as general allen states, quote, successful transition will be characterized by our afghan partners taking increasingly -- increasing responsibility for the planning and command and control of these night operations. i would appreciate our witnesses sharing perfect relative to the conduct of night raids and ongoing talks to reach an understanding on those operations. i understand resolving this issue could help clear the way for concluding a strategic partnership agreement by the nato chicago summit in may. many challenges remain in afghanistan and should not be understated. much will depend on countering the cross border threat from insurgents finding refuge in safe havens in pakistan's territory including dealing with the threat from the network on progress and reconciliation talks with the taliban. much will depend on the hamid

karzai government proving the delivery of services and economic development taking on corruption and providing increased transparency and conduct of credible for financial and national elections. despite the challenges our troops throughout remains high and will see this mission through to completion and success. they deserve our support and have our support. senator mccain. >> let me thank our witnesses for appearing before us and their continued service to our nation. i appreciate dr. miller amended his expertise for this important hearing and obviously i especially recognize general allen who might be the only witness before this committee who's congressional testimony qualifies as art and art from his day job. i know general allen is first to say what inspires him to get up every morning to keep fighting hard each day and long into the

night is the selfless example set by the troops he leads. much of the recent news from afghanistan will be discouraging and that increase the desire of a war-weary public and our mission there. none of these -- none of this changes the u.s. national security interests at stake in afghanistan. it does not mean the war is out. there's a realistic path to success if the right decisions are made in the coming month. painful lesson we learned on september 11th, 2001, remains as true today as then. what happens in afghanistan as a direct impact on safety at home. if we quit afghanistan again as we did in the 1990s and abandoned the millions -- wanted to see our allies in the hopes

of succeeding together the consequences will be disastrous for us both. it does not have to be this way. our troops have made significant military progress on the ground in afghanistan. four years ago southern afghanistan, robot the taliban and coalition backed resources and strategy necessary to break the momentum. today the situation has reversed. similarly our effort to build the afghan national security forces has been completely overhauled. the result is growing numbers of afghan units that are capable of leading the fight. the a few afghan soldiers who turned their weapons on our troops should not obscure the larger fact that hundreds of thousands of afghans are fighting every day as our faithful allies in a common fight against al qaeda and the taliban and these afghan patriots are being wounded and

killed in far greater numbers than our forces. this should give us hope that a common goal of afghanistan that can secure and govern itself remains achievable overtime. the sustained -- to sustain this process is critical that president obama resist the short-sighted calls for additional reductions which are guaranteed of failure. our forces are currently slated to draw down to 68,000 by september. a faster pace than our military commanders recommended which is significantly increased the risk for our mission. at a minimum there should be a pause after september to assess the impact of the drawdown. it would be much better to maintain the 68,000 forces through the next year's fighting season, probably longer. at the strategic level our efforts continue to be undermined by the perception that the united states will abandon afghanistan once again.

this creates incentives for the taliban to keep fighting, pakistan army to hedge its bets by supporting the taliban and for our afghan allies to make counterproductive decisions based on fears of what a post american future will bring. let's reverse the dynamic and the best way to do so is by concluding a strong strategic partnership agreement with afghanistan which would serve as a concrete basis for a long-term political, economic and military relationship. two weeks ago one of the major obstacles to this agreement was resolved as u.s. and afghan governments reached an understanding on a timetable for handing over detention operations. this provides a reason for optimism that a similar resolution can be found and gradually transferred the need for a so-called light rays to afghan forces. this transition has already occurred in practice.

with these two issues resolved the strategic partnership agreement could provide a framework for an enduring u.s. military commitment to afghanistan beyond 2014 including a joint operating facilities and long term support for 350,000 afghan national security forces that are necessary to secure the country. this plan should include an enduring presence of special operations forces to continue counterterrorism cooperation with our afghan partners. such an agreement would encourage our allies to make similar long-term commitments. this is the right way to set the conditions under which our forces can responsibly drawdown and handle the afghans. strategic partnership would make clear to the taliban that they cannot wait a south and win on the battlefields us fostering

