although i may not have no shoes, i'm still going to walk the town. ♪ that's not only a blues aesthetic, that's an american aesthetic. you couldn't get more american than new orleans. welcome to "gps," the gobel public square. i'm fareed zakaria. president obama has had a good couple of weeks. his health care plan just got through congress, he concluded a nuclear arms treaty with russia and perhaps most important the american economy appears to be on the road to recovery. but he has a looming problem that could muddy this bright picture -- afghanistan. president obama has made a huge investment in the war in afghanistan, having almost triple the number of u.s. troops in that country. but over the last few weeks a

central problem has emerged with his afghan strategy -- it's called hamid karzai. experts and policymakers agree to the key to a successful strategy in afghanistan is having a credible local partner. our local partner is karzai and relations between him and the obama administration are bad. the administration has privately and at times publicly criticized him for corruption, vote rigging and general ineffectiveness. it threatened to withdraw a white house invitation to him and even now it suggests he's being monitored for his comments. for his part, karzai has been attacking the united states vigorously over the last ten days amid reports that his private behavior is erratic and sometimes just plain weird. all in all, a bad situation. my own view which is somewhat contrarian, is that the obama administration should grow up and face the facts -- it has no alternative to hamid karzai, so

it should support him rather than undermining him. karzai is a pashtun, the dominant ethnic group group and he seems willing to work with washington. he's had troops in his country for eight years. he has significant support in the country. certainly more support than any other political figure in the country at this point. and finally, there is no path to replacing him short of a military coup or something equally destabilizing. so, karzai may be corrupt, inefficient and weird, but does anyone really think that his alternative would be a jeffersonian democrat who was also popular with the pashtuns, effective and honest? this is afghanistan. a country wrecked by 25 years of war, with one of the lowest levels of income and literacy in the world. what it needs right now is government. good government f we're lucky. democratic government ideally,

but first government. in an ideal world we might be able to have it all. in the one we have, it's a choice between karzai and something that could be a lot worse. any way that is my view. you will hear a very important voice express the opposite view now. peter galbraith, one of america's most distinguished diplomats over the years has decided that working with karzai is impossible, and draws some very striking conclusions on america's mission in afghanistan, and on karzai himself. >> one of the explanation, based on what sources inside the palace have said, is that he is -- that he may be using drugs. this behavior is very strange. >> what you have heard within the palace does it speak of particular drugs? >> well, hashish use and marijuana is common in

afghanistan. >> after that the editor of "time" magazine, a pulitzer price-winning historian and a new columnist for the "new york times." you won't want to miss any of this. let's get started. peter galbraith has served for many years as an american diplomat and has had a dramatic impact on american policy. in croatia, as ambassador, he sounded the alarm that led to u.s. military involvement in the balkans. as a private citizen, he helped the kurds carve out an autonomous republic within iraq. his most recent posting was to afghanistan, where he was sent by u.n. secretary-general ban ki-moon to monitor last year's presidential election. galbraith said he saw widespread voter fraud, most of it favoring president hamid karzai. when he spoke out about this, he was fired.

now he is speaking out about other aspects of hamid karzai's administration. peter galbraith joins me now from belgium, norway. welcome. >> very good to be with you. >> most people would agree that it is crucial for the mission in afghanistan, for the nato mission, for the u.n. mission, to succeed in afghanistan, that we have a credible, local partner, that is the phrase often used. have you come to the conclusion, watching afghanistan up close, that hamid karzai is not the credible partner that we need? >> he is not. he's been in office since 2002. for that period his administration has been characterized by ineffectiveness and corruption. last august there were presidential elections. at least 1 million of karzai's 3 million votes were phony,

possibly more. so many afghans now do not see him as legitimate. so, on top of corruption, ineffectiveness, he now has a crisis of legitimacy. then this last week, in a series of really stunning statements, in which he admitted that his re-election was fraudulent, he accused me of organizing the fraud that re-elected him. he then retracted that in a call with secretary clinton, just immediately thereafter he told the parliament that perhaps he would go over and join the taliban. on top of corruption, ineffectiveness, illegitimacy, he is also behaving in a very weird fashion. >> you said something that i thought was very striking. 1 million of the 3 million votes that he received, in your view, were fraudulent. you were there. that would suggest he does not demand a popular plurality.

