>> well, the honorable member know we arehere in afghanistan at the invitation of afghanistan and a united nations mandate. we are not seeking to conquer afghanistan. it clearly is impossible. you only have to fly over and look down at the deserts and mountain ranges to know in a moment that it is not possible to conquer afghanistan but it should be possible to provide necessary support for the government of afghanistan to be able to conduct its own security and provide for the future of its own people. and the honorable member is right that there is great public concern about this. i don't want to minimize the difficulties or imply that things are easier than they are. but i do believe that if these three things are pursued successfully together, the military strategy, the economic strategy, and a political process, then it is possible not to have a purely military success but to succeed in our objective of an afghanistan that can look after its own security. >> does the foreign secretary accept that what the public will now regard as a timetable for the withdrawal of british troops will

pakistan afghanistan relationship but where does that leave mr karzai and his agenda for afghanistan and the american one. i think first of all to go back to our tolls point you this is a missile alliance between the u.s. and pakistan countries really don't have friendships they have relationships and they have interests and their relationships are based on interests so we shouldn't really see this is a permanent relationship there will always be differences and the baggage of history of the u.s. pakistan rollercoaster relationship really impinges on current decisions and perceptions inside pakistan as far as afghanistan is concerned in my view pakistan could certainly live with karzai provided it sees a stable of law an entity in which the bathrooms have a much greater say that's the kind of government that they could live with because they're supposed to and that are most contiguous to the area that's pakistan on the border and if they are unhappy that the northern alliance or other groups that are traditionally closer to india have greater say then pakistan will be unhappy some of

military in afghanistan. "mr. mortenson who for a time lived out of his car in berkeley, california has spoeng at dozen of military bases, seen his books on required reading lists for military commanders and had lunch with general david petraeus. he was recently in florida at centcom headquarters and met with the head of special operations command. his new book is "stones into schools, promoting peace with books not bombs in afghanistan and pakistan." here is our conversation with him, taped yesterday. a pleasure to meet you. very much so. for a man who tries to scale k-2 and find himself in a village of people who bring him back, so to speak and then -- pick up the story. >> 1993, i went to k-2 -- i went there in honor of my sister krista who died from epilepsy, to honor her, i got within 600 meters of the summit, didn't quite make it to the top so i came off the mountain and i was very weak and emaciated and i walked five days and i stumbled into a little village called korfe where i was befriended by the people

afghanistan before we have finished our job then the taliban would just return to afghanistan and create again a safe haven for international terrorism terrorists could easily spread from afghanistan through central asia and further afghanistan could once again serve as a launch pad for terrorist attacks against north america and europe. ok and i'm the eternal pessimist i'm afraid i mean the what the head of nato had to say right there is going to happen i believe because it's all over you know policy on afghanistan is not being made in kabul it's being made in washington and it's all about not foreign policy it's about politics ok obama's choices are very limited right now could we see the repeat of history. well yes i think so but i have to say i mean first on such of nato i mean nato is already leaving you i mean you have this again saying we we are in afghanistan what date what is it why do you know why do we still we now know what's that we can solve it you know what it is in afghanistan effectively as a coalition of the willing as usual mostly britain and america and britain by now

what works in afghanistan is what has worked in afghanistan. let the afghans pay the price and do their fighting. putting american boys in place is contrary to our national interest and will not lead to success. trying to put upon the afghan people, will not work. we need to strategy instead of putting our people into a meat grinder. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. who seeks recognition. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. lee: i would like to yield one minute to the congresswoman from maryland, donna edwards. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. edwards: i rise in support as a co-sponsor of this amendment and i thank congresswoman lee. this amendment requires that we act on evidence and we know that based on the evidence our afghanistan policy is a failure. numerous strategies and restated mission statements from president bush to prime minister gordon brown to prime minister blair to president obama, we -- restated mission statements continue to fall short. u.s. military repo

guest: in afghanistan? host: in afghanistan. guest: well, i think we should have kept our eye on the ball following our action in 2003. instead we invaded iraq, and most of our brain cells and resources moved on to iraq. in hindsight, senator bob graham, who opposed the action in iraq, was right. he said this will distract attention from afghanistan, which is our real target. and to the caller who said, why don't we ever get over 9/11? i don't think we're ever going to get over 9/11. i'd like us to learn the correct lesson, which is not that we should have a military footprint around the world forever, but which are that we live in a world where there are a lot of people who can be taught not to like us, and we have to project our values and win the argument with these people to prove that we are a good global citizen and that we care about human rights development of the world. host: representative harman is the subcommittee chair of homeland security intelligence and terrorism, as we talk about afghanistan and the situation in

