Questions and Answers
Dr Patrick Cronin, IISS
Could you tell us more about what the GCC states are doing to provide stability to your regional neighbour in Iraq? In particular could there be more done on economic development inside Iraq by the GCC states?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
I will be frank. I do not think the GCC is doing enough in Iraq. I think we need to do more and to be involved more in the Iraqi issue. Since Iraq is a very close neighbour of the GCC any problems in Iraq affect our region very quickly. I think we need to help more with our allies, especially the US, but to work together also we have to work as an ally and to exchange views. It is not that one policy should be done in Iraq. It should be a policy that all of us could accept and implement. The problem sometimes is that the GCC finds what is being done in Iraq is not what we are expecting. We cannot get what we need, but actually we should encourage our friends, especially the US, that we can work with them together and find a kind of compromise in our ideas, let us say, in how we want Iraq to be. Iraq is a very important country in the region, and for the stability in the region we need a strong and united Iraq. Unfortunately up until now we have not been successful in this. What was the second part of your question?
Dr Patrick Cronin, IISS
They are related. The first part was what the GCC is doing, and you have given us an answer to that in part, but you may want to elaborate as to some of the programmes and support that are being provided by individual GCC states. The other part was simply what else the GCC could do to stabilise Iraq, and provide stability to the region through a unified stable Iraq.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
We should all consider how we could do a special programme to invest in Iraq. This programme needs to be agreed with the Iraqi government, with our allies in the region, and it should be in two parts in my opinion. Part of the problem in Iraq is to find jobs for the people. If the people are busy then it will put them away from thinking of other ways. Afghanistan was a bit far from our region, and we have seen the effects in our region and beyond our region of what has happened in Afghanistan, which has been a school for terrorists. Now with Iraq it is in our backyard. If we do not help, and if we do not involve ourselves in the developments in Iraq in a positive way, then I am afraid we will have the same things happening. It is not in Afghanistan, it close, in Iraq. Thank you.
Dr John Chipman
Just to follow up, what are the political and economic conditions in Iraq that would inspire more Qatari involvement in Iraq?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
I will be very frank. First of all we would like to see all the Iraqi people treated the same in Iraq. Secondly, we would like to see all the wealth of Iraq for all the Iraqis. That is very important. It has been promised that part of the constitution of Iraq will be reviewed, and that is something that is very important for us. Of course, any investment will not be encouraged during instability or when there is a problem, especially in the safety of the companies in any country. We are willing, and I am talking about Qatar, to be involved if we know that there is a programme and, let me put it this way, fairness for all Iraqis in terms of political involvement, in terms of the use of wealth. That is something that is very important for us.
Dr Gary Samore, US
Thank you very much Mr Prime Minister. I thought it was very significant that the GCC invited President Ahmadinejad to come speak at the recent summit meeting, and I would like to ask what role you think Iran could play in the regional security architecture of the Gulf. In particular, have you seen any willingness on the part of the Iranians to move forward the resolution of the three islands issue, for example, by allowing the dispute to be submitted for international mediation? Thank you.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
We have to acknowledge that Iran is a very important country in the region. We cannot avoid dealing with Iran. For us in Qatar we are trying to do our best in terms of the relations with Iran, and I think that most of the GCC countries are trying to do that. We believe that if we are looking for stability in the region we have to work together with the Iranians, with the Iraqis, and with the Yemenis in the region. I do not think we can solve our problem through trying to seal Iran off from the region, they are a very important player, yes there are some issues, there are some differences between us on some ideas, we know that, and we always tell them this. What is very important is that nobody tries to dominate the region, neither Iran, us, nor any other part in the region. It is very important that we tell the Iranians, as we always tell them, that we are a neighbour, we have the same religion, we want to work with you together, but we want to work in equality, we need to work by respecting each other, and that there are a few things that we have to explain to each other from our side. They are blaming for trying to damage stability in the region, because we have foreign countries in the Gulf. We are trying to tell them that we have the foreign countries because we would also like stability in the region, we are small countries and we had no big foreign presence before the invasion of Kuwait. So we have all the right countries and have a very special relationship with our allies. This relationship is not directed to the Iranians, because we do not believe that it is wise to threaten our friends or our brothers in Iran on this issue.
