commitments, i don't think that you really have any choice, but to recognise them they're going to be recognized by other countries in the region. they're going to be recognized for better or worse by the people of afghanistan. so for the past several years, the united states and you and so many partners have been dealing directly with the taliban, that not to recognize the government when it felt when it collapsed, i think would be problematic. a would be we can turn afghanistan into a pariah state again, but that would hurt the people of the country. so i don't think that that would be that is likely given the amount of international recognition that the taliban have already achieved. the question is whether the international community can put leverage on the taliban using recognition as a way to get them to adhere to norms, international human rights standards. but i don't think that that the international community, given the way that things have played out how very much leverage to that right now . thank you very much. need to know just 4 of users. joining us after

a couple of seconds after 20100, we're continuing our coverage of events in afghanistan. we'll bring you the rotation of white house shortly. where you as president joe biden is about to speak and he has interrupted his holiday to come back and address the crisis in cobble. and that's going to stone will cause for you that just as soon as it starts. and meantime, we still have our guests standing by and also she had returned the who's waiting to listen in to the president as well. and she had, they have been some lines already given out. give us an idea of what you're expecting to hear from him. first and foremost, no regrets about the withdraw from ghana sound. this was a key part of what the u. s. people voted joe biden to do as they did donald trump . to do so that will always be this case that you want us to leave. we are leaving and there was something that's happened morning by the national security advisor to

terabyte and take sullivan to suggest that the very chaos that we're seeing. and i've got this done as to the argument that if the troops got military who had hundreds of little going to fight president my not to speak now, i want to speak today to the unfolding situation. i can't stand for developments that have taken place in the last week and the steps were taken to address rapidly evolving events. my national security team, and i've been closely monitoring the situation on the ground and began to stand and moving quickly to execute the plans. we had put in place to respond to every constituency, including, and contingency, including the rapid collapse we're seeing. now. i'll speak more in a moment about the specific steps we're taking. but i want to remind everyone how we got here. and what america's interests are in afghanistan,

we want to have gans dana was 20 years ago with clear goals. get those who attacked us on september 11th, 2001. and make sure i kind of could not use f ganeth stand as a base from which to attack us again. we did that. we serv really degraded archived in afghanistan. we never gave up the hunt for osama milan, and we got him. that was a decade ago, our mission afghan. stan was never supposed to been nation building. it was never supposed to be created a unified, centralized democracy. or only by last interest in a gap. stan remains today. what has always been preventing a terrorist attack on america homeland? i've argued for many years that our mission should be narrowly focused on counterterrorism, not counter insurgency or nation building. that's why oppose the search when it was

proposed in 2009 when i was vice president. and that's why i'm president. i'm adamant we focus on the threats we face to day in 2021. not yesterday's threats. today, the terrorist threat has metastasized, well beyond afghanistan, l ship bob in somalia are cried and the raven peninsula on looser in syria, isis attempting to create a killer fight in syria and iraq and establishing affiliates in multiple countries in africa and asia. these threats warn our attention and our resources. we conduct effective counterterrorism missions against terrorist groups in multiple countries where we don't have permanent military presence if necessary will do the same and can stand. we've developed counterterrorism over the rise and

capability that will allow us to keep our eyes firmly fixed on the direct threats united states in the region and act quickly and decisively if needed. well, i came in office, i inherited a deal. the president trump negotiated with italy won under his agreement. us forces would be out of can stand by may 1 2021. just a little over 3 months after i took office. us forces that already drawn down during the trump administration from roughly 15500 american forces to 2500 troops in country. and natalia bon was at his strongest militarily since 2001 the choice i had to make as your president was he did a follow through on that agreement or be prepared to go back to fighting the tall