the leadership deficit in afghanistan is a very serious one. from the perspective of the people of afghanistan. >> lehrer: you think the key to it is just corruption? just simple corruption? or is it more complex than that? >> it is more than that. it's also the system of governance. i think president karzai insisted through the new constitution to create a super presidency and an extremely centralized government structure which he has not been able to deliver. he has failed. i think this is inappropriate system of governance for a multiethnic society such as afghanistan. i think he has not been able to also come up with any offer for the taliban to be... to negotiate over. he wants to negotiate but he hasn't said what he is going to offer them to negotiate for or over. and he needs to articulate what that might be. i think through decentralization government structure in afghanistan which would be far more appropriate for the country, taliban might have an incentive to negotiate with the government, that is, to be able to run their own local c

and in afghanistan. is this pacific command structure -- how do you sort of bridge that -- i would argue in some cases it's an artificial gap between your responsibilities and other spanders' responsibilities? >> to ensure there are no gaps. i spoke with admal willard yesterday in preparation for this hearing. and if you confirm me, we agreed to work very closely together. wecannot do something on one side of a combatant commander's boundary that complicated the other. we're committed to working together and it will be the closest collaboration between pacific command and central command if you confirm me. what we don't want to do is ignore the reality that it's a regional problem, that pakistan has had a very difficult history with india. india has shown great forbearance under some enormous pressure. at the same time,fghanistan and pakistan have got to be able to work together. and so it is complicated, but it's the normal -- the normal state of things in the world. we can overcome any little boundary

troop commitment in afghanistan. they raised new questions about pakistan's reliability, about afghan corruption and about civilian deaths. but mr. obama said today all those things already have been taken into account. >> that's why we have substantially increased our commitment there, insisted upon greater accountability from our partners in afghanistan and pakistan. developed a new strategy that can work and put in place a team including one of our finest generals to execute that plan. now we have to see that strategy through. >> reporter: the president won support on that point from republican senator john mccain at the confirmation hear inghearings. >> the wick i cakileaks leak is part of the concerted history and that's why we need to make changes to our strategy in afghanistan, to increase our commitment of troops and resources and to bring new and better leadership to the mission. >> reporter: meanwhile, john kerry, chairman of the senate foreign relations hearing, cautioned against overreacting to wikileaks.

appear in how would you define victory in afghanistan? had you think that will look like? how much time do think congress will give president obama to achieve those goals? >> victory to me is success. it is not something that is going to be a side thing at the end of the war. it will be a gradual thing. . stable and democrats -- i think security is number one, and i will not allow the taliban it will take a number of years, but the best way is to take responsibility. it is critical and always has been. it is a signal to the afghan government. we would begin to reduce our military presence, the pace of the reduction to be determined at the time. the decision is to make it clear but we will continue beyond the july 2011 time. >> q said it would take several years during and what do you think of afghanistan -- you said it would take several years. what do you think afghanistan will look like. >> there are parts that are secure now. i would say, is iraq's secure? we are pulling out totally by the end of next year, down to 50,000 by the end of this year if my recollection is co

to afghanistan. that's our basic conclusion and basic advice is to stop as much as we can or at least do less of what we're doing that is harmful. if we want to break the momentum of the taliban, well, a good place to start would be to not fill their coffers. that's our story and we're sticking to it and now to tell you the actual truth is phil heymann. >> as he comes up, you can see with this study, that was supposed to be the good news. this is also why we have him here to present a view from the administration as well as others and they will have their opportunity here very shortly to give their thoughts on this. but before that, professor heymann. >> i am about 10% as good an economist as any of the three and that worries me a little bit about giving my thoughts. but on the other hand, economists led us to the economy that we now have and sometimes they are wrong. indeed, often they are wrong. and the question that i want to put to you and to them is how sure we are of what part of their conclusi

and no the whole region afghanistan pakistan and i guess x. or viewed. states are likely to fall on the taliban or other forms of extremism was not take a look at the wider context if you well you know and in context of the global fight against terror how will as you said the failing of americans in afghanistan impact the situation actual americans have failed in nation building in afghanistan and the major problem you know general mcchrystal has now gone to the new commander of american troops and international troops in afghanistan they try to apply neutral solutions yes because they're a military man but you know you can apply the solution only two minutes a problem the problem in afghanistan the problem of the biggest are not military and those are social economic and political problems smallest of all corruption drug abuse and actually the basic problem the failed nation building let's see the basic problem of those countries and of course we can make no plans for to enter for two years is just a complete fantastic. political expert from