So the conclusion in this is that we have to work together, we have to find a way to live together. Nobody should try to dominate the policy or the Gulf; the Gulf is for all of us. In terms of the islands, I think the GCC declaration was very clear, that they would like to solve this problem in a peaceful manner. A peaceful manner involving either direct talks, or that they can go to the international court. We hope that the UAE and Iran will try to solve this problem through a serious political dialogue, to reach a friendly solution. That would be the right approach to this problem.
Dr Mamoun Fandy, IISS
Mr Prime Minister, thank you very much for thoughtful and short speech. My question is concerning the great deal of confusion created about the visit of President Ahmadinejad during the Doha summit. There are leaks in the Arab media, including media from Qatar, saying that Qatar did not consult with other GCC states in terms of that visit. Would you care to elaborate on what happened? If Qatar wished to have Iran act as a rational state through this invitation, do you think the consequences of that visit led to more rational behaviour on the part of Iran? A final thought still lingering on the part of many, which might be an accusation that Qatar is trying to punch above its weight, and be on both sides of the issues at the same time?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
Can you repeat punch?
Dr Mamoun Fandy, IISS
Punch above its weight, exaggerating its power in the region, and trying to be on both sides of the issues. People cite that one example that is probably always repeated, that Qatar gives the air strip to the Americans and the airwaves to the Islamists. That is another example of that confusion. Thank you.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
That is five or six questions, and I will answer all of them with pleasure. First of all, if I did not do a short speech, I could not listen to your answers. I decided to do a short speech and to take more questions. That is the first answer. In terms of trying to tell our brothers in the GCC about the invitation, or take their permission, that was not the case before in many other GCC meetings. Many other countries have been guests, and the guest is the responsibility for the host, for Qatar. So it is not a matter of consulting others. Actually, we informed all the GCC countries a few days before, and the request was actually from Iran, they wanted to attend. We accepted this and sent them an invitation, because we think it is important to listen to President Ahmadinejad and to tell him what we think.
About our role, everybody thinks that he is the most clever and important guy in the world. It is very important that people do not feel that they are underestimated. We are proud that we are Qatari, we are proud of our role, we know our size, we know that Qatar is not a big country, in fact, it is one of the smallest countries in the world, but we believe that to live on this planet, if you do not have a vision of what you want to do, in terms of economics, policy, it means that it is, as we say, zero on the left side. So we need to add value to our region, and to add value in our region is in politics, economics and education, health and all other sectors. I know some people ask why Qatar did this, and perhaps you are one of them, but you ask a good and legitimate question, and your opinion is legitimate. Sometimes it is right, sometimes it is not right, but in my onion we are proud of our role, and will continue our role.
In terms of our relations with the US and with the Islamists, we are an Islamic county and we are proud to be an Islamic country. What we believe in first of all is the importance of the stability for our country and the region. I mentioned this before your question, we have a relationship with the US, which is known, and we have a relationship with some European countries, military relationships, which are known. We have not done anything under the table, and we believe this is our right. In terms of the Islamists, if the Islamic people are only Islamic, there is no problem, because we are also Muslims. If you are talking about terrorism, I think Qatar was one of the first countries to publicly and loudly fight terrorism after 11th September. The first planes to go to Afghanistan from the US were though Qatar, and also from that time we have been working against any terrorist group. Terrorism is not only Islamic, it is an international fact, which all of us have to fight, but we do not fight Islam, or say extremist Islam. We say either terrorists or Islamic. If they are Islamic they are our friend and brother, if they are terrorists they are our enemy. So we need to divide these two things. Thank you.
