night the man who it was stolen from played right there. the violent and the violinist were given a prolonged standing ovation. thanks for watching, al jazeera america, i'm del walters in new york. "inside story" is next. ♪ the u.s. is trying to shore up afghanistan before the bulk of military forces leave, but it's not ♪ hello, i'm ray suarez.

when the united states invaded afghanistan in 2001, the country was being run by a loose-knit confederation of religious sell lots, who possessed very few attributes of an actual state the taliban was little more than an suv driving around the country carrying a trunk mufullf money. now the taxpayers of the united states have spent mightily to build a better afghanistan. now that the u.s. is getting ready to leave, what kind of country do the afghans have to look forward to? >> reporter: president obama and his administration are hoping a new aid package will help pull afghanistan out of its war

economy after the country relied heavily on international aid for 12 years. monday the usaid promised nearly $300 million for rebuilding afghanistan. the new package will include $125 million in food and farming, $77 million for trade and taxes with plans to expand trade to the international markets and improve tax collection, and $100 million for education, helping to fund ten afghan universities and partner with three u.s. schools. monday's announcement comes as the u.s. continues to pressure afghan president to sign the us-afghan bilateral security agreement. pact would solidify conditions after the u.s. lees.

the pact got the approval of the tribal council last year, but president karzai has still not signed it. >> translator: afghanistan will never sign the security agreement under pressure. no pressure, no threat, no psychological pressure against our people can force us to sign it. if the foreigners want to leave, they should leave today. >> translator: we support the document. we are hopeful that this document gets signed as soon as possible, and the people of afghanistan also support the agreement. >> reporter: president obama reiterated the importance of the bsa deal. >> if they sign a security agreement that we have negotiated a small force could

remain in afghanistan with nato allies. >> reporter: while the administration negotiates, congress wants to make sure it can weigh in. >> we are introducing a bipartisan resolution to say before any american soldier, sailor, marine or airman is committed, congress should vote. automatic renewal is fine for netflix and gym memberships, but it isn't the right approach when it comes to war. >> the decision to sacrifice american blood and treasure in this conflict could not have been made by the white house and pentagon alone. >> reporter: in afghanistan nato and u.s. forces may be planning to leave by the engineer -- en of the year, but for civilians it's still a very dangerous place. two contractors were killed in a kabul suicide bombing on monday.

>> civilian casualties in afghanistan have increased by 14% in 2013. >> reporter: taliban insurgeons and other militants are stepping up attacks around the country, seeking to shake confidence in the government before april's elections. ♪ joining us now to discuss aid to afghanistan as it transitions away from a war economy, thanks for being us. >> thank you for having me. >> the brood rubrics, food and farming, trade and taxation, education. they sound great, but try to give us an idea of the specific kind of projects that this money guys. >> yeah, we have made a lot of gains, and the goal is to cement

those gains. these programs are focusing on what we consider to be one of the necessary prerequisites for success. and that's sustainable economic growth. the afghans won't be able to sustain economic growth without trade and revenue parts of this program that we'll announce today. we're helping them for example, gain access to world trade organizations. that's enormous. countries emerging from conflict that have been able to make the hard challenges and decisions associated with this have seen a 20% permanent bump in this their gdp. that will be largely useful for afghanistan as that go into this period. it focuses on regional trade. it focuses on finding ways to reduce barriers to trade, and at the same time increase customs

revenues, and it will help them install a value-added tax, [ technical difficulties ] -- peaceful afghanistan that is self sustaining, that governs its own space, and governs its population justly. but there is a transition to be had, and the military decisions that happened last june, we're living through that now, and i think we will continue to transition to afghan lead not

just on security, but on other things as well, and i think that is feasible, and a positive way to look at the future. >> should the american taxpayer at this stage of the game, we have been on the ground 12.5 years have any confidence that money being spent by the government in that country is being spent well and wisely and accountably? >> they should. the news reports sometimes to the contrary, it is very aggressive on the ground in policing how we spend taxpayer money. we don't spend any of the money in afghanistan until we have mechanisms in place to make sure we know where the money is going, and what it is doing? with respect to the reports that come out. i'll note they have never identified any fraud, waste, or abuse, they identify risks. and that's a large part of what we do as a business. if afghan was a place where it was perfectly safe to invest

your money, we wouldn't need to be there. and that's where we hope to be in a decade or so. but right now, usaid will continue to safely administer u.s. tax dollars through programs in afghanistan. >> the special inspector general for the afghan region released a report that said that none of the current afghan ministries were places where you could disburse money and be confident that it was being used properly. >> yeah, usiad worked with these ministries to ensure their capabilities. and we identified the weaknesses that the report enumerated. but we also identified mitigating measures for each of those weaknesses, and we haven't disbursed any money to any

ministry that we believe are not adequate to the challenge. we maintain control over the funds from the beginning of the process until it gets to the person that receives the funds. what is important is that it gives us a chance to help these ministries learn what it is like, and what it takes to administer large amounts of money. >> the inspector general called this new infusion the biggest gamble with taxpayer money that usaid had ever made. is that fair? >> i can't make ament compareson like that. usaid predates me. but we wouldn't have done this if we could don't it in a way that would be acceptable to the taxpayer and acceptable to congress. i have to testify on these matters.

