Thank you.
Mr. Barber, you raised a very interesting point. I want to build on that, because I think some of what you've said is amenable to what I'm thinking.
In the geopolitical struggle that's happening in Iraq right now, you know that there are two types of governance structures. There's one on the ground and one internationally. This is just a proposal, but should we somehow get the geopolitical actors who have influence in Iraq but are not Iraqi to come to some conclusion, to conclude some sort of agreement which would put pressure on their surrogates on the ground? To me, it seems like a fractured sort of mishmash there, where different people are taking orders from different parts, different people or different entities, yet if we can get the entities on the top and say that this is the agreement we've come to and now please implement it....
Also, and I know this is a really quick question, one of the things that Oxfam and some of the other human rights organizations have done when it comes to aid is that rather than give it through an organization or a middle person, they give it directly to the people. They would fund whatever purchases they need to fund, either through a debit card or a direct cash transfer. That way, you're eliminating the middle person, or the middleman, and you're providing aid directly to the people rather than having it go through another organization where it could be lost there or lost to corruption.