Mark Fitzpatrick, IISS
Thank you Mr Prime Minster. I just have one question, which is about plans for nuclear energy in the region. Last year when the Gulf Cooperative Council announced its intention to study the feasibility it surprised many people. It was seen by some as a political statement designed to send a signal to Iran, maybe to send a signal to others. Some states in the region might have more demand for nuclear energy. I wonder if you might offer any prediction for the future? Can we expect to see nuclear power in this region in five, ten, fifteen or 20 years?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
You mean energy?
Mark Fitzpatrick, IISS
Civil nuclear energy.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
I think the GCC is already working on civil nuclear power from last year’s meeting in Riyadh. It has been agreed that there is a group studying this. I can tell you, even in Qatar, we are personally working on this, although we have a lot of gas in Qatar. We are also studying this matter to see the economics of it. This region needs more power and more water, desalination water. So I would not be surprised to see nuclear power even before that time in this region.
Dr Mowaffak Al Rubaie, Iraq
Thank you very much. Mr Prime Minister, I am intrigued by your comments on welcoming more investment programmes in Iraq from the GCC countries. I welcome that, and I would like to develop it later with you in our bilateral. I wanted to ask, at the GCC summit in Doha you invited Iran as a guest, and I believe that Turkey was also invited as a guest. I thought that it was unfair, to say the least, that the security of the region was discussed without Iraq present, as an Arab nation and as a Gulf country, and as the centre of the regional security arrangements in the whole region, the GCC countries in particular. This will go for all meetings of the security officials in the GCC and in the Middle East in general. That is a question for you Mr Prime Minister, Iraq was not invited for that conference?
While I welcome your in depth knowledge about the politics in Iraq, and also welcome your comments on the constitution, and we are the first to admit that our constitution is not infallible, we have a lot of deficiency in that, and there is a mechanism within that constitution to amend the constitution. We believe that this document is one of the most progressive and one of the most advanced, and was approved and ratified by millions of Iraqis in marching towards a democratic constitutional parliamentary system in Iraq. We are really proud of this, what we consider to be a sacred document. We are the first to admit that there are some deficiencies there, and there is a mechanism built into that constitution to address those deficiencies.
This is a genuine question - do you believe Mr Prime Minister that Al Jazeera’s policy is contributing negatively or positively to the fight against terrorism in the region? Thank you very much indeed.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
First of all, as I mentioned, the Iranians requested to come to the meeting, and we sent an invitation. We thought it was a good idea to listen to President Ahmadinejad in Qatar. It is the same with the Turkish Prime Minister, it was his idea first that he would come, and afterwards he had some issues, because the President had left the country he could not also leave. So we did not actually invite more than we were willing to let them come according to their request. Iraq is a very important country, I said this before, and they should be part of the dialogue that is happening in the GCC and in the region. As I mentioned, there are two problems facing us, not facing only you, but facing us. We need a strong Iraq. That is very important for the stability of the region, very strong politically, very strong militarily, very strong in terms of the unity of the people in Iraq. To be frank, the unity of Iraq is still not there. I am not an expert on the Iraqi issue, but part of it, as we hear, is that some parties feel that they are not being taken as full citizens. Maybe they are wrong, but that is what we hear. For that reason I mention the amendment. You say there is a mechanism in the constitution, and that is what we have been discussing from the beginning, when the constitution was under referendum, that there would be an ability to make amendments.