>> larry sampler is the agent with responsibility for the afghan and pakistan area, thanks for being with us. >> thank you for having me. >> we're going to take a short break, and when we come back, we'll talk about the state of play in afghanistan today, and what kind of country is waiting out there in the future when nato forcesback pack up and go. this is "inside story."

only on al jazeera america welcome back to "inside story." i'm ray suarez. american and nato forces are leaving afghanistan by the end of the year, despite pressure from the united states, afghan president, hamid karzai has not signed a bilateral security agreement that would keep some u.s. troops in the country.

we're continuing our conversation, joining me here in washington, senior central asia fellow at the new america organization. from new york, exexecutive director of women for afghan women, a group that promotes rights. and a afghanistan and pakistan analyst at the state department. i want to begin this start of the program by getting a quick thumbnail sketch, your read on the situation now during this tense time of negotiation between the united states and afghanistan over what the future would look like. ambassador let's tart -- start with you. >> afghanistan today is very different than the afghanistan of 2001 or 2.

it has come a long way with a lot of progress and a lot of hope along the way which has turned into a sense of uncertainty and worry about the future, partly because of the fact that the u.s. and afghanistan relations are right now sort of in a cold war state. and the afghan people would like certainty. because they do not want to lose the gains of the last 12 years. they think the international community has invested heavily in blood and treasure in afghanistan, and the afghans have also paid a very dear price. they have paid a price since the soviet invasion. so this is a time when they feel they have had an historic opportunity to rebuild afghanistan, its institutions, and give its people hope, and we are at a cross roads where we

need to make the right decisions to go on the right path. >> if we were to go back home and talk to the women, what would they tell us about how they feel the country is doing? >> well, as the ambassador said, a lot of progress has been made. afghanistan cannot be compared to the year 2000 afghanistan. it's a different country and environment. a lot of progress has been made, but at the same time, this is a very fragile time for afghanistan. you know, we're in transition. anything can happen. if the troops leave abbruply like the soviets left, civil war can start all over again, but if it's done in a gradual way, then we'll have a chance. and afghan women are afraid of what is going to happen in the future. we have no idea what is going to happen. the security agreement has not been signed yet.

everyone wants it sign. the soldiers who -- who fight this war against the taliban want it signed, so as soon as that is signed, we'll know what the plans are, so living in this uncertainty is becoming very scary for all of us. >> and finally marvin winebomb. >> well, what we're looking at here is of course so many uncertainties here. i'm just picking up from where the ambassador was speaking. what is different really today is there are stakeholders. if one goes back to the '90s, really the country was largely depopulated. there was no state in effect. what we have had in the last 12 years now are the return of people, talented people, people who have an economic and emotional state in afghanistan now, and these are the people who want to stand up now. and we shouldn't -- we shouldn't

diminish the importance of these people, because ultimately, these are the people on which the future of the country is going to rest, and these are the people looking to us to say, hey, you helped us come back here. now work with us, don't -- don't walk away from us. and unfortunately we're in a situation now because of karzai's remarks that he may precipitate action on our part, which will serve neither the afghans, nor the united states. >> help me understand that, ambassador, by common account, everybody wants this bilateral security agreement signed. it's understood to be important for your country, yet we are apparently no closer to getting it signed. >> we're not closer with karzai, it seems like everybody else in

afghanistan from though 11 presidential candidates who will be going to the ballots in about six week's time, to the military of the country, to the military, to the intelligence, parliament, everyone is eager to have this signed, not because there is anything special for them in it, but because the country is not yet ready to standing on its own. especially the security forces who have done incredible work. they have been standing on their own for the past year or so. they know they need assistance for a few more years, otherwise they could fall apart. everybody knows that almost 85 to 90% of the country's budget is funded by international assistance. so when you take that away as the result of the agreement not being signed, you are going to have a huge collapse of the

economy, political crisis, and you may end up having a security crisis, and this is what the afghans want to help prevent, and it's not go for anybody, including the united states who have spent so much investing in afghanistan and others around the world. >> when the united states left iraq with no continued presence there, do they see iraq as its own case -- >> i think there are real concerns that this is what we could be looking at. certainly things have gone the direction they have in iraq, which seconds a message that without the international presence, it's going to be very hard to stabilize this country. you know, we're all trying to figure out what is motivating hamid karzai, and i think here we're really in a quandary here to explain it. is it just that he's a hard bargainer, a clever guy at the negotiating table?

