Prof. Shakir Tawfiq from Iraq(I think Baghdad University) spoke at the Physics department today. He is a professor of Electrical Engineering.

Its an interesting perspective. The perspective of the highest echelons of the elite in Iraq. He was educated at 'Baghdad College' did his PhD in Sussex. Under Saddam, he was a very senior scientist in Iraq, high up in the nuclear programme for example. He knows all the weapons inspectors by name ... every time they came to Iraq, they would visit him. He said that his house was in the most upscale locality in Baghdad and right next to the Iraqi intelligence services.

This programme to get Iraqi scientists was started by Richard Wilson-- of the Physics department -- months ago and most of them didnt get visas. Dr. Tawfiq waited for a month in Amman, till he finally got his visa and was able to come here. He said that he was very happy to be here, that coming to Harvard was a dream.

I had a long conversation with him in the afternoon attended his talk and then spoke to him later over 'refreshments'. He is working with the occupation is head of several committes and even described a conversation he had with Bremer.

He said little new in the talk. To summarize it, I would say that he 'played to the gallery' .. perhaps he believed that Americans here wanted to hear positive things about the occupation and he said everything good that could be said about it.

However, when I asked him in person and pressed him on the issue he said: "If anybody has 1% of patriotism he will not accept the occupation. Its an occupation whatever you call it". His public talk did not quite gel in with this statement.

1)He pointed out that Iraq had *no* weapons of mass-destruction. As he says, if they wanted to start a programme, they would need me ... so I know.

2)Nevertheless, he believes that war was positive and moreover is optimistic about the occupation. He made several puzzling statements in the talk. eg.

a)After speaking of the delterious effect the sanctions had on the Iraqi economy and calling them murderous, he said: "but they worked. If you wanted to impose sanctions, this is the way it should have been done. It stopped all WMD production".

b)He said the Americans made initial mistakes in Fallujah because they dont understand Iraqi culture but their 'negotiated solution' to the problem is the way he thinks they should deal with all problems in Iraq. [Editors Note: especially puzzling. Bomb with AC130's, shoot ambulances,
turn the football field into a mass grave, then turn over command to a Saddam general, then have the Pentagon rescind that decision and turn over command to another Saddam general??]

c)While speaking of the history of Saddam, he *never* mentioned sustained American support for him.

d)He believes many practical mistakes were made ... eg the Iraqi army was disbanded. Nevertheless he remains 'very optimistic'.

e)He said people in America should cooperate with the occupation and can help -- for example -- by helping revise curricula in Iraq.

Perhaps this is an overly negative picture of what he said. He is quite a pleasant person ... not a republican or a hawk or anything.

I'm afraid I cant quite convey the tone of the talk accurately. In many ways, he is nationalistic but in the US, he is extremely restrained with criticism of the US. I suppose, this is similar to the way I behaved when I first came here. As I said before, he 'played to the gallery'.