I am not a spokesman for Al Jazeera, and I always say I hope that they do whatever they do, because I receive a lot of claims and problems from Al Jazeera. Let me put it this way, if we are talking about developing this region, development is not just economic, political and social, but we also have to develop the standard of information that the people get. Some of their information is right, some of it is wrong. I do not always agree with what they say, but it is part of a policy of his Highness the Amir that when he came to power he said he would have free press. Maybe because of Al Jazeera you can hear it the same day, but if you see our newspapers, they are also creating chaos for us internally. I hope that nobody reads them outside, which is much better for us. I know many people say Al Jazeera is sitting aside. I think this is part of it, because when they do something and they do not succeed they put the blame on Al Jazeera. Like when we say we always blame the Italians. Sometimes they say the lack of success in Iraq is because of Al Jazeera. I do not believe this. If something happened anywhere else in the world, do they say it is because Al Jazeera is there? I do not want to defend Al Jazeera, and I do not completely agree with what they say, but I do not think it is right to say that Al Jazeera is creating this problem. The problem is there, perhaps Al Jazeera has highlighted the problem, maybe at a different angle, which other people do not like, that is the problem. However, we have to accept the free press, and there is a lot of pain in the free press, different opinions. That is the new world, that is what our friends in the region tell us to do, they need the free press, they need elections, they need more liberal governments. That is part of it, and there is also pain in this. You have to accept it all as a package.
Jeremy Bowen, UK
Thank you very much Prime Minster. You spoke in your opening remarks about the importance of dialogue. Do you think therefore that now is a good time for the US to engage with Iran on a senior level, without preconditions, perhaps negotiating on the kind of grand bargain that the Iranians themselves spoke about some years ago?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
Thank you for a short and important question. In my opinion, yes, they should have a direct talk and direct dialogue. I always think that if there is a mediator something is lost in the middle. I always think that a direct talk does not mean that you agree with the other party. As Arabs we went to the US a few days ago to make a dialogue with the Israelis, so why then does the US not have a dialogue with Iran? I think that is the only way to at least understand each other on the matter. If they do this, I also advise them to put the region in the picture. This is an important area for all of us. I always like us not to be consulted, but to be involved on the issues, if they are in our region – I am not talking about other international areas.
Baroness Symons, UK
Prime Minister can I ask you questions about the economic development? At the beginning of your address you said that the GCC was the economic heart of the planet, and I wondered what progress was therefore being made on the plans to secure one currency for the GCC by 2010 and one financial regulatory authority? Also, where do you think the negotiations on the EU- GCC free trade area were getting?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
Thank you Baroness Symons. Regarding one currency, I hope, but I do not think that we will reach that by 2010. That does not seem to be the case. In terms of the economic development and one regulatory body, this is very important and vital for the GCC. We in Qatar are frightened about this now, we just took a decision a year ago to make one regulatory body and to try to upgrade our economic systems in the country. It is hard for the people to accept this. To bring all of the GCC to this, I think it is difficult, but it is not impossible. I think that working together in one currency will have a positive effect on the GCC countries. What was the last part of your question Baroness?
Baroness Symons, UK
The last point Prime Minister was the point about the long awaited free trade area. We had the discussions between the EU and the GCC and we keep stalling, and I was wondering what your assessment was about how that would go forward?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
This time I would say that I blame your side, not our side. There is always a new development in your demands, let us say. Also, when we are talking about free trade, and we mentioned some of our projects, you say, no, no, this is outside the list. Now there is a good understanding, there are only one or two small points, and we are very close to reaching an agreement. It took so long, and part of the reason it takes so long, I tell our European friends, is because we are all doing business with Europe, and it is all going right. So some of them ask why we need to do this, and why we cannot let continue to work as it is. This is a short strategy. The long strategy is that this agreement needs to be a partnership, because there are other players now in the economic relationship with the GCC, especially with Asia, and there are a lot of developments. So it is more important for your side than our side to finalise this. I hope that we do this at the beginning of next year.