some would think he would have won the election any way, he just gave himself a larger margin. but you don't think he would have won the election? >> what is clear is that he did not win the election. the election commission, his cronies, put his total at 54% at the end of the preliminary count. the electoral complaints commission, an independent body, eventually eliminated enough phony ballots, but not all of them to put him at about 49%. i think most experts believe his real count would have been at about 42%. his challenger, abdullah abdullah at 35%. we don't know what would have happened in a run-off, but it is true when an incumbent is below 42%, in a run-off he's in trouble. >> what kind of fraud are we talking about? what was going on in afghanistan? >> it was what i call wholesale fraud. there were large parts of the south of afghanistan where no voting took place at all, yet

where hundreds of thousands of votes are recorded. just to look at a few key provinces, kandahar, the second to largest province in the country. we estimated that the turnout in kandahar was in the range of 10%. but the votes that were reported suggested a turnout in the city of 30%, the outer district, 60%, in some districts well over 100%. in kandahar probably ten times as many votes are recorded as people cast votes. >> now, you also talked about these very belligerent statements that hamid karzai is making. anti-american, antioch pags i- , and there are some who are saying he's playing to a feeling in afghanistan who is tired of just seeing foreigners ersforeis

just giving the public what they want. do you see what's going on? >> no, frankly afghans see the same things that we do, and they're very disturbed by it. abdullah abdullah, karzai's main challenger and who is also a physician, he said, look, karzai is undermining our country by alienating our major backers, and he is doing that. he said also i'm a doctor, what he's doing is not normal. and i think that is something that afghans see. karzai's emotional health has been a concern to diplomats in kabul, those who deal with him. they know he's prone to tie rra and outbursts. some of the things we've seen this week going on in public have been going on in private for months or years. >> you have suggested that he might be using drugs.

you're a serious man a diplomat of longstanding. these are very undiplomatic words. you must have come to them carefully. are you convinced that hamid karzai has a drug problem? >> i said that one of the explanations, based on what sources inside the palace have said, is that he is using -- that he may be using drugs. i don't know that. but it -- i wouldn't have said it if i had not thought there was a significant possibility that that was true. this behavior is very strange. >> what you have heard from within the palace, do it speak of particular drugs? >> well, hashish use or marijuana is quite common in afghanistan. i want to be clear, i have not heard any indcation that he has used opium or heroin. >> and this behavior would be

consistent with some kind of drug problem? >> what is clear -- i think we should keep the focus on what we know what is clear is that his behavior is very erratic, it is counterproductive to his country. here he has 100,000 u.s. troops on the ground fighting to keep him in power, support his government, and he announces he's going over to the enemy? he is the beneficiary of one of the most fraudulent elections in history, and he accuses the united nations and the individual who blew the whistle on the fraud of committing the fraud? this is not a credible or rationale political strategy. he apologizes to the secretary of state, and then a few days later says no, no, it was the united states that committed the fraud that got me re-elected. >> do you get the sense that the military is frustrated by karzai? do you get the sense that they would like to see a president

who was, a, more enthusiastically backing them? who is delivering more effective governance in places? is that something that you heard? >> are you referring here to the coalition military or the afghan military. >> the coalition military, general mcchrystal's troops. >> yes. the senior military officers are frustrated. they understand that their strategy is a counter insurgency strategy that depends on having a credible local partner. ca karzai is incapable of being reformed. if he's incapable of being reformed, we're not going to accomplish the mission of the troops and those troops shouldn't be there. we don't have to debate if the mission in afghanistan is important or not if the counter insurgency strategy won't work because we don't have a local

partner, we shouldn't be wasting these military resources on a strategy that is not working. >> if that's the case, is there an option between backing karzai and the other extreme one that you suggest which is pulling out the entire mission altogether? is there an alternative to karzai? is there some -- somebody and some path to another credible local partner? >> well, i want to be clear, i'm not advocating a complete withdrawal. i'm saying we should stop the surge, reduce the number of troops to the numbers that we had at the start of the obama administration. there are still missions that can be accomplished, counterterroism, defending kabul, defending the nonpashtun parts of the country. i also think we -- it's important that we take a different approach. the white house spokesman was

right now to call karzai on his remarks, to say they were untrue, and troubling. but he was wrong to say that karzai was the democratically elected president of afghanistan. he is not. the afghan people know that. we should send a message that we understand that. there are going to be parliamentary elections in the fall in afghanistan. karzai has been trying to manipulate the system so that he will appoint not only the election commission that managed the fraud, but this -- but he's trying to get rid of the electoral complaints commission that uncovered the fraud by appointing his own people and reducing its powers. the congress, as it considers the afghan appropriation, ought to put into law a condition that says no money will be given to afghanistan for these elections, unless there are truly independent afghan electoral bodies administering them, that's ones with no karzai appointees on them at all.