amman in the middle of the spring fighting season would have been no cease fire after may 1. there is no agreement protecting our forces after may 1. there is no status quo of stability without american casualties. after may 1, there is only a call reality of either following through on the agreement to withdraw our forces or escalating the conflict and sending thousands more american juice back into combat and gas. and lurching into the 3rd decade of conflict. i stand squarely behind my decision. after 20 years, i've learned the hard way that there was never a good time to withdraw us forces. that's why we're still there. we were clear eyed about the risks. we planned for every contingency,

but i always promised the american people, but i'll be straight with you. the truth is, this did on fall more quickly than we had anticipated. so what's happened of ghana, stan political leaders gave up and fled the country. the afghan military collapsed sometime without trying to fight. if anything, the development of the past week reinforce that any u. s. military involvement, i guess and now was the right decision. americans cannot and should not be friday or, and dine in a war that afghan forces not willing to fight for themselves. we spent over a trillion dollars. we trained and equipped in afghan military force with some 300000 strong, incredibly well equipped,

a force larger in size in the military of many of our nato allies. we gave them every tool they could need, repaid their salaries provided for the maintenance of their force. something the tale bon doesn't have tale bon, does not have an air force. we provide a close air support. we gave them every chance to determine their own future. we could not provide them was the will to fight for that future or some very brave and capable afghans, special forces, units, and soldiers of afghanistan is unable to mount any real resistance and the tale bond. now, there is no chance that one year, one more year, 5 more years or 20 more years, the us military boots in the ground would have made any difference. hazard,

i believe, to my core is wrong to order american troops to step up. when afghan is stands, own armed forces would not the political leaders of the afghans were unable to come together for the good of their people. unable to negotiate for the future of their country, when the chips were down, they would never have done so while us troops remainder that can stand, bearing the brunt of the fighting for them. in our true strategic competitors, china and russia would love nothing more than the united states to continue to funnel billions of dollars and resources and attention in the stabilize that can stand indefinitely. when i host a president ghani, and chairman of dylan at the white house in june. and again when i spoke by phone to danny in july,

we had very frank conversations. we talked about who have ghana. stan should prepared to fight their civil wars after the u. s military depart to clean up the corruption in government. so the government could function for the afghan people. we talked extensively about the need for afghan leaders to unite politically. they fail to do any of i also urge them to engage in diplomacy, to seek a political settlement with a tolerable this advice was flatly refused. mister ghani insist that the afghan forces would flights and obviously was wrong. so i am left again to ask of those who argue that we should stay how many more generations, america's daughters and sons. would you have me send to fight afghans,

have canister, and civil war. and afghan, truthful man. how many more allies merican lives? is it worth? how many endless rows of headstones arlington national cemetery? i'm clear on my answer. i will not repeat the mistakes we've made in the past. mistake of staying and fighting indefinitely. and the conflict is not in the national interest of the united states. of doubling down on a civil war in a foreign country of attempting to remake country through the endless military deployments of us forces. those are the mistakes we cannot continue to repeat. because we have significant vital interest in the world. and we cannot afford to ignore. i also want to acknowledge how painful this is to so many was the cesar scene in afghanistan. their gut wrenching, particularly for veterans,

are diplomats humanitarian workers. for anyone who has spent time on the ground working to support the afghan people. for those who have lost loved ones that get us to and from eric is a fight and served in the country serve our country in against this is deeply, deeply personal. this for me as well. i've worked on these issues as long as anyone i've been throughout afghanistan during this war or the war was going on from cub boulder kandahar to the cooler valley. i've traveled there in 4 different occasions. i met with the people. i spoken to the leaders. i spent time with our troops and i came to understand firsthand what was it was not possible. i can stand. so now we're 1st focus on what is possible. we will continue to

support the afghan people. we will lead with our diplomacy or international influence. general mandatory and aid will continue to push for regional diplomacy and engagement to prevent violence. and instability will continue to speak out for the basic rights of the afghan people of women and girls. just as we speak out all over the world, i've been clear, the human rights must be the center of our foreign policy, not the periphery. but the way to do it is not through endless military deployments . so our diplomacy, or economic tools and rally in the world to join us. let me lay out the current mission and i can see i was asked to authorize and i did. $6000.00 us troops to deploy, have cannon stand for the purpose of assisting the departure of us and allied