and they feel they need a counter against india in afghanistan, so it is pakistan and southern afghanistan, roughly speaking and india, perhaps, having influence in the north. and the afghan taliban, the pastan's proxies. >> rose: general petraeus, is he going to change anything about the mcchrystal strategy? >> i think what is going to happen is general petraeus is obviously doing an assessment of all aspects of the policy on the ground to see where things may be tweaked. i don't think you are going to see any major changes at this point. i think in terms of candle hear there will be a continued and renewed focus on some kind of political settlement within the city itself and working with the various factions to try and do that outside of the city i think you are going to see perhaps accelerated efforts by the military outside to try and cut down some of the taliban networks, and i think specifically some of the -- some of the commando operations that have been going on very quietly but very efficiently, ruthlessly efficiently in going after taliban leadership and these are the special op

we have to go after the afghanistan government. some of that money needs to come back to main street. guest: i think that is the point of some of these remarks in the report. we have security interests and the way we have to look aheait is, if the surity concern is terrorism, or we prosecuting that the best we can? and i do not think so. i think there is a more cost- effective way to do it. wee table. the speaker pro tempore: the house will come to order. the house will come to order. members in conversation, if they'll take their conversations to the cloakroom. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? >> madam speaker, i send to the desk a privilege red port from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 1500, resolution providing for consideration of the senate amendments to the bill h.r. 4899, making emergency supplemental appropriations for disaster relief and summer jobs for the fiscal year endi

guest: in afghanistan? host: in afghanistan. guest: well, i think we should have kept our eye on the ball following our action in 2003. instead we invaded iraq, and most of our brain cells and resources moved on to iraq. in hindsight, senator bob graham, who opposed the action in iraq, was right. he said this will distract attention from afghanistan, which is our real target. and to the caller who said, why don't we ever get over 9/11? i don't think we're ever going to get over 9/11. i'd like us to learn the correct lesson, which is not that we should have a military footprint around the world forever, but which are that we live in a world where there are a lot of people who can be taught not to like us, and we have to project our values and win the argument with these people to prove that we are a good global citizen and that we care about human rights development of the world. host: representative harman is the subcommittee chair of homeland security intelligence and terrorism, as we talk about afghanistan and the situation in

to help tackle the problems in afghanistan. and the shanghai organisation of corporation is also assisting. the context group and with the upcoming meeting of for instance of russian afghanistan and pakistan and to extend and started this year in helping and one of the factors of creating good neighborhood relationships after the international stabilization efforts here is called to restore it's a new trial audio is going to sign a trailer status of against and we hope this will be supported by the afghans. and the presidents of russia united states are willing to support it in their mutual statement taken in twentieth of june in washington and we believe that today's conference so will help maintain our efforts and support afghanistan to build a prosperous and stable state thank you. listening to russia's foreign minister sergey lavrov addressing the international conference taking place in kabul at the moment on the issues that are taking center stage are security issues drug trafficking and other measures that. need to be ta

of course that's in afghanistan. so getting the right and effective mechanisms of development and diplomacy in afghanistan really is par of that goal. and we have to get it right. but i'm beginning to wonder if we are. at a recent hearing, this subcommittee held -- i think it was with the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction. i was really quite shocked at some of the amazing, damning incidents of corruption which i think our -- well, we are aware of and even contributing to as we continue to increase our military footprint in afghanistan. for example, i there was a recent "new york times" report citing afghan and nato officials contending that security contractorompanies, including those connected with president karzai's family and affiliates, charged with defending united states and nato interests, have actually funneled money directly to the taliban, not to attack convoys or other targets, and in at least one case there is suspicion of a contractor compelling the taliban to attack nato forces in