real reconciliation on favorable terms to the afghan government and to us. it would demonstrate to pakistan's army that continued support for the taliban is a losing bet that will only leave islamabad more isolated and less secure and would give afghan leaders the reassurance to fight corruption and govern better. in short this agreement could change the entire narrative in afghanistan and the region from eminent international abandonment for enduring international commitment. all of this is achievable if the right decisions are made in the months ahead. far from being an salvageable or not worth the effort as many now fear this war is still hours to win. after all we have given, after all the precious lives we have lost and all the vital interests we have at stake, now is not the time to quit. it is time to recommit ourselves to being successful. we owe nothing less to the tens

of thousands of americans who are risking their lives every day for this mission and for us. i think mr. chairman and the witness. >> thank you. dr. miller, we are delighted to have you with us today and you are acting under secretary of defense for policy and we call upon you. dr. miller. >> thank you. chairman levin, senator mccain, thank you for inviting me to testify today. i am pleased and honored to be here with the outstanding commander in afghanistan, general john allen. united states vital objectives in afghanistan remain to deny safe haven to al qaeda and the 90 taliban the ability to overthrow the afghan government. this administration is committed to meeting these 4 objectives and while we have faith and will face serious challenges our strategy is -- counterterrorism efforts against al qaeda have been extremely successful although the job is not

finished. there is no doubt we will severely degraded al qaeda's capacity. as a result of the surge in 2009 we have broken it reverse the taliban's momentum. the afghan national security forces are increasingly capable and increasingly in the lead. mr. chairman, our forces are performing extremely well as i saw firsthand in a trip to afghanistan i took me 2 weeks ago. we are well into a process of transition to a n s f leadership. the fact today almost 50% of afghans live in areas that began a transition process. mr. chairman, as you noted as interim milestone at some point in 2013 the ansf will provide security for all afghanistan. this will take a number of forms including u.s. and coalition forces partner with afghan units as is already occurring in a

number of places today. will also include for example the smaller footprint associated with u.s. and coalition forces. by the end of 2014 the ansf will be responsible for the security of their country. by that time u.s. and coalition forces will have moved to a much smaller presence focused on counterterrorism and training, advising, assisting afghan forces. mr. chairman and members of the committee there is no doubt the afghanistan war has been a tough fight. in the last several weeks have been particular be difficult. be inappropriate handling of korans and religious material at back room air base was an error that while an intentional send precisely the wrong signal. this unfortunate act stands in stark contrast to the many years during which u.s. forces demonstrated the respect for the religious practices of the afghan people. more recently the afghans had to

respond to the orca killings of 16 afghan civilians in kandahar. justice will be done and anyone responsible will be held accountable. we have been challenged by attacks by afghan personal. green on blue attacks. we will have to work through these incidents and challenges as president obama and secretary panetta discussed over the last week with president hamid karzai. it is critical that these tragic occurrences not blind us to the significant progress we have made. from 2010 to 2011 and initiated attacks in afghanistan were down 9%. this trend continued in 2012. for january and february this year and initiated attacks are down a further 22% from 2011 levels for the same month.

in october of 2008 there were only 140,000 afghans in the ansf. today there are 330,000 and we expect to reach our goal of 352,000 afghans in the ansf ahead of the october 2012 target date. today almost 90% of coalition operations in afghanistan are carried out in partnership with the ansf and the ansf is in the lead for more than 40% of operations. as you know, and as senator mccain mentioned we are negotiating the strategic partnership between the united states and afghanistan that will frame our enduring relationship. this strategic partnership will demonstrate that we learn the lessons from 1989 when our abrupt departure left our friends confused and our enemies emboldened. in partnership with hamid karzai and the afghan government we recently completed a crucial milestone when general ansf --

allen signed cooperation and defense ministers. we're working with the afghans at a more random of understanding that operations for special operations which when completed will further strengthen our partnership. concluding the strategic partnership will send a clear signal the united states remains committed to afghan security. such an assurance must and will continue beyond our planned transition in 2014. as president obama said in his state of the union address, quote, we will build an enduring partnership with afghanistan so that it is never again a source of attacks against america. the need for a long-term commitment extends also to coalition partners. as nato secretary-general met -- rasmussen said in december, quote, our commitment does not meet with transition. we will finish the job to help create a secure afghanistan for shared security. achieving a durable peace in afghanistan over time will require some form of reconciliation among afghans. it is by no means certain that

this reconciliation effort will bear fruit in the near-term but it is very much in our interests to tribe. as secretary clinton said any negotiated outcome with insurgents must be our read lines for reconciliation. surgeons must renounce violence, and must abide by the constitution of afghanistan. success in afghanistan depends on the support of afghanistan's neighbors particularly pakistan. like afghanistan and southern neighbors pakistan has interests that must be understood and addressed. pakistan has responsibilities. most importantly it needs to take steps to ensure militant and extremist groups cannot continue to find safe haven in pakistani territory. pakistan has powerful incentive to do so. in 2011 some 2,000 attacks in pakistan resulted in 2000400 death mostly from i eat thes.