civilian personnel from afghanistan and to evacuate our african allies and vulnerable atkins to safety outside of afghans. our troops are working to secure the airfield and ensure continued operation of both civilian and military flights. we're taking over our traffic control. we have safely shut down our embassy and transferred our diplomats. our to our diplomatic presence is now consolidated at the airport as well. over the coming days, we intend to transport out thousands of american citizens. women living working that can stay will also continue to support the safe departure civilian personnel. the civilian personnel of our allies who are still serving the canister operation

allies, refugee, which i announced back in july as already move 2000 and afghans were eligible for special immigration visas and their families to the united states. in the coming days, u. s. military will provide assistance to move to move more s i v eligible afghans and their families out there against it were also expanding refugee access to cover other vulnerable afghans who worked for embassy u. s. non government agencies or the u. s. non governmental organizations and afghans who otherwise are a great risk in u. s. news agencies. i know there are concerns about why we did not begin evacuating, atkins civilians sooner. part of the answer is some of the afghans did not want to leave earlier. still hopeful for their country and part of because the afghan

government and his supporters discouraged us some organizing a mass exodus to avoid triggering, as they said, a crisis of confidence merican troops are performing this mission as professionally and as effectively as they always do. but it is not without risks . as we carry out this departure, we have made it clear to the tale mind. if they attack our personnel or disrupt our operation, the u. s. presence will be swift, and the response will be swift and forceful. will defend our people with devastating force if necessary. our current military mission, we short in time limit is what scope and focused in its objectives get our people and our allies as safely as quickly as possible. and once we have completed this mission,

we will conclude our military withdrawal will and america as long as war after 20 long years of bloodshed, events foreseen now are sadly proof that no man of military force whatever deliver a stable united, secure afghanistan, as known in history as the graveyard of empires, what's happening now, just as easily happened 5 years ago, or 15 years in the future. you have to be honest. our mission in afghanistan is taking many missteps, made many missteps over the past 2 decades. i'm now the 4th american president to preside over worn afghans to 2 democrats and 2 republicans. i will not pass this responsibly on responsible nano, 5th president. i will not miss lee the american people by claiming that just

a little more time and i can't stand will make all the difference. nor will i shrink from my share of responsibility for what we are to day, and how we must move forward from here. i am president of the united states of america, and the buck stops with me. i am deeply saddened by the facts we now face. but i do not regret my decision to end america's war fighting nap gadsden and maintain a laser focused on our counterterrorism mission. there and other parts of the world a mission to degrade the terrorist threat of al qaeda in afghanistan and kilo some been lot was a success or decades long effort to overcome centuries of history and permanently change and remake afghanistan was not. and i wrote and believed and never could be. i cannot and will not ask our troops to fight on endlessly

another in another country civil war, taking casualties, suffering, life shattering injuries, leaving families broken by grief and loss. this is not in our national security interest. it is not what the american people want. it is not what our troops have sacrificed so much over the past 2 decades deserve. i made a commitment to american people. when i ran for president, i bring america's military involvement can stand to an end. while it's been hard and messy, and yes, far from perfect. i've honored that commitment. more importantly, i made a commitment to the brave men and women who served this nation, that i wasn't going to ask them to continue to risk their lives in the military accidents should have ended long ago. our leaders did that and vietnam and i got

here is a young man, i will not do it in afghanistan. i know my decision will be criticized, but i would rather take all that criticism and pass this decision onto another president of united states. yet another one, a 5th one because it's the right one. so right decision for our people. the right one for our brave service members risk their lives, serving our nation as the right one for america. thank you. may god protect our troops, our diplomats and all brave americans served in harm's way. the watching president biden addressing the crisis in afghanistan, he said he stands squarely behind, is decision to pull the troops out of afghanistan. he admitted that events did unfold more quickly on the ground and anticipated,

