission, to put on shows. For example, we helped to sponsor a town hall meeting to answer questions about the election, and then when it came time to choose the lineup on the ballot by lottery, we also sponsored a show that was broadcast nationwide so that there was transparency in the process.

Ken.

MR. WOLLACK: A lot of the work that is done is through training programs, but much of it is the sharing sort of the nuts and bolts of long-term political party development. Multiple political parties are going to be a feature, hopefully, for many years in Iraq; many of these parties are newly formed.

As Judy said, there are well over 200 political parties that have registered for this election and dozens of coalitions that have registered. But they are going to be part of the political scene in Iraq long after the election. And so, basically, the sharing of experiences is: how political parties organize themselves internally; how they reach out to members and reach out to the general public; how they communicate; and how they organize from national headquarters to local headquarters.

So these are basically the nuts and bolts of long-term political party development. Once parties enter into a parliamentary environment then: How do parties function? How do caucuses operate in parliaments? How do they communicate with one another? How do they form coalitions, not only before election but after election? So these are all experiences that have taken place in many other countries around the world and it's basically sharing those experiences.

With civic organizations, there is a coalition of domestic election monitors that has formed from more than 100 civic organizations in Iraq, and this has become a phenomenon that began in the Philippines in 1986 with the advent of the National Citizens Movement for Free Elections, which supported the integrity of the snap presidential election in 1986. The experience of NAMFREL spawned literally hundreds of domestic election monitoring organizations around the world, and that is part and parcel of building local ownership in an election.

I think what's important to understand about Iraq, this is not an election being run by the international community. It's an unusual environment because you have a large foreign military presence in Iraq, as one did in Afghanistan; but in terms of running the election itself, this is an election that is not being run by the United Nations, it's not being run by the OSCE. It's unlike Cambodia, unlike Bosnia, unlike East Timor, unlike Mozambique. This is an election that is being run by Iraqi election authorities with some technical advice from the international community.

So building local ownership in this process, with political parties, civic organizations, so at the end of the day the Iraqis feel that this is the beginning of their own political process, not a political process that has been run or owned by the international community, I think that is the most important aspect of this election process. And that is the goal, I think, of all the organizations that have been engaged in Iraq -- to stand behind people, stand behind the Iraqis, not in front of them.

And by all accounts, the election authorities, the Iraqi election authorities, have gained the confidence of observers and parties and civic groups for their professionalism and impartiality.

MR. DENIG: Okay, let's go to New York for the second question.

QUESTION: Hello, Mercedes Gallego from El Correo, Spain. Actually, first I'm going to start with a follow-up question to your remarks.

It's hard to understand that this is an election that is not run by the international community, since besides the number of troops that are occupying Iraq, it seems the date or everything have been set from outside or from a government that hasn't been elected by the Iraqis. So that is a hard point that I'd like to get follow-up explanation.

My question was actually for a country where so many well known organizations have give up working, and how come you developed your activities there, and what kind of support are you getting from the American Government in security terms and how you're preparing for the most likely escalating violence?

MS. VAN REST: Well, let me address the ability to work in Iraq first. First of all, we are independent organizations. We do receive government funding, but we are the ones who determine what programming is going to be done and how we are going to conduct those programs. We have secured our own security company to help keep our staff safe, and we basically have enough coverage to allow the staff to go out and conduct training programs.

But the most important thing to understand is that we are not the only ones working on the elections. We are assisting Iraqis -- and again, it is through Iraqis, who are training -- and our assistance to them, such as in voter education, providing printing for materials and helping them to develop television ads. This is the way that we are able to have a pretty far reach throughout the country. We are not just centered in Baghdad, but we work with groups that are also all over the country. And so, again, it gets to the point that we have made before, which is that it's really the Iraqis who are conducting these activities. We are there to provide technical assistance and training, and that is how so much is getting done.

MR. WOLLACK: In terms of the first question of how can we say that this is an election being run by the Iraqis when there is such a large-scale international military presence in the country, I think it's an understandable question. But for those of us who have spent time observing and supporting election processes around the world, this is not a model in which one would point to where the international community is running the electoral show.