mr. chairman and members of your committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. we embark on this fight more than a decade ago to ensure the terrorist network that struck in new york and washington d.c. and in the skies over pennsylvania would never again be able to use afghanistan as their sanctuary. thanks to the great courage and skill of the u.s. armed forces and civilian personnel, coalition partners and afghan partners our strategy has worked. while success in war is never guaranteed we are on a path to meet our objectives to deny safe haven to al qaeda and deny the taliban the ability to overthrow the afghan government. i would like to thank the committee for your continued support of our effort in afghanistan and your strong support for the great men and women of the u.s. armed forces. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. general allen. >> chairman levin, senator

mccain, distinguished members of the committee. this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss our operations in afghanistan. it is a pleasure to be here with my friend dr. jim miller who is acting undersecretary of defense for policy and it has been a pleasure for me to get to know him. over the last several weeks as he has been a very important ally of mine in helping to explain some policy issues with which we deal on a daily basis. let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to all of you for the support you provide to our men and women in uniform every day. that they are well equipped, well-trained and well lead as a great testament to the efforts of this committee and the work of this congress. on behalf of those troops and their families, thank you for all you have done for them. in the past eight months i have walked the grounds of afghanistan with many of those

troops along with my friend and partner, ambassador ryan crocker and civilian representative ambassador simon guest. i met with the leaders of most of the 49 other nations serving alongside us in the international security assistance force. all through this i have been in close consultation with afghan civilian and military leadership, most of whom have been enmeshed in this country's conflicts. and the darkness of the taliban for the ten years plus of this conflict. and i have gotten to know the mall quite well. so from those experiences i can tell you unequivocally three things. first we remain on track to ensure that afghanistan will no longer be a safe haven for al qaeda and will no longer be

terrorized by the taliban. second as the coalition the largest in recent history, we are well along in our progress to meet our 2010 lisbon summit commitments to transition security to the afghan national security forces by december of 2014. and third our troops know the difference they are making every day and the enemy feels that difference every day. to be sure, last couple months have been trying. in the wake of the revelations that american troops have mishandled religious texts to include the core and protests, some of them violent, occurred in several but only a few of the regions across afghanistan. 32 afghans lost their lives in these riots and even more were hurt. just since the first of january the coalition has lost 61 brave

troops in action from six different nations and 13 of them were killed at the hands of what appear to have been afghan security forces. some of whom were motivated we believe in part by the mishandling of religious materials. just as tragically reinvestigate in what appears to be the murder of 16 innocent afghan civilians at the hands of u.s. service members. each of these events is hard wrenching and my thoughts and prayers go out to all those affected by this violence. coalition and afghan alike. but i assure you the relationship between the coalition and the afghan security forces remain strong. two weeks ago i was in the helmand province visiting with marines and local afghan commanders. in the wake of the koran burning incident when the violence was at its peak a young marine said he and his unit were told about

the demonstration by their afghan counterparts. the afghan troops told them, quote, let us patrol outside the wire for a couple days. we have got this for you. understanding the gravity of the risk the afghans had assumed for them, the marine continue our afghan brothers were trying to protect us. this one statement spoken by at young marine conveys the power of this brotherhood in arms forged in battle over the years. it speaks to the trust we build with the afghans and the shock absorbency of this relationship. and yet we know there is much hard and did the work yet to be done. the progress is real and important we it is sustainable. we have severely degraded the insurgency. as one afghan commander told me in the south in the latter part of 2011, this time around the

taliban was the away team. on top of that success and as a result of our recent operations we have seriously degraded the taliban's ability to launch a major spring offensive of their own. this spring they will find many of their catches empty. their former strongholds untenable and many of their foot soldiers absent or unwilling to join the fight. in kandahar, 54 were members decided to reintegrate into afghan society. when asked to lay down their arms they would claim the unrelenting pressure they were under. they found themselves against capable afghan forces with greater frequency. and when will to fight foreigners they were unwilling to fight their afghan brothers especially afghans who fought back with courage and skill because of the training that we