General (Retd) Dr Klaus Naumann
Thank you Prime Minister. You mentioned that one of the dangers for your region is international terrorism. That is something that we all share, international terrorism is a threat to all European nations and, indeed, NATO nations. We know that we cannot succeed in fighting terrorism by simply using military means, we have to eliminate the reasons for terrorism. Could you share with us the GCC’s assessment of the reasons for terrorism, and where you see options for cooperation with the European and NATO partners in fighting terrorism?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
Thank you, it is an important question. There are a lot of reasons. Part of it is education, part of it frustration in the region. There are many disputes in the region, and a lot of the people feel that our allies, like the US and Europe, do not have fair and firm opinions, especially in the dispute between the Palestinians and the Israelis. What happened in Iraq is very important, as is what happened in Afghanistan. Most of it is frustration, but not only because of you, but also because of us in the region. A lot of people have problems with a lack of democracy, and also the way they have been educated, they have been fed radical ideas over the years. So it is easy to turn them to the other path. It is important that we study the matter together. It is not all because of them, some of it, to be frank, is because of us. So the governments have to study the matter, to study where the disappointment is, and to try to find a way to give the people their rights to education, health programmes, and housing programmes. That is if we are talking internally.
If we are talking internationally there are a lot of disputes in Somalia and Darfur, and people think that the west, the Europeans and Americans, are always against the Muslims. Perhaps that is not right, but when you look practically there are other problems. We need the help of Europe and the US, and that help is through the UN and through vetoes, and it has stopped. It does not go anywhere else. That is the problem we are facing, to explain to our people when they say why? We did not have a good answer for them, to be frank. Regarding NATO, Qatar was the first country to start a relationship with NATO, and we have a lot of meetings in Qatar. Now all the GCC is part of that dialogue with NATO. It is important to share our experience, and to see the experience of NATO. NATO forces have a different attitude and different ways of dealing with matters. It is therefore important to have a very close relationship with NATO.
Mansoor Al Arayedh, Bahrain
Your Excellency, you spoke about how we can cooperate in terms of terrorism and supporting the efforts in that context. How can we bridge the gap between west and east? The west sees the terrorist organisations in a certain context, and then the east sees it in a different context. We need to bridge the gap if we are able to work together towards a consolidated effort. How do you see this context?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
First of all we need to know what terrorism means, we have to make a definition for that. We always say we hope that the UN differentiates terrorism from other things. That is the problem we have, we have a dispute, because we say sometimes, this is not a terrorist group, and they say that it is. The problem is that this dispute, if we were to follow exactly what they say we would have problems internally, to be frank. If we do not listen to them, we have an international problem. So we are in a dilemma in this, and the best thing is to sit together and make a rule of thumb, what can we count in the terrorism category, what is in the grey area, and what is in the white area. That is very important.
Dr Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, UAE [in Arabic]
Your Highness, we have heard US secretary of Defense Robert Gates saying that Iran is more dangerous on regional security level than Israel. I would like you to comment on this statement and to tell us who you consider is more dangerous on the level of regional security, Iran or Israel. This is my first question.
My second question is, and of course relating to US Secretary of Defense’s speech, The United States of America is monopolizing the security file in the Arabic Gulf. The US has been monopolizing this issue for the 30 last years, in fact since 1971. From your point of view, do you consider that it is now time to put an end to this American monopoly on the security file and to convert it, as has been suggested by His Highness Shaikh Al Sabah in the inaugural meeting, into a global and common responsibility?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim [in Arabic]
Who is more dangerous - Iran or Israel? I think that we have to look to what Israel has done during the last 50 years. Israel occupied territories; Israel made millions leave and is until now killing in the autonomous territories. Israel enters and goes out of territories as it wants, under the guise of security reasons and if the other party tries to retaliate on this revelry, we find that they call this retaliation “terrorism”. Here we are facing a real problem. The problem is that our friends, who are at the same time Israel’s friends, should say to Israel: “you make your friends uneasy and you make us uneasy, I am speaking to you in Arabic,” It is a an uncomfortable position for us because how can one explain what is happening in Israel? How can you explain the Golan occupation for over 50 years? There are United Nations resolutions; the Arabic citizens tell you that there are United Nations resolutions that have never been applied, when in the Arabic countries UN resolutions have been applied and sometimes they have been applied abusively. A part of this fact, this is a terrorism creation factor, this difference in treatment gives argument to terrorism.