You know, I look back at the UN High Commissioner in Bosnia or the United Nations role in East Timor or the UNTAG in Cambodia. These were elections where not only was there a large military presence in these countries, but also all the election laws and procedures were promulgated by the international community.

That has not been the case in Iraq, nor was it the case in Afghanistan. As the UN said in Afghanistan -- Mr. Brahimi said -- that the United Nations would have a very light footprint. The same has been true in Iraq. The laws governing political parties, the decisions on which parties could be registered, how they would be registered, the registration process -- the laws that were promulgated are all laws that were either established by the Iraqi authorities or they acceded to some of the rules and regulations that were established by Ambassador Bremer before he left. But some things were changed and other things could have been changed.

So these are decisions that are being made strictly by the Iraqis, and as each day and weeks have gone by the Iraqis, I think, have gained a great deal of experience. They've benefited from advice from the international community, but that advice has been just that-- advice. Decisions are not being made by the international community. So when you look at this model, it is not a model of what you have seen in other countries.

In terms of security, there is no doubt, as Judy said, that we are deeply affected by the security environment in Iraq and we have to take precautions, as others who are working in Iraq take precautions. But those are issues that we deal with every day. Many Iraqis are engaged in training programs in the country. Many have left the country to look at experiences in other countries -- from Europe to Canada to the United States to Indonesia -- who have traveled to many countries around the world, watching how other political parties and civic organizations are organizing around transitional elections.

So what all this effort has been is to try to share these international experiences and expertise, but ultimately it will be Iraqis that run it, the Iraqis that will participate in it and the Iraqis who will guarantee the integrity of the process, and it will be the Iraqis who will judge the legitimacy of the institutions that emerge from the elections.

MR. DENIG: Let's take the rest of the questions here, and just remind you to please use the microphone and identify yourself and your news organization. Let's start in the front row here, with Russia.

QUESTION: Thank you. Dmitri Kirsanov of Russian News Agency TASS. I have a number of fact-finding questions, if I may say so.

First of all, I would like to know how much money both of your organizations have spent so far in Iraq. Secondly, I would like to know how do you choose those who receive your money? And thirdly, I would like to know how the system of checks and balances look like. Who controls the way you spend this money and stuff like that?

Thank you.

MR. WOLLACK: In terms of the funding that we have received for our program in Iraq, it has come primarily from the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID and a small program funded by the State Department. But unlike many organizations that have operated in Iraq, we're not government contractors. We operate under what's called grants, not contracts, in the sense that these are programs that are being supported by the U.S. Government. But these are not U.S. Government programs.

And that may not seem like a huge distinction for you all in this room, but it is a big distinction for nongovernmental organizations and how they operate around the world. We are not government contractors here. We have also received funds from other governments and intergovernmental organizations. So we are independent of the government; the government has [merely] supported the work that we do based on the reputation and the track record of these organizations over the past 20 years working in many countries. That's number one.

Number two, in terms of the exact dollar amount, it depends how you calculate it, and it depends what you take into account in terms of expenditures for security. I'd be hard pressed to tell you exactly how much money we have spent in Iraq so far, but it would probably, I'm guessing, be under 10 or 15 million dollars so far.

We are not grant-making organizations. That doesn't mean we do not give grants to others, but our work with political parties is not disbursing money. These are not funds that are going to political parties; rather, as I said, these funds support the sharing of expertise and experiences with political parties.

We have provided some small grants to civic organizations to carry on their work. We are providing some assistance, financial assistance, as well as technical assistance, to Iraqi civic organizations that will be monitoring the process. And the United Nations and other international donors are also contributing to those efforts and we are working closely with the United Nations and others that are engaged in supporting civil society organizations in Iraq to engage constructively and actively in the political process.

So this is not an American enterprise but has become an international enterprise in supporting local initiatives.

MS. VAN REST: I just want to follow up on Ken's remarks. We also have estimated expenditures close to about 10, 15 million thus far. How we choose to work with either the political parties or civic organizations is, really, basically, up to them. When we offer a training session, we open it up and invite whoever is interested in learning about democratic processes and coalition-building or voter education, for example.