it's been for about 20 years that the americans are interfering in afghanistan. >> reporter: afghanistan's not the only issue iran's confronting with the international community. its alleged attempt to build a nuclear bomb has drawn new sanctions. let me ask you about sanctions, if i may. does it concern you that the people of iran may be feeling the effects now of sanctions that result from iran's nuclear policies? >> translator: i think the policies by europeans and americans are ridiculous. they think they're going to influence the life of the iranian society. if fact, they're imposing sanctions against themselves. iran is a great nation with a great population. we have vast and rich resources and it's very much easy for us to overcome all problems. >> reporter: one unsolved problem is the 31 year freeze in relations with america. five years into your presidency, i sense that you feel an opportunity was missed for a reconciliation and accommodation with america. but you clearly don't feel that you missed the opportunity. >> translator: please pay attention. i sent the letter to bush and

war in afghanistan and pakistan. in my own view is pakistan's the more important of the two in the long run. that's a nuclear weapons states and afghanistan will always have its problem and pakistan is a more serious problem and we're bi-polar disorder with the agencies dealing with pakistan and india for example. i don't think we have a regional approach to the reege. . we don't have an integrated approach. >> woodruff: do you think the wikileaked documents in the last few days, what's they're bearing on that? >> i think they're irrelevant but they'll drive policymakers to stop putting things on paper and harder to establish a record of wt was done. anytime the government has the leaks it closes and there will be more verbal communication rather than writte written communication. >> woodruff: how do you see the leaks? >> i think they add noise and confusion to the dialog and despite the best efforts of policymakers in the u.s. and pakistan to stay committed to the current parts which is that of collaboration and coo

dollars and that of course will also be very much needed here in afghanistan. troops start leaving the country but as you can see there are a lot of issues there on the plate for the well gets to talk about but on a touch of let's not talk about the drug problem there which is also causing a major headache for russia how's it going to be addressed how's it going to be tackled well of course for russia this is one of the main concerns journalists conference because the the shocking that out of. one hundred thousand people that die because of drugs coming from afghanistan annually and more than a third of them dies in russia and together with the e.u. russia consumes about fifty percent of drugs coming from of ghana stones so for russia of course it is a big issue during this conference and. also willing to cooperate with. partners from the west in order to tackle this problem. politically political games around this huge problem and unacceptable we cannot comment on two drugs coalition in afghanistan today is the world's man. with the problem over regional borde

iraq has involvement in afghanistan. the way the taliban are trained all these things are or how the years a pox on the intelligence elements and their involvement so i don't see it as a real surprise. i think somebody is trying to politicize this probably more than it really it is you do say there's a huge number of documents there how do you think this leaked information will impact on military action in afghanistan. well one has to realize that with one thousand and one thousand documents it can become piles by iran years reports and accurate reporting one person's hearsays another person's statements another person's assumptions so they can all become documents nobody can jump into conclusions said they were all the i cure it facts are accurate reports but documents so one how one should recognize that but of course there's some of the sensitive issues if we don't know about it. if it's an operational nature it could. affect some of the operation on the ground military operation our intelligence operation we don't kn

i believe our goal is to help afghanistan prevent a takeover again of afghanistan by the taliban, who provide safety, solace, and support to the al qaeda terrorist group, which is global tax, already, including 9/11. that should be our goal. i believe our mission should be to strengthen the afghan security forces so that they can take on that tell the taliban. the army is well-respected by the people of afghanistan and the taliban is feared by the people of afghanistan but detested by the people of afghanistan. and so the building blocks of an afghan policy and mission are that you have an army and that is respected and an opponent that is detested by the afghan people. and so, for me, whether or not we have progress or not will depend on whether or not we have successfully taken some steps to build up the afghan army, particularly, with other security forces in afghanistan as well. the evidence we have made progress, in terms of putting the army in a position where they can be the principal provider of security for the afghan people, some of those steps have been at the following. fi

policy in afghanistan. there is substantial concern about our course in afghanistan, in part because of the recent disruption in our military leadership, but also because gains in governance, development, military training, and other areas have not occurred at a pace that loose confidence in president obama's original timetable. some security improvements have been achieved and more are likely to follow, but they have been hard-won. and in six months, the president expects a review by his commanders on the status of our efforts in afghanistan. this review presumably would determine the shape of an unexpected transition of responsibilities to afghan security forces in july of 2011. but absent a major realignment on the ground, it is unrealistic to expect that a significant downsizing of u.s. forces could occur at that time without security consequence. this conclusion is reinforced by recent gao and inspector general reports that have raised deep concerns over the viability and the quality of training for th