but he went on to say that us troops should not be fighting a war. that african forces refused to fight themselves. and he said that afghan leaders had given up and fled and the african military refused to fight. he did acknowledge, though, that the scenes are got wrenching for veterans and anyone who's been involved in working in a kind of on the last 20 years or he lost loved one of their at. he also said that 6000 troops had been authorized to assist in the evacuation of us personnel and vulnerable ass guns. and he that he'd made it clear to tell about that if any of those trips were attacked, the response would be swift, a spring. and she had her tansy from washington, d. c. so an unrepentant president biden spreading out his reasons why they had to pull out and, and unapologetic re for the, for the way it's happened. and it's clear then that the white house feels about wish by the american public to finally leave. afghanistan will be far more

powerful than the scenes of chaos that we've been seeing over the last few days. it is, you know, it is overwhelmingly popular that the u. s. is finally ending its mission enough down on. and that's what that 1st section of his speech was all about. now as we expected, his point was going to be, look, we see the chaos without only add to my resolve that we need to leave because look, they don't want to fight themselves. they don't want to fight against, it's all about cells. so that's all we should pricing on that because that was his . he said that the bus stop with him, but actually there was plenty of blame, but he was apportioning throughout speech, particularly to be off down the full, the african government. the abstract ghani, whom he said, had not reached a political settlement with the taliban. blaming them for that big place, but also when it comes to because of the counting seems here at his suggestion, that was we wanted to evacuate people. it was the government that didn't let us

because they didn't want it to be to seem like there was some crisis of confidence in the governments are blaming the afghan government. blaming the afghan troops, which he still sticks to the line of thing that get 300000, fully equipped, but never really coming to terms with the fact that we've known for years now about simply wasn't the case. and that when push came to shove, there was very little evidence that math can force, would fight for a government that they did not believe in, in cobble that was simply being propped up by us and us dollars in particular. he doesn't, he doesn't accept any of that. so there was this. okay, i'm the one who's reciting over this. the buck stops with me. but look, i'm doing what i said we would do and others. and you know, once reminded a president, obama, for example, simply doubled down on the conflict and i've got, at least i'm getting us out that seem to be that. what about the line that he took the dutch they can conduct effective counterterrorism efforts, and they do so in multiple countries without permanent presence is there is that

does that goes some way to answering some of his critics because as he was saying that he was concerned on the clue, this wasn't how things found out. and this is what we had 5 president off the president. but he was saying this was never a mission about nation building or creating a more secure. i've kind of thought it was only ever about counter terrorism, preventing al qaeda, a safe haven post 911. we achieved that rapidly. we got a summer been love him when he was vice president clearly. so we did that and he these true, he's right. actually that he was never someone who was for obama serge, and he was always someone who spoke out against against a long nation building it out. got us. and that is true. he does have that on his side. and yes sir, he's saying that to continue that whole mission, which is counter terrorism. he says that as we do around the world, we're able to, we're able to fight and the threats to the homeland without having a permanent or troop presence in other countries. i mean, clearly that isn't true either. we know that just in the last, well,

from my bomb or almost from the war on terror onwards, the u. s. as a troop presence in calculus, countries now with both over and over. so that isn't exactly true, but actually means is not in the actual theater of conflict. an instability and violence. 1 where we were safely behind, behind us bases around the world. now because, you know, there was a famous graphs of just how exponential the growth of the us presence around the world has become since 2001. but his point that being, we don't have to be in the country, it's still perplexing to keep some talking about syria. because there are at least a 1000 troops that we know of in syria that, that are fighting. that in fact, that, that presence is always been questioned, not just legality, but what exactly they are up to. but anyway, he's still saying that we can fight terrorism without actually having a presence in afghanistan over the horizon capabilities. but again, they said that they had over over the horizon capabilities to prevent the pool of cobble nonetheless there that will certainly mollify those. those republicans, especially liberal liberal intervention during the democratic party,