So something that is really important to understand is that we don't just pick and choose organizations just because we think they might win an election or they might do this or that. We are just trying to help Iraqi organizations across the board to learn how to operate in a democracy.

MR. WOLLACK: And I should add, around the election process itself, this is not about trying to identify with one or another political philosophy or ideology. This is assisting those who want to participate actively in the political process, to support a process that ultimately reflects the will of the Iraqi people. That's their business. Our business is to help those that want to participate, and in that regard, our work is with a broad cross-section of Iraqis.

MR. DENIG: Let's go to Germany here, in the first row, please.

QUESTION: Michael Backfisch, Germany's business daily, Handelsblatt.

Could you tell us something about the feasibility of elections? What's the percentage of the country where finally elections can be held? How many polling stations do we have? And how many parts of the country are covered by that?

So in view of these facts, do you think we'll have elections which are sufficiently legitimate in the end?

MS. VAN REST: One of the things that I need to add to the activities that IRI conducts in Iraq, and also across the world, is that we conduct public opinion polls and we have been conducting these polls in Iraq about once a month and we have increased the number of polls that we're conducting. And you can see them on our website.

In the last poll that was conducted at the end of November, early December, there were indications that 70 percent of the Iraqi population believed that the elections will actually happen, and another three-quarters of Iraqis say that they strongly intend to vote, with another 12 percent say that they somewhat intend to vote. So I think that there is the view that the elections indeed can happen and that Iraqis will participate, in spite of security concerns.

The other item of note is that there is an awful lot of activity that is beginning to culminate as we get closer to the elections. There was a report recently about the surge in registration and the correction of the voter roll. There are a lot more civic education programs that are going to be conducted. This is the right window of time for these activities to increase.

So in spite of what some reports say, our indications are is that Iraqis want to vote and that they will vote in this election, and that the Iraqi Election Commission will be able to conduct the vote.

MR. WOLLACK: Let me step back a little bit and talk about this in a larger perspective, too. There was a lesson supposedly that was learned by the international community after the Dayton Accords in Bosnia, and that was that elections came too early in Bosnia, that it only reinforced sort of the ultra nationalist parties representing the three major communities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that, perhaps, more time should have been given to allow for the development of multiethnic parties, and that the election process too early reinforced division rather than brought the country together.

And so, therefore, there was a lesson among some development experts that we shouldn't rush elections, that they should come naturally and slowly over time. And I think the great lesson of Iraq was that people demand the right to elect their leaders, and you'd better be prepared right away to support, not only elections at the local level, but people have a desire, have aspirations to have a role in the political life of their country and want to elect those leaders.

And I think that was the great lesson in the first year in Iraq. And, perhaps, it was slow getting off to start because people didn't want to push the process, but it was the Iraqis that ultimately were pushing. And I think it was a reaction to their desire to have these elections that had taken place at the end of January. I think that there is a great deal of enthusiasm. The one thing that the Iraqis have shown in every public opinion poll and focus group is they want to own their own political process. And so this election, I think, reflects those desires.

It is going to be a difficult process. No one is saying that it is not a difficult process. People were making dire predictions before the Afghanistan elections, as well, that people would not come out to vote, that people would stay at home, that there were those that want to subvert the process that would keep the voter turnout quite low. And ultimately, what happened in Afghanistan is an overwhelming participation in that election process. And I think that there will be an outpouring of participation in Iraq.

It doesn't mean that there will not be serious security hurdles to overcome or that there will not be certain parties and certain segments of the community that may not participate, but I think there will be an enthusiasm, and if there are significant segments of one population, of one community that do not participate, then I think the Iraqis will have to come together after that election and come up with some creative ideas on how to further provide an inclusive environment as they begin drafting a constitution.

I'm not a prophet. I can't tell you what is going to happen at the end of the day, but it is certain that many Iraqis, including those in the Sunni community, do want to participate. There are some that want to participate but are recommending a delay. There are some that don't want to participate that are recommending a delay. But everybody wants to participate in a political process, and if this one comes off at the end of January, which I think it will, and there are those who feel somehow disenfranchised by it or disengaged, I think that there is going to have to be a major effort to reach out to those to include them in a process over the course of the next year.