is it just that he's trying not to demonstrate that he is a puppet of the united states or anybody else? or does he have perhaps some other thoughts? and my own view is that he at least is contemplating the fact that he might very well bring afghanistan ahead without us, because he feels he has alternatives, particularly if he can end the insurgency through a political settlement. >> in the last ten years when the international forces have left certain parts of the country, it would seem from the outside that often things have been particularly hard on women. schools educating girls were destroyed and the girls were chased home. places where women were able to start businesses were emptied out by the old guard coming back in and reasserting their control over areas. is this burden going to be

heavier on women if there's no continued progress in your country? >> absolutely. whenever a conflict starts or there's violence, women and children are the first victims, and we have seen that all over the country, in the southern provinces, the eastern provinces, in some of the northern provinces where we are, we have seen women being threatened more and more. we have seen cases of stonings of women, of -- you know, killings, and burn -- burning of schools, so all of that is happening all over the country. >> we're going to take a short break, and when we come back, we'll talk about the development work that has been going on in the country for many years now. what has worked, what hasn't, and what lessons have the afghan people taken away from the effort to rebuild their society? this is "inside story."

al jazeera america. we understand that every news story begins and ends with people. >> the efforts are focused on rescuing stranded residents. >> we pursue that story beyond the headline, pass the spokesperson, to the streets. >> thousands of riot police deployed across the capital. >> we put all of our global resources behind every story. >> it is a scene of utter devastation. >> and follow it no matter where it leads - all the way to you. al jazeera america, take a new look at news. the stream is uniquely interactive television. we depend on you, >> you are one of the voices of this show. >> so join the conversation and make it your own. >> the stream. on al jazeera america and join the conversation online @ajamstream. welcome back to "inside

story." i'm ray suarez. america's longest war is coming to an end in afghanistan. relations between the u.s. and afghanistan are tense at the moment, and the situation on the ground remains very dangerous. a suicide car bomber attacked a that toe convoy on monday. two civilian contractors died. on this addition of our program, we're looking ahead to what happens when nato forces leave by the end of the year. and marvin you mentioned before the break, hamid karzai's calculation that perhaps there is way of brokering peace with the taliban forces without nato forces, is that possible? >> i don't believe so. and there are people within the country who think if you could somehow break the back of the

insurgency through negotiating with enough of them so you create the process -process -- [ technical difficulties ] >> -- it's up to now over 350,000 troops. this is an extraordinary effort. what is really at steak here now is the fact that without a bsa, without a security agreement, the likelihood that there would be funding which would pay the salaries of these soldiers is really in jeopardy, and if that breaks apart, then i think we're then seeing the disintegration, really of the state that is without a -- without a security force that remains intact >> what would you expect to

happen if the taliban was made part of a coalition government? >> oh, wow, that's a question that i don't want to even think about. the taliban cannot be trusted. we're totally against any form of negotiations with the taliban. they are terrorists. they are killing civilians on a daily base. ever single day there are suicide bombings in kabul and ash the country. they are killing people and president karzai is trying to negotiate with them. which is not doable. it's not -- it won't work. and if there are any kind of negotiations, it will be on the backs of afghan women, and we don't want to even contemplate that. >> there must be some remaining support in the country for the taliban, or else they couldn't survive. they would be harassed and chased away.

>> well, we know that the taliban backbone, the taliban hubs and bases are situated across the border in pakistan. the leadership resides in pakistan with their families. there are taliban, of course, foot soldiers and lower-level commanders in afghanistan. and wherever they find some type of support they use it. and sometimes they use very harsh means to subjugate people in villages and so on and so forth. the level of support for the so-called taliban is nowhere -- is no more than maybe 7 to 10% at the best. so this means overwhelmingly the afghan people are not for the taliban, and not for their ideas. they experienced the taliban in the 1990s. it was a very dark period of afghan history, and they don't

want to go back to that. they want to find some means to pressure as well as some outreach. willing to participate in this new afghanistan can do so, otherwise we'll be facing crisis after crisis. >> thank you all for being with us today. that brings us to the end of this edition of "inside story." great to have you with us as well. the program may be over, but the conversation continues. we want to hear what you think about the issues on today's show or any day's program. you can log on to our facebook page and send us your thoughts on twitter. or you can reach me directly at ray suarez news. we'll see you for the next edition of "inside story." in washington, i'm ray suarez. ♪

welcome to al jazeera america. i'm del walters. these are the stories we're following for you. we are just moments away from a joint news conference between president obama, and french president, francois hollande. another first for the first woman to lead the federal reserve, making her debut on capitol hill. we'll have 125 separate pieces of snow equipment. >> and a state of