who frankly never wanted the us presence enough to end. mitch mcconnell, the republican minority leader in the senate, was just purchased a sag. well, maybe we were still in career. we're still in japan. we still have other bases, maybe that yeah, that was kind of what they had. they had envisaged a permanent u. s. presence enough canister. and there are many democrats and hillary clinton's and the others of the world who felt the same sort of way, but vital is always, this is one area of consistency with everybody. if he did not want that long term presence and kind of stuff, she have a totally thank you very much indeed. let's bring in jennifer brick. what has she really associate professor of public and international says that university of pittsburgh, she joins us live via skype. thanks for being with us. i want to do. it was quite a strong defense of his policy when he said he stood squarely behind his decision and he hadn't, didn't want to continue. what he said was an endless was putting us troops at risk for a fight that he said that african leaders and, and african ministry had refused to fight. what did you make of the,

the tone of this and, and how would it go down with people? i was shocked at the speech. i agree with his policy is actually i agree with the desire to withdraw from afghanistan. i agree with his assessment that his government is to blame for many of these problems. but there was a refusal here to acknowledge the scope of the military and crisis of taking shape and cobble right now and throughout the country. he says the buck stops with him, but blamed every one else to it can be true that other people deserve desert blame here, but so does the united states. and i just thought the speech was quite into main in terms of thinking about the people of afghanistan. you know, he talked about the veterans, he talked about the american diplomatic workers. he acknowledges people like me who spent so much time and i've gone to funding, we're watching this crisis and he says it's heart wrenching for us yet. he acknowledges americans who lost loved ones and i guess and yes, he did not acknowledge the african people. he didn't acknowledge the people. why do

you those people at the airport in cargo? those are many of the people who worked united state who have to leave the country in order to apply for asylum. the distinct apartment set up rules and said you cannot apply for asylum within the country. you have to fly to another country. and that's why many of the people are there because they, they fear that they will be targeted by the college. and many of them are targets in the tolerable. and so the people who are clinging to us aircraft for dear life are fearful for their lives because they were part of our mission. they were part of an american family and such, such inhumane discussion of them. i, he just seems to have keep the same for the people of our son, and i can't understand it. tell me about his, his words he warned about. it said he wanted to tell him not to interfere with the us evacuation, threatening, devastating force if necessary. what's your impression of how this is going to pan out? do you think that that will be avoided that escalation and the taliban will hold

off from from interfering with evacuation? i don't think that telephone have any interest in interfering with the evacuation now. i think they're waiting for the united states to, to clear whatever the finish their business and get out so they can, you know, set up their government, they're not interested in giving the united states and another reason to stay or to stay involved. so i think that's the incentive that the taliban looking at right now. and what, what about when you talk to you? you mentioned that you were surprised about the lack of reference to the, to, to the african people. he did say that he would continue to support the african people and that it would and human rights should be center of all our policy, but not through endless. was how effective do you think the support can be without any kind of military presence? so this is, i think this is when it comes to a question for the asking people and how they negotiate this with with the taliban government. atkins, society has changed quite a lot over the past 20 years. society is much,

much stronger position to negotiate with the taliban government. that it was, the taliban recognizes that. that's why they're behaving, i think in a more restrained way, at least for now in terms of the population of cobble. i don't think the united states has much leverage to affect these things right now. the united states, i think has discredited itself on these issues. and i've got this done. i mean, you, you said you had the way they had an incredible. they have been some reports that actually elsewhere in the country that they have returned to some of the the old ways. so where do you, where do you see the difference there? so i think this is a big question. we're still in the hawk of we're right now. the taliban have not established their government. they haven't decided whether it will be power sharing . it's unclear what this government will look like. so we're seeing atrocities we've seen atrocities from the african government side. i don't mean to excuse the trust, it's in the taliban, but i think it's we have yet to understand how the taliban will govern. they have.