This is not the last election in Iraq -- and the process by which the new assembly is going to draft a constitution will also have to bring in people, perhaps, who did not participate in the election, and I think that's going to be a burden but an opportunity for the Iraqis to reach out to those communities.

QUESTION: One quick follow-up.

MR. DENIG: Very quick.

QUESTION: All right. To your evaluation, what's the percentage of the country which is safe enough for elections?

MR. WOLLACK: Well, people have talked -- you know, again, I don't know. People have talked to 70, 80 percent of the country, the geographic area that's safe to vote. And in terms of the populations areas, perhaps, it's a little less than that, but it's -- but in terms of the geographic area, it's quite significant.

MR. DENIG: All right. Let's go to the gentleman here in the second row, in the blue tie.

QUESTION: My name is Thabet ElBardicy with Al-Ahram, through ATN, from Denmark.

I would like to ask about some of the organization. You said that there are several hundreds of civic organizations over there, if you could mention the biggest of those and what's their contribution and how they are received by the population in Iraq.

MR. WOLLACK: Well, you know, Iraqi is not unique. We've worked over the years in a hundred countries and every country is different but I have not been in a country that’s unique. People face the same challenges wherever they live. They ask the same questions. They're dealing with the same problems. And something I think we have learned over the last two decades, and that is, the problems are the same; the key is how you deal with those problems in a way that doesn't resort to violence or exploitation. And Iraq is no different.

And I think with the lifting of the dictatorship in Iraq, what you have in Iraq, as you've had every other place in the world that is beginning a transition, is a proliferation of political parties and a proliferation of civic organizations, and a proliferation of ideas. And it takes a period of settling out. People have to begin to know each other. And one of the things that we found out in early focus groups is that there has almost been a unanimous hatred of Saddam Hussein, but many people, many people also believe many of the things that he said. There is a fog of disinformation in Iraq. This is a country that is extremely isolated. You ask an Iraqi a year ago who can they name as a friend in the world, they can't name anybody, in the region or in the rest of the world. You got ahead in Iraqi politics by understanding Iraqi politics, not the rest of the world or the region.

And so, therefore, all this civic organizing and political organizing is something new, but the proliferation of these groups is something that has been very encouraging. Many people said, well, the Iraqis are going to search for a strongman; however, the proliferation of these parties, the proliferation of these civic groups, the demonstration that when given an opportunity the Iraqis want to have the same thing that everyone else wants to have around the world -- they want a pluralistic political process. And many of the groups are groups that deal with everyday life. They're doctors and teachers and business people and those that want to engage in good governance, those that want to engage in business-oriented groups. And the common effort on the part of all of these is to engage in the political process, not necessarily in a partisan way, but to promote the integrity of a political process that they can participate in. And so many of these groups -- some are small, some are medium size -- many of these groups have come together around a variety of advocacy issues, one of which is civic education, another is election observing and monitoring. And what we and others have done is to help to bring those people together and to support their effort to carry on their advocacy and their education programs.

MS. VAN REST: Just to follow up on that, though, I think that it is important to understand that there are many of these groups that have emerged since last year and many of them are working together in different groupings. So I think it will take this election and subsequently the next two to determine what is the largest group working together in Iraq. We will see probably some cases of political parties coming together and then after an election regrouping and going into another coalition, and the same with the civic organizations. So I think at this point it's a little hard for us to say what is the largest group, identifiable group right now, because it's a very variable thing.

MR. WOLLACK: Let me give you an example in 1990 in Bulgaria. There was a group of five members of a Bulgarian mountain climbing club that wanted to get engaged in the election process, in Bulgaria's first multiparty election. They didn't want to join political parties but they wanted to watch the election. And that group, in six weeks, grew from five mountain climbers to 12,000 members, became the largest civic organization in Bulgaria. And they're still in existence today, the Bulgarian Association for Fair Elections and Civil Rights.