you know, we paid $200 million of u.s. taxpayer money for those august elections, we were cheated. we shouldn't allow that to happen to us with regard to the parliamentary elections, not only because fraud is wrong, but because if they're fraudulent, they're likely to lead to civil war. >> don't go away. wi we will be right back with peter galbraith talking about hamid karzai and why he thinks the u.s. mission there is doomed. >> you speak about giving up on the mission. but i -- we don't -- if the mission can't be accomplished, we don't need to debate whether the mission is important or not. this country definitely needs to focus on other ways to get energy. we should be looking closer to home. we have oil on our shores. natural gas can be a part of the solution.

i think we need to work on wind resources. they ought to be carefully mapping every conceivable alternative. there is an endless opportunity right here.

good choice. only meineke lets you choose the brake service that's right for you. and save 50% on pads and shoes. meineke. . we are back with peter galbraith, american diplomat extraordinaire who was fired recently from his role as the u.n. special representative to the afghan elections. do you think that the obama administration made a mistake in -- in validating the

elections? >> yes, i do. because the afghan people knew that those -- the results were fraudulent, and it looked like the united states was siding with karzai for convenience, rather than standing up for principle. >> let me come back to the question of the alternative. if you do say we're going to have to be in afghanistan, perhaps in reduced numbers, do we have an alternative to karzai? as you point out, his opponent in the elections was a tajik, or a half tajik and is therefore widely regarded by the pashtuns as an outsider if we do accept we need a pashtun partner, the pashtuns are 50% of afghanistan, 40% of afghanistan, but 100% of the insurgency, 100% of the taliban what alternative do we have to hamid karzai? >> that's a very difficult question.

while i don't think karzai is the democratically elected leader, he is the leader and i think it's a dangerous game for the united states to get into the business of trying to choose an alternative leader. we tried it in vietnam when we orchestrated a coup that got rid of the general there and the results were disastrous. i think we have to accept karzai is there, but since he is there and it means we cannot accomplish our goals, in the end i think if we can't accomplish our goals, we need to con seventh lives of our troops and the money. it's wrong to send people to a mission that they cannot actually accomplish. >> but that means you are, in a sense, giving up hope on creating a more stable afghanistan that would not be dominated by the taliban or would not have the possibility of being dominated by the taliban. you are giving up on the broader mission of afghanistan and retreating to a very much smaller counterterroism mission,

correct? >> yes. as well as preserving the non -- the -- the stability in the non-pashtun areas which is at least half the country. we are in a war that we cannot win, and we also cannot lose, in the sense that the taliban cannot retake kabul. they got there in the 1990s when the whole world had turned away, and basically on pakistani tanks that is not going to happen again. they can't take the tajik other non-pashtun areas. so even if we were to reduce our presence, i don't think the situation would look different from what it is now. you would have a -- an autonomous tajik and hazare region and a pashtun region

where it is now where the countryside is controlled by the taliban and where they now control large parts of the cities and kandahar. you speak about giving up on the mission. we don't -- if the mission can't be accomplished, we don't need to debate whether the mission is important or not. before we commit troops, 100,000 troops, hundreds of millions of dollars, we need to see how it is we're going to succeed. everybody says that for counter insurgency strategy to work we need a credible local partner. and i think nobody can persuade me, and i suspect other analysts that karzai is really capable of being a credible local partner. that's the dilemma we face. >> on that sobering note, peter galbraith, thank you very much. i should tell our viewers we have extended an invitation to president karzai to join us, and in the upcoming weeks i very much hope we will have that

opportunity and put to him some of the questions we just heard answers to. thank you peter galbraith. we will be right back. >> how many people will focus on the details versus the -- >> this is a guy who will get things done. >> if you are dealing with legislation -- >> people will not be paying more money by november. >> they won't be getting anything by november either, right? >> will it still be on popular by then? the screenings that happen here

might be fun or dramatic, but it's not real life. there's another screening that is real life, and it could save your life. it's a screening test for colorectal cancer, the second-leading cancer killer of men and women. screening finds precancerous polyps, so they can be removed before they turn into cancer.

