Hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee - Assessing the State of Iraqi Corruption

Interview

Hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee - Assessing the State of Iraqi Corruption

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

REP. VAN HOLLEN: I want to thank --

MS. ROSETT: Sure.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- the witness, and I caught some of your testimony actually on the internal monitors as you started off your testimony, and I think we can all agree that this is not a -- a partisan issue in terms of the desire to fight corruption --

MS. ROSETT: Yes.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- that Republicans and Democrats alike would like to join in that effort.

And having been a journalist, I would assume that you think that publicizing or exposing corruption is one way to fight it. Wouldn't you agree?

MS. ROSETT: It's a pretty good way. Yeah.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: I mean, we have a saying around here that sunlight is often the best disinfectant, meaning if you allow the public to watch what's going on --

MS. ROSETT: I usually call it daylight, but I write that, yeah.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Daylight, okay. But, I mean, you would agree with that general proposition, would you not?

MS. ROSETT: Yes, I would.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Okay. So I find it very curious that the State Department has taken the position that even talking about corruption in Iraq in open is somehow a bad thing. Because you would think one of the best tools we could use to try and clean it up and make sure that funds were better used would be to expose the problem in public. Wouldn't you agree?

MS. ROSETT: I would. I think they're making a mistake.

Could I back up, though, and just say one thing I think is terribly important to put in context?

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Yeah.

MS. ROSETT: And it is that they should have been doing it for years. They're -- again, it's what I was saying before. This -- this thing has deep roots, long legs and has morphed as it's gone along.

I'm not convinced that there -- from what I -- the tangible signs one can see -- that there is more corruption in Iraq than there was, say, during the final years under Saddam, because I think you need to ask the further question, corruption of what kind?

REP. VAN HOLLEN: But if I could --

MS. ROSETT: What's it buying, what's it doing?

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- if I could just --

MS. ROSETT: -- but basically what I'm saying is, oh, yeah, I think they should've, but I think they should've exposed the documentation they had on corruption under the U.N. oil-for-food program. I think they should have spilled out documents as soon as they went into Baghdad and began signing them. And, yes, I do think that they should be producing more today.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Right. I mean, obviously, the regime of Saddam Hussein was a terrible regime. It was a regime we did criticize openly, in many, many different ways, for lots of their actions.

MS. ROSETT: No, no, you have no idea.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: But --

MS. ROSETT: The frustrations that you have been experiencing --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Okay. Right.

MS. ROSETT: -- I found in trying to get documentation -- (laughs) --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: I understand. But we -- we did invade Iraq with the government of Saddam Hussein. And now of course we are there. We had the interim government, and we had the Coalition Authority. And the fact of the matter is we are now -- wouldn't you agree -- in a much better position -- if we chose to -- to affect the problem of corruption in Iraq than we were under the regime of Saddam Hussein. You would agree with that, would you not?

MS. ROSETT: Yes.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Okay. So let me --

MS. ROSETT: What --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- so I guess that -- the question is why we have spent such a measly amount of money --

MS. ROSETT: Wait -- no, actually --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- in terms of fighting corruption --

MS. ROSETT: -- no, wait, can I back up? I think we would've been -- I think it would've -- no, I think it would have had actually an extremely salutary effect if we had been -- if we -- we -- who's we -- if the U.S. State Department, if the U.S. government, had been -- I'm not with the government -- I'm a journalist -- (laughs) --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Right.

MS. ROSETT: -- if the U.S. government had been forthcoming at the time, had been open, had said, "Here are the documents showing what's going on, who's doing these deals," I think that would've actually possibly even headed off this war. Okay? That's how -- that's how important I think it was. But I agree it should happen now.

I would link that to something very important. I think as an argument for saying let's leave -- abandon Iraq, to me it doesn't -- it doesn't hold up, because what is it we're trying to achieve there? You know, would it be then less corrupt if we left? I don't think so. I think, again, the judge put it very well. I think predatory neighbors would move in and it would be hell, beyond anything they're seeing now.

Should America care about that? That's a subject for another hearing, I think. But --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: But you would -- you would agree -- and I -- you would agree, would you not, that the failure of the State Department to sort of publicly address this issue makes it easier for it to continue? In other words, if you were to shine a light on this problem --

MS. ROSETT: Yes.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: -- and publicly address the problem, you're more likely to be able to solve and confront the problem. Isn't that the case?

MS. ROSETT: Yes. I agree. I can see a case for hiding off what is probably the 2 or 3 percent of whatever the actual documentation or evidence is that does in fact involve mortal danger to somebody. I'm all for that. But the other 80 or 90 percent, yeah, put it out there. I think that's -- I think -- there's -- over and over again, we see with diplomatic institutions -- I see this all the time -- my main focus in recent years has been the United Nations -- but the State Department is in some way akin -- (laughs) -- to this -- that kind of thing -- we see the argument that we can't rock the boat. You mustn't shake people up. We don't want to disturb anything.

Very often people are not fools. You know, Iraqis know if there's corruption. It has real effects. It's better to say, "Here is the problem." And if that needs -- if that needs to be accompanied for purposes of U.S. politics or security by the argument that it is terribly important that we be able to sustain a government in Iraq one way or another, fine. But, yeah, better to tell the truth. But I --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Is it safe to say that if the State Department won't talk in an open forum about corruption in Iraq, the people in Iraq are still going to know whether there's corruption in Iraq?

MS. ROSETT: Of course. They will not know it in the same way.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: I was a -- that was a rhetorical question.

MS. ROSETT: Yeah.

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Let me just close. And I think -- I think that also raised the question about why they won't talk about -- the people in Iraq know -- why they won't talk about it in an open forum here I think, frankly, is an attempt to hide a very real problem going on in Iraq from the American people.

REP. WAXMAN: From the American --

REP. VAN HOLLEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source