And there are stories like this all over the world, and what civic-minded people do, is they learn organizing skills around elections. And so you don't know ultimately who emerges and who develops. And a lot of it has to do with leadership, a lot has to do with membership. But that's one wonderful thing about elections. It's not only electing your leaders, but it's also about providing an environment in which people can participate and organize.

MR. DENIG: Yes, we'll take the gentleman in the third row there.

QUESTION: Thank you. Guy Dinmore of the Financial Times.

You say the Iraqis will judge the legitimacy of these elections. I'm sure that's true. And some will say they're legitimate and I imagine others will say they're not. But in past elections, as I recall Georgia and Azerbaijan and others, the international community has really turned to organizations like yourself to give an impartial and neutral assessment of whether, indeed, these elections are legitimate.

Do you think you will be able to do that? And there is talk that there will be very few observers to watch these elections. I mean, how will we, the international community, assess whether or not these elections are legitimate?

Thank you.

MR. WOLLACK: I guess I can answer that in two ways. This is not a traditional election whereby large numbers of international observers are there to help deter fraud or promote confidence in participation among a population who believes that this election is likely to be stolen. I don't think that's the issue. I think the election authorities in Iraq genuinely have the confidence of the people. I think there are challenges getting the information out -- voter education and things like that -- that's a tremendous challenge. But nobody is questioning the impartiality of those that are managing this process.

So therefore, my view, the role of international observers, compared to Georgia or compared to the recent elections in Ukraine, is less important than building local capacity. This election is all about Iraqi ownership of the process. So I happen to believe that it's more important to have a large number of Iraqi political party members who are there poll watching, a large number of civic activists who are there protecting the integrity of the process. That's more important than having international observers.

But I do believe that there will be enough of those political party activists and civic activists present who will be making judgments and making statements about this election process that the international community will be able to make those judgments. And there is a group of countries that have come together to do some international monitoring, as well: the Indonesians are involved, the Yemenis are involved, the Canadians, the Mexicans, and others. So there will be some type of international engagement. There are very few international observers in Afghanistan, for example, but there was a sizeable Afghan domestic monitoring capability that people were able to benefit from. And I think that will be the case in Iraq as well.

MR. DENIG: Okay. Let's come up here again, the third row here.

QUESTION: My name is Munis Mawari, from Asharq Al Awsat newspaper.

I think you have experienced some other Arab country. Iraq is not the first Arab country that you participated in. You participated in the Yemeni election, for example. What lesson did you learn from those experience? And does it apply into Iraqi election?

MR. WOLLACK: You know, Iraq is not going to be the first election that has multi-parties participating. You look at elections that have taken place recently in Morocco, Morocco, where you have the alternance. The elections that have taken place in Yemen, while there have been problems, are rather traditional elections, in which political parties have organized themselves. Women are running as candidates and running as party activists.

You know, I, basically, believe that the lesson that has come out of places like Yemen and have come out of places like Morocco, is that people generally tend to organize themselves in very similar ways, whether in Yemen or Philippines or South Africa or Chile; that candidates participate, parties organize themselves. The challenge is to reach out to voters, to develop a platform, an ideology, and then to try, in a sense, a different style of politics.

In countries that have not experienced democratic politics, there is sort of a vertical style of politics, where people speak down to citizens. And I think the great challenge for parties to understand and candidates to understand is that politics are very horizontal. You have to begin listening to people. You have to go to citizens. You have to listen to them and respond to what their hopes and aspirations are. Trying to understand how you change a vertical style of politics into a more horizontal style of politics, I think, is something that's challenging for parties in this country. It's something people have to constantly deal with, whether one's a new democracy or a traditional democracy.

But that's, I think, a great lesson from Yemen, and I think that in Yemen you do have a commitment on the part of all the political elite, as well as people from the grassroots, to engage in a sort of a pluralist political process, and I believe that sort of democratic processes and institutions probably is the best way to deal with some of the divisions in this society.

MR. DENIG: Okay. Let's go to Germany, sitting way back.

QUESTION: Thank you. I'm Matthias Rueb, with German daily, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

Much discussion has been around a role that the UN should play in helping to prepare the election. Have you cooperated with the UN? And what kind of role is the UN playing in helping make the election happen and probably observing the elections?