i got screened. now, it's your turn. so you can stick around and enjoy the show. if you're 50 or older, get screened for colorectal cancer. now, as we often try to do, i gathered a group of very smart people to talk, debate, agree, hopefully disagree about the most pressing issues of the day from obama to the economy to the british elections. joining me are richard stengel, managing editor of "time" magazine and author of "mandela's way." krista free land, and ross douthat, the newest and youngest editorial columnist at the "new

york times." rick, you look at what obama is dealing with now, if feels so different than two weeks ago health care has passed, the economy appears to be doing well, the arms treaty with russia. is he on a new trend upward? >> i think so. two weeks ago he was jimmy carter, now he seems to be superman. he has done health care. made that surprise trip to afghanistan. he, i think, feels the wind at his back. he feels revitalized. that's not being shown in the polls there that not been a bump, but i think he feels they turned a corner. >> i think rick is right that obama feels energized, but the only thing that matter now and the only thing that the white house is focusing on is the economy. in particular jobs. and that, i think, sort of tale of two cities. on the one hand, i do think they are having some success in improving the jobs picture. i think that we will see between

now and november, when we have the mid terms, significant improvement. partly because they're doing some sneaky things. the census employment is really having -- you think census, like that seems like too small. >> 800,000 people. >> right that is really moving the numbers. this is brilliantly timed. medium-term, though, looking out to 2011, i think the prospects are a lot iffier. >> i think, ross, let me ask you this. the obama administration seemed to have recapitalized the bank where credit is now flowing. it stabilized the auto industry n a way he didn't have massive hemorrhages of job losses. it stabilized the mortgage market and is doing more quiet pump priming. this is an economic success story. >> it is in a way, but what chrysta is saying about the unemployment rate, there's a point where america is heading

into a structural long-term unemployment. where the stock market grows, but unemployment is stuck around 8%, let's say. for americans, this would be an extraordinary change. european nations are accustomed to that long-term structural unemployment issue. >> and they have a social safety net so people can survive that. >> in the united states, you can go back to the recession of the early '80s, but really americans don't have any kind of long-term experience with unemployment being that high it will be interesting to see both in the mid terms and then headed into 2012, if obama vung for is running for re-election, gdp is growing, but 8% are out of work, it's a difficult environment for a president even if he has done all the right things on the economy. >> rick, do you think that obama is going to turn a corner on the opinion polls? or is that essentially linked to the unemployment number?

>> i think it's odd why it has not gotten a bump. as a former person who worked in politics, i would think he did -- would. but part of it is this economic malaise we're in. the changes are, as ross was saying, they're secular not cyclical. there's going to be a high unemployment rate. people still don't feel confident -- even when i read the stories in the "new york times" where they say people are starting to spend again. even in an antidotal way, i don't think people feel that way. certainly also with work, people don't feel secure in their work. >> and the unemployment number has not moved yet. 162,000 jobs created in march, but still 9.7% unemployment. >> i'm skeptical about what the government can do about unemployment. >> even this short-term massage you don't think will help. >> i think it's a long-term policy. if they think unemployment will stay at this high level, they have to rethink everything they do. >> the other thing to keep in mind, yes, the health care bill was a tremendous political success.

but, you know, if you look at the polling numbers on health care, you have a political success passing an unpopular bill. i think a lot of the media coverage of the bill since it's passed has been even in liberal media outlets, okay, now we will focus on some problems here, some of the problems there. here's a reason why the mandate won't work. >> sure. don't you think, ross, overall, you know, the narrative that rick started with, of at least this is a win, right? how many people -- how many people are going to focus on the details versus the sense of this is a guy who will get things done? but if you are dealing with legislation in terms of the actual impact on peoples lives, people will not be paying more money by november. the things they are -- >> they won't be getting anything by november either, right? >> sure therefore -- >> he passed an unpopular bill -- >> will it still be unpopular by then? there will be a plausible narrative where people say he told us before the election he

would do it. this is the george w. bush theory of leadership. at least he's the decider. >> didn't they buy it then. >> they did for a while. >> we're looking at an abyss in the sense of if it hadn't happened -- people questioned his whole presidency and said it would go down. the fact he accomplished something, even though it's a bill, as you say people are luke warm about, is better than the alternative this is where europe and america are different. europe is used to higher unemployment, more comfortable with it, in america you think people think the american mote hear stopped running. >> if unemployment continues to be an issue. i think it was pointed out that there's a safety net that's been there for a long time. >> it's not bad to be unemployed. if you have a chance to be unemployed in germany or in the united states, it's better -- >> of course the -- the side effect is, you know, in a down period, it does seem to ease the pain.