locals make the link with afghanistan clear. >> for as long as the native forces remain in afghanistan there will be people like him. what happens in afghanistan has a direct effect on people's thinking here. >> the afghan and pakistani taliban make great use of the uncontrolled tribal area along the border. the british gave them almost complete autonomy in the days of the raj. this is where al qaeda and other groups operate. osama bin laden might be here somewhere. in a mansion that has scarcely changed since the days of the raj, the governor has started to take over the tribal areas where the extremists operate. >> one measure of our success has been the fact that over the past two years you look at the local people in the province over here. they were favorably inclined toward them, but have turned against them. >> at the moment when pakistan is successfully cracking down on its own telephone group it stands accused of helping the afghan taliban. >> they were able to show their strength. the authorities started looking at the taliban as one of the future options to support in afghan

afghanistan is extremely rural. it's extremely tribal, it's extremely impoverished and they are also set in their ways the way they have done these things in the past. it's very difficult for them to hear from us that we are going to be there to secure them and take care of them. but when we do. when we do stop in these villages and we protect them, we give them infrastructure, we show them that development will make their lives better and there is no need for the taliban, that is when we accomplish our mission. but again it's very difficult and focusing on population centers is going to be key in rancing in afghanistan. >> petermansour these i.e.d.s have killed thousands of civilians in afghanistan as well. does that create an opening for the united states and its allies? >> it absolutely does. and let me just give you some granularity to what we are talking about. since the beginning of the year nearly 400 afghan civilians have been killed by roadside bombs in over 840 have been wounded. two-thirds of the civilian

has not had enough troops in afghanistan. resulting in this record of a remote outpost calling for help as they are nearly overrun. we are taking casualties. enemy in the wild. the afghan government has been corrupt and inefficient. according to this document, "the general view of the afghans is that the current government is worse than the taliban." american air strikes and commando raids have killed too many civilians. this report describes a raid that was intended to take out a high-ranking al qaeda operative and ended up killing children instead. the pentagon says it will take days if not weeks to determine the damage done by the massive leak of classified material. bruce rideal who directed a review of the afghan war at the start of the obama administration says the sight of so many secret documents on the web is likely to discourage afghans from risking their lives to help the u.s. for fear of winding up on the internet and becoming targets. >> the intelligence collection in afghanistan has been hard from the get-go. to

we do afghanistan. today, we are here to talk about one aspect of the afghanistan issue, a very important one. we have 3 ph these and a professor -- ph.d.'s and a professor and a former attorney general, as well as the drugs are, and a representative from richard holbrooke's office. this is a great crowd, a well- informed crowd. understanding the importance of this issue and the drug components of afghanistan. the institute of peace, and the center of international corp. have done a couple of these reports -- cooperation have been a couple of these reports. one of these reports was written by to people that are here. one of these reports has already had an effect on the policy of this administration, moving from the medication, which had been the policy before, the one of the focus -- a focus on the movement. we will have an opportunity today to listen to this new report being presented. in the words of the preface to this report, it is even more radical than the first one. it is very timely today, in t

the new commander all for american troops and international troops in afghanistan. solutions yes because the nutriment but you know you can apply solution a problem the problem in afghanistan the problem of the pakistan military those are social economic and political problems small struggle corruption drug abuse and actually the basic problem the field nation building let's see the basic problem of those countries and of course we can make no plans for to interfere in afghanistan . on the way shortly here on our t.v. think with a very very. gentle woman she is one hundred thirty years old but says she still enjoys life surrounded by have great great grandchildren we tell. the un's a warning that if while the richest countries can't they're spending on aids research the recent progress in fighting the disease will be put in serious jeopardy it sounding the alarm at the international aids conference in ghana where activists demanding universal treatment sarah ferguson in austria for. it's the third day of the aids two thousand and ten conference in vienna and already

we may see similar tactics in afghanistan, but it is very short term. in the background, you have the ethnic rivalries in the country in -- and pakistan and india fighting their own proxy war. >> you're talking about the weakening council. they are not targeted by -- as traitors by the insurgents. is that a dynamic that could kick in in afghanistan as well? >> there is this problem. this feeds into the afghan civil war, which came as a key feature of afghan politics in the 1990's, and many people would see a return to that, and of course, these withdrawal dates are not the same for the british, are not and coincidental with the next round of u.s. presidential and u.s. national elections. they know they are on to a loser, and they want to signal they will be out by the time the electorate votes again. >> thanks. leaders of britain and the united states will spend three hours in talks in washington today and emerged to describe the relationship between their countries as essential to international security and prosperity. during a meeting, the leaders dis