MS. VAN REST: Well, we haven't worked with the UN directly because we have been more focused on civil society and political parties, for example. But there is a concerted effort to share information in order that activities are coordinated.

MR. WOLLACK: The presence of the United Nations has been welcomed by the Iraqis, and by all accounts, Mr. Valenzuela has enjoyed a very, very good reputation in the country; and he and his staff have provided ongoing advice to the Iraqi election authorities and have been involved in training programs with the Iraqis. So I think the UN role has been important, but they have played a supporting role to the Iraqis, and I think it's the proper role that they have played. I think the Iraqis have appreciated the expertise and experiences that they have brought but that the UN is not standing in front of the Iraqis. So I think that there has been a symbiotic relationship and that the balance has been a good one. I know we have worked closely with the United Nations. I know the United Nations is also helping to support Iraqi domestic monitors as well, and so we've been cooperating with them on this effort.

MR. DENIG: Okay. Let's go to the gentleman in the far right, blue coat.

QUESTION: Hisham Boumar, Al Hurra TV.

A little force of the political parties and political movements in Iraq that's called for elections on this, on the pre-specified time of 30th of January, they were either sort of pro-Iran or have sentiments for the Iranian regime.

To what extent, do you have any fears or concerns that opening a political process at this time would be vulnerable and prone to influence from outside forces, especially from outside forces, especially from Iran? And do you think they might sort of sway the results, one way or another, at the expense of some other minorities inside Iraq?

MS. VAN REST: Well, I just think from our experience in working with the wide range of Iraqi political parties that they're intent on having their own elections and making their own decisions. So I do not think that there is a lot of influence in that way.

Ken, I don't know if you've got --

MR. WOLLACK: There are lots of reasons somebody could come up with to say that -- why there shouldn't be an election all over the world. What if the results of the election were to go this way? What if the results of the election were to go that way? What if this would become a proxy war by different people?

And I understand all of those things. And I understand all of those risks. And I don't want to discount them. But at the same time, there are greater risks, and those risks are not having an election process that people are participating in. And I think that ultimately when the Iraqis take ownership of their own process, it will ultimately be their own process.

I think people have a stake in their own country and have a stake in their own political process. And I think that is the best course of action. The more people participate, the more political parties participate in the election process, the more civic organizations participate in the election process, the more citizens feel that they have a stake in their government, have a stake in their country, and that ultimately that will overwhelm, I think, those that may want to serve other interests. And I think that that will be the case in Iraq, too.

MR. DENIG: The gentleman in the camel coat, please.

QUESTION: Hasan Nazar, Turkiye daily.

How do you choose the Iraq organizations to be helped? For example, do you help the tribal leaders?

MS. VAN REST: Yes, we do work with tribal leaders, as well. Again, as I mentioned earlier, when we have training seminars or conferences or meetings of any sort, we do offer them to a wide range of people or groups who want to be involved in the political process. So, yes, tribal leaders have been involved, as well as a wide range of political parties and civic organizations across the nation. We don't specifically pick people to come to a training seminar. We offer it. We offer it to a wide range.

MR. DENIG: All right. Take the gentleman in the back there, please.

QUESTION: Adil Awadh, Radio Sawa.

There are some Iraqi Sunni figures and political groups who are, obviously, asking for postponing the elections and they think one of its essentials is not ready, is not available. That is what's called the National Reconciliation. They demand national reconciliation conference outside Iraq before holding the elections. That's why they're asking for three or four months of delay.

First of all, how do you understand their position? And why national reconciliation hasn't happen in Iraq till now?

MR. WOLLACK: Well, first of all, those that have been advocating a postponement of the election happen to have a legitimate viewpoint and that viewpoint should be heard. And many, many of the parties of that, have been advocating that, are parties that both institutes have worked with.

So I think, ultimately, these decisions are decisions that the Iraqis have to make, whether the elections are going to be held on January 30th, or in the end, they decide to postpone it by a month, or two months, those are decisions they have to make, and those are decisions that the Afghans made in Afghanistan. They had an agreement, the Bonn agreement. The elections were supposed to take place at a certain date. It was postponed twice.