in an up period there's more of a drag, and you didn't a different kind of malaise. you get malaise of middle class, that there's very little to be achieved. you get a loss of energy in the country, people see that growth is not possible and expansion is more difficult. so you won't see a kind of p populist movement in western europe any time soon. be careful about admiring their safety net too much, because it has a down side particularly in a period of economic growth. >> we will continue with rick stangal, anne applebaum, chrsta and ross douthat. >> 2012, it will depend -- we have been talking about the unemployment. >> it's the economy, stupid. [ rifle fires ]

[ announcer ] if you think about it, this is what makes theladders different... from other job search sites. we only want the big jobs. join theladders.com. a premium job site for only $100k+ jobs... and only $100k+ talent. oh sure, we have plenty of employees that... you can label as "different." like janice. uh-huh. yeah. fashion deficient. and tom... copy incapable. it's open kimono time.

looking good, dan. oh, we want to make sure all our ducks in a row. yeah. volume control syndrome. but we focus on the talent and skill that each person... brings to the team. i mean, no one's really concerned about labels. not even mine. labels get in the way. disabilities rarely do. visit thinkbeyondthelabel.com to evolve your work force. [ male announcer ] we call it the american renewal. because we believe in the strength of american businesses. ♪ ge capital understands what small businesses need to grow and create jobs. today, over 300,000 businesses rely on ge capital for the critical financing they need to help get our economy back on track. the american renewal is happening right now. ♪ it's the chevy spring event. and everyone deserves a car, truck, or crossover they can count on. like these consumers digest best buys. and all backed by a 100,000 mile powertrain warranty.

discover for yourself, and see why over a thousand people a day are switching to chevy. during the spring event, qualified lessees can get a low mileage lease on this new malibu ls for around $199 a month. call for details. the switch to chevy starts at chevy dealer dot com. and you'll dump your old mop. but don't worry. he'll find someone else. ♪ who's that lady? ♪ who's that lady? ♪ sexy lady ♪ who's that lady? [ female announcer ] used mops can grow bacteria. swiffer wetjet starts with a clean pad every time. and its antibacterial cleaner kills bacteria mops can spread around. swiffer gives cleaning a whole new meaning. ♪ lovely lady we are back with our all-star panel, anne applebaum,

rick stengel, the author of a new book, editor of "time" magazine, chrystia freeland of reuters, and ross douthat of the "new york times." let's talk about another political actor, and another impending election, which is the british elections. you used to be the deputy editor of "the london spectator." >> i was. >> when you look at david cameron running against gordon brown. this is a labour government in power for 12 years, presiding over a great economic crisis with a lot of assorted scandals, the government still has not been able to establish a commanding lead. what's wrong? >> they are working off a very, very bad history, a very bad legacy. you know, the british story really makes an interesting parallel to the american one. you had thatcherism which was so triumphant in britain, that it changed the whole context of

british politics. when tony blair came to power in 1997, he basically took the best ideases of thatcherism, kept them going and pushed them farth farther. that left the british conservatives far to the right, taking eccentric positions on issues. it left them without their big ideas. their big ideas were simply the ideas that tony blair was pursuing using different language and in some different ways. and they have been a marginal party. you know, in a two-party system you always have some votes. they haven't had much influence on british politics for the last 12 years. recovering from that has been a major trauma. they now have a leader who -- he's very impressive, very young. he has not said very much. we don't know what he thinks about. and this is, i think, deliberate, because the conservatives are so wary of offending people again, so wary of scaring people again, that they had to put somebody like

that into office. >> i think that's a narrative that totally ignores the financial crisis, you could have sid that with accuracy about what labour had done pre-financial crisis. post-financial crisis there's a tremendous opportunity to attack these guys. >> sure. >> blair and brown took on what was good about thatcherism, but what part of seemed good prior to 2007 is part of what devastated the british economy. britain bought into the whole deregulation of financial services, the whole notion of we will have the world's premiere financial center more aggressively than the united states. in relative terms, the british economy has been battered much more profoundly. >> how does a right of center party attack -- >> conservatives can say we believe in rules. we are a party that believes you have to have good rules to have a country operate properly. >> ross, you're a conservative, can you --