Now, as far as Iran is concerned, Iran is, from our point of view, a neighbouring state and an important state. We do not have to see it as an enemy. We have to try as much as possible to have natural and privileged relationships with Iran.
It is true that there is a problem with Iran since The Shah occupied the UAE Islands. It is a standing problem and all GCC States took, I think, a position from this issue which is the UAE position, claiming the resolution of this problem. We claim to resolve this problem in a peaceful way. This is a problem with Iran but you cannot compare Iran with Israel. Israel exaggerated and procrastinated. Israel killed and procrastinated and continues to do it, it continues to procrastinate about the UN resolutions. It does not apply these resolutions and this is why we cannot compare them in this regard. I know that there are fears from Iran in the region and there might be some reason for this but it is very important for us to attempt to create a situation of understanding with Iran because this is the interest. We have no interest in entering into a military or non-military confrontation with Iran because the outcome of this confrontation, will be that the resources of the region will be in danger if we go into uncalculated action or emotional action or any unfair comparison.
As for the Gulf security issue, we hope that Gulf security will become an international security because it is indeed an international economic security. We hope that our friends will consult us more. I remember that early this year or last year, they said they had a package for Iran, let me tell this story, and we blamed our friends about this matter. Within the package, they put the GCC, within the package, and they did not consult the GCC. We also have a problem with our friends. Imagine someone sends you within a package and you knew nothing about it, I mean, this is the height of humiliation and the height of disregard. Within the package, they indicated: “We bring you the GCC so you can reach an agreement with them”. This has been written and served. We told them: “How can you send us in a package this way?”. This is very important, our decision must be in our hands, and no one must be able to send us in a package. This is very important. Thank you.
Secretary Cohen, US
Thank you very much Mr Prime Minister. I had a question as you draw the comparison between which is the greater threat. I thought I would offer one comment. I do not believe that the head of the state of Israel has ever called for the destruction of Iran or to wipe it off the face of the map. That may be one distinction we need to keep in mind as we discuss comparisons, which are all said to be odious in any event. I have two questions, you are suggesting something along the lines of six party talks that we are having with respect to North Korea. Namely, that the US should engage in a high-level discussion with Iran, but be sure to consult very closely with the GCC. Does the GCC have a common view about the threat that Iran poses, so that the US could in fact achieve a common approach in dealing with Iran? Secondly, if we were successful in persuading Iran not to continue with its enrichment programme, would Qatar or the other GCC states still feel compelled to go forward and develop nuclear power?
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim
If we are talking about nuclear power, for us it is not a must, but for us it will be decided according to an economic measure. For some of the other countries, the big countries, it is part of their pride. If the Iranians have it, and they do not have it, it means what they can say in front of their people. That is another problem. So there are many measures for nuclear power. All the GCC countries have the same opinions about the Iranian threat, or the Iranian dialogue. I cannot see that they have the same opinion, but in principle, yes, they do have the same opinions. Maybe the approach differs between country to country on this, but the whole GCC would like to see a peaceful solution to that.
In terms of wiping Israel from the map, Secretary Cohen, we also hear it from Saddam Hussein before. These are words, and you have to know the culture of the region. The culture of the region is that we sometimes become more aggressive by saying things, but we do not always mean it. It will be a big problem if the reasons that Iraq was destroyed were applied to Iran. We should make our policy on facts, and facts are very important.
Dr John Chipman
This has been an extremely important conversation, indeed, dialogue with Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim. Let me thank you for the frankness of your answers to questions, and for not shirking a single question, even when a single questioner asked five questions of you, answering every one of those questions very forthrightly. There was a lot of discussion in this session about the requirement to involve all relevant powers in discussions on gulf security, I hope that it is accepted that the Manama dialogue is indeed such an opportunity to play such a role, until another institution is developed. This Manama dialogue encourages all countries of the region to have their voice heard.