By all accounts, the Iraqi authorities right now want to proceed with the election on January 30th. If there is a change in that, I believe that change will come from the Iraqis. There are many reasons why there hasn't been a reconciliation, but if you look at many of the party lists, they include people from all the communities. So there is reconciliation. Perhaps not all the rules of the game have been approved by everybody. But there is a view of the Iraqi authorities that sufficient agreement on the rules of the game have been established that would allow them to go through this election process. But this is not the end of the game. I mean, this is only the beginning of the political system. There is going to have to be many reconciliation processes that will take place after this election.
The drafting of the constitution is going to have to be a reconciliation process. There are future elections; you know, before the end of the year there will be another election. So this is an ongoing process, and but this is one that has to be defined by the Iraqis, and for the outside to make these types of determinations or judgments, I think is inappropriate.

MS. VAN REST: Let me just add though that we also know that there is still effort among the Sunni population to try to figure out a way, how to encourage Sunnis to get out to vote. There was a recent meeting of village clerics, Sunni clerics, to talk about how they could encourage Sunni Iraqis to get out the vote. So they haven't totally given up and we do believe that there will be Sunnis voting in this election as well.

MR. DENIG: Let's take the gentleman here.

QUESTION: My name is Shirzad Al Khadhi, from Al Hurra TV network.

There is the participation of women in the political process and the election process, is significant in Iraq and some unfortunately lost their life, were assassinated, or so on. Could you please tell us something about your plans for the future in this regard -- or projects or programs that you have?

Thank you.

MS. VAN REST: Our programs -- as Ken, I'm sure, will also talk about -- within the ICE program has had a special emphasis on Iraqi women, women's leadership program, civic organizations that have been organized by women, a variety of activities to help them become part of the political process. That is part of our long-term plan to continue doing that, because it is evident that Iraqi women intend to be part of the democratic development of their country, and they're very active, in spite of serious security concerns.

MR. WOLLACK: One very positive feature of the party law -- and I haven't seen this in too many countries -- is not only that a certain number of women have to be on a party lists -- that we've seen in other countries, and usually, women then end up on the bottom half of the party list with no hope of ever passing the threshold and getting into a parliament. In Iraq, it's quite different. Every third name on the party list happens to be a woman, and it goes all the way down the list. And it ensures that women are going to be not only on the party list but be included at the top of these party lists as well. So the system provides for active participation of women, and I think that we and others are going to continue to support that effort and continue to support those that are engaged in the political process within their own political parties, and to ensure that their voices are heard the day after the election, not only the day before the election.

MR. DENIG: Do we have a final question? Let's go to Finland, in the back there, please.

QUESTION: Jiri Raivio, Helsingen Sanomat, Finland.

You said you have been participating or doing this in hundred cases. Well, have you ever experienced security situation that would have been anything close to the one that you have in Iraq?

MR. WOLLACK: Well, this has been one of the most challenging. Yes, Afghanistan was a quite difficult security environment. Afghanistan elections did not benefit from observer delegations, international observer delegations that travel outside of Kabul, outside of the capital.

Certainly, the security situation is extremely challenging in Iraq, but the electoral system was established in response to Iraqi demand. And so, it's the Iraqis themselves that came to the conclusion, I think, that they want to proceed with a relatively early election process, despite these challenges. And I think that the international community, basically, supported that decision.

MS. VAN REST: And to echo Ken's comments, the security situation is challenging in Iraq, but from our experience, we see hundreds of Iraqis who are intent on this process going through, and in spite of security concerns, they are continuing to get out and conduct "get out the vote" activities and go to conferences and all manner of things to prepare for the elections.

MR. WOLLACK: But I've also seen situations [in other countries] where there have not been severe security constraints where elections have been stolen. And so, therefore, when one looks at the legitimacy of the election process, perhaps it's better to go forward with elections in spite of serious security challenges, rather than an election process that ultimately is not seen as legitimate by the population and is seen as fundamentally flawed and fraudulent.

MR. DENIG: Thank you very much, Judy. Thank you very much, Ken. And thank you, ladies and gentlemen.