>> i think it -- >> these guys don't understand how capitalize how capitalism works. we understand how capitalism works. we believe you should have good, strong central bankers. >> is she the next sarah palin? >> this is a case where american conservatives have an advantage over british conservatives, because american conservatism has that populist tempers. the tea parties now are doing that british conservatives have a harder time mustering that kind of populism. david cameron is many things, but he's not really a populist. >> don't you worry that the tea parties could force the american conservative party in the direction of -- the american republican party in the direction of they might meet the same fate of the british conservatives? >> it's possible. >> as they become louder and more aggressive, they will be

more and more marginalized? >> the tea parties are clearly an asset for the republican party in 2010. >> what about 2012? >> 2012 it will depend -- we've been talking about the unemployment. >> it's the economy, stupid. >> it's the economy. the thing the tea parties have going for them, whatever you think people talk about, there's racism here, extremism there, they don't have specific policy agen agendas, but they're talking about the deficit. >> do the tea parties have the -- is the problem that the tea parties seem vibrant, energetic, they have a lot of energy to the republican party but they drive it to the right and it loses the middle ground? >> tea party -- ross, i would be curious to see what you think about this, it represents a historic movement in people of people who distrust government, that centralized power. those are the tea partiers. they disproportionately come from republicans, but in a way they always existed. now we have a name for them.

they may change what happens republicans and conservatives, but they've been around for a hundred years. and now they have a rubik that we can understand. i don't know how much influence they will have on mainstream republicans. >> they are partially hard-core-based conservative voters and partially the ross perot demographic. what happened to the ross perot demographic, once the economy bloomed and the deficit stopped -- in the early 1990s, the deficit seemed to be a huge problem, by the late 1990s it wasn't. the perot demographic, a lot of them went back to the republicans, some of them went to the democrats, that movement fizzled out. you can imagine the same thing happening if the economy grows at 1990s rates. >> it's not just about economic growth. the point we started on which is where is unemployment is the central political issue. one thing that we're seeing which is interesting right now, is a wall street rebound, which is much, much stronger than the

main street rebound. we are seeing an interesting fact which is american economies are really strong. and american ceos turn out to have done a good job. most people don't see that because we think about the wall street fiasco. if you look at corporate balance sheets they are incredibly strong. u.s. companies respond to the crisis swiftly and they are much more productive. then being more productive means they don't need that many more workers. we could see a strong corporate rebound but structural unemployment being quite high. if so, any political platform which speaks to those disaffected people who feel left out by this economy will be effected. >> if you are talking about character, leadership this is what your book is about, rick, when you look at the secular saint, nelson mandela, who you begin the book by saying is probably the one guy who is truly universally admired. if you were to summarize -- i

hope our viewers buy the book any way, if you were so summarize what is the key to mandela to being charismatic and wise? >> the key was his prison experience. 27 years in prison, he went in as a hot-headed young man and came out steeled, self controlled, measured, and he understood the power of the media, even though he been away from it for 27 years. he understood he to project tolerance, forgiveness, and that helped prevent a civil war in south africa and unified the country. he was media savvy in a way that he learned so fast that he could become this symbol that became for all of us the symbol of unification, leadership that we all yearn for. >> anne applebaum, rick stengel, chrystia freeland, ross douthat, thank you very much. we will be back.

you something aboutl osteoporosis you don't already know. it runs in families - my mother has it, and now i have it. so even though i tried to keep my bones strong, it wasn't enough. now, once-monthly bonivais . it didn't just stop my bone loss. boniva worked with my body to stop and reverse my bone loss. and studies show, after one year on boniva, nine out of ten women stopped and reversed theirs, too. (announcer) don't take boniva if you have low blood calcium, severe kidney disease, or can't sit or stand for at least one hour. follow dosing instructions carefully. stop taking boniva and tell your doctor if you have difficult or painful swallowing, chest pain or severe or continuing heartburn, as these may be signs of serious upper digestive problems. if jaw problems or severe bone, joint, and/or muscle pain develop, tell your doctor. you've got one body and one life, so don't wait. ask your doctor if boniva can help you stop losing and start reversing.

(announcer) for a free trial offer call 1-800-4-boniva or visit boniva.com aren't absorbed properly unless taken with food. he recommended citracal. it's different -- it's calcium citrate, so it can be absorbed with or without food. also available in small, easy-to-swallow petites. citracal.

hi, here are the headlines for you this hour. the body of polish president lech kaczynski is now on its way to the presidential palace in warsaw. the streets lined with huchndre of thousands of people. british prime donald tusk greeted the coffin. kaczynski, his wife and several senior military leaders were among 97 people killed in a plane crash in western russia yesterday. and experts do not expect a tsunami in the solomon islands despite a 6.9 magnitude quake. there are no reports of damages. "reliable source" begins at the

top of the hour. we will return to fareed zakaria "gps" after the break. oh sure, we have plenty of employees that... you can label as "different." like janice. uh-huh. yeah. fashion deficient. and tom... copy incapable. it's open kimono time. looking good, dan. oh, we want to make sure all our ducks in a row. yeah. volume control syndrome. but we focus on the talent and skill that each person... brings to the team. i mean, no one's really concerned about labels. not even mine. labels get in the way. disabilities rarely do. visit thinkbeyondthelabel.com to evolve your work force.

now for our "what in the world" segment. for months there's been a great chill across the pacific. relations between china and the united states have been filled with unfriendliness. accusations of disrespect, upset over meetings, threats of tariffs, anger over arms sales. but over the last week, things have begun to warm up. close watchers of this show will remember i recently told you to watch very carefully chinese president hu's decision to attend or not the white house's nuclear security summit scheduled for next week. china has been coy about whether it would send a delegation at

all let alone whether the president would head it, and how could the white house hold a global meeting on nukes if only the four of the world's five declared nuclear weapon sites were there. but then it was announced president hu would attend. late their day as president obama flew on air force one, the two presidents spent an hour on the phone together. the call was so long, in fact, the plane sat on the tarmac for ten minutes waiting for president obama to finish his conversation. in short order, the u.s. delayed the release of a report that many expected to admonish china for currency manipulation. then treasury secretary geithner extended a trip to india to drop in on the vice premiere in beijing. after that meeting china made clear it was now willing to address u.s. concerns on currency. a frequent guest on this show has called the u.s./china

relationship a marriage of convenience. he says the two nations find theys in a marriage that neither can fully dissolve and neither fully wants. everybody always talks about the u.s. being literally indebted to china for hundreds of billions of dollars, that's true, but it's much more than that. it's a two-way street. we must not forget that china needs the united states, too. it needs america to keep buying, spending and borrowing, which keeps the dollar strong and the chinese economy strong. of course the balance of power has shifted in recent years, with the united states arguably needing china more than it did in the past and with china arguably needing the united states less than it did in the past. so why did the formerly crossed couple suddenly kiss and make up? perhaps, as was suggested to me, the quarrelling couple remembered even during such struggles they still have go to bed with each other every night. so why not do it with smiles on their faces. we will be right back.

each year food executives come to grasse, france to work with roxane. here in this centuries old town cargill creates flavors. and food companies come to collaborate with cargill. creating unique tastes from thousands of rare flavors. helped by roxane... an ingredient mixing robot. and a team of flavor experts. food companies find the recipe for success. this is how cargill works with customers.

now, for our question of the week, here's what i want to know. should the united states continue to back afghanistan's president karzai? let me know what you think. and, as all, go to our website to see some good answers to last week's question. now, as i do every week, i want to recommend a book. this week it is "mandela's way: 15 lessons on life, love and courage." it's just out from today's guest, rick stengel.

the two collaborated on the biography "long walk to freedom." for this book, rick went back to his notes from the mandela years and turned it into advice on leadership and reflections on character. it is a short book and well worth reading. and now for the last look. behold the monument of african renaissance. the $27 million statue was unveiled this week to celebrate the nation's 50 years of independence. this in a country where, at last check, only about half the people are employed. and this is how the government chooses to spend its money. dignitaries from around the world took part in the celebration, but many senegalise are outraged, they held a protest with their own less expensive version of the monument but money wasn't the only issue in a country that is almost entirely