had provided them. and the training we provide is critical to our mission. throughout history insurgencies have seldom been defeated by foreign forces. instead they have been ultimately beaten by indigenous forces. in the long run our goals could only be achieved and then secured by afghan forces. transition the linchpin is the strategy, not merely the way out. during the last 12 months the afghan security forces have expanded from 276,000 to 330,000 and they will reach their full surge strength ahead of the scheduled deadline in october. expansion and professional as asian of the afghan security forces allows us to recover the remaining 23,000 u.s. surge troops by this fall. enables us to pressure the taliban to reconcile and makes possible security transition to

afghans in accordance with our lisbon summit commitments and on time. security conditions remain very good in areas that have transitioned from kabul in the east to herod in the west, from masar el shaif in the south, there are expected to assume the security lead for two therefore possibly more of the afghan population. as the potential unifying influence in afghanistan the afghan forces are better than we thought they were to be. importantly better than they thought they could be. as they move to the 4 they are gaining more and more confidence and more and more capability. in the past five months 89% of the total conventional operations partner with conventional and afghan forces and 42% of those operations had

afghans in the lead. over the next two years coalition forces will remain combat ready but increasingly focused on security force assistance and supporting afghan combat operations. afghan leadership is simply the and i can tell you the afghans want to lead and they want the responsibility that comes with it. in fact for the first time our joint coalition afghan operational campaign plan from january of 2012 to june of 2013 was conceived and developed and planned with afghans in the lead. they are truly emerging as the real defeat mechanism of this insurgency and increasingly as an emblem of national unity. this is essentials for the long term security of afghanistan. but none of us harbor illusions. we know that we face long-term

challenges as well. we know that al qaeda and other extremist networks, the same network that kill afghans and coalition troops every day still operate with impunity across the border in pakistan. we know that the taliban remains a resilient and determined enemy and many of them will try to regain their lost ground this spring through assassination, intimidation, high-profile attacks and placement of ieds. iran continues to support the insurgency and fuel the flames of violence. we know corruption still robbed afghan citizens of their faith in their government and for governance itself often advances insurgent messages. this campaign has been long. it has been difficult and it has been costly. there have been setbacks to be sure and we are experiencing them now. there will be more setbacks ahead.

i wish i could tell you this war was simple. progress could be easily measured. but that is not the way of counterinsurgency. they are fraught with successes and setbacks which can exist in the same space and the same time. but each must be seen in the larger context of the overall campaign. and i believe that campaign is on track. we are making a difference. i know this and our troops know this. i would like to take another moment of your time today, mr. chairman and distinguished members to end where i began this morning. with our troops. and the thousands and thousands of american and coalition partners that are bearing the weight of this conflict and remember that there will be a number that will never return to their families. i ask you to please note this. they are central to my every decision and to every word i

speak before this committee. one of them, a young marine who was laid to rest last tuesday at arlington cemetery was a hero. he knew what he stood for and he knew his mission. he knew the risks and he knew he might have to give his life for this cause for which we fight. so sergeant william stacey prepared a letter for his family. to be read in the event of his death and in it he said there will be a child who will live because men let the security they enjoyed in their home country to come to his. and this child will learn in new schools that had been built and will walk his street not worried about whether or not his leader's henchman will come and kidnapped him and he will grow into a fine man who will pursue every opportunity his heart could desire and he will have the gift of freedom which i have enjoyed for so long.

and if my life by safety of a child who will one day change the world than i know that it was all worth it. mr. chairman, i can only add that i am confident that americans are safer today because of the sacrifices of the magnificent men and women of uniform our service members represented in this letter by sergeant stacey and i am confident that we will prevail in this endeavor. i want to thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today, for the extraordinary support of this committee, the support you provide every day to the young men and women of our armed forces who i am privileged and honored to lead and i look forward to answering your questions. thank you. >> thank you, general allen for your powerful, cleaner and moving statement.

thank you for reading sergeant stacey's letter to us. it has the kind of powerful effect and immediate effect that i wish every american could be privileged to hear. let's do a seven minute round. votes at 12:30 and we should be able to get in a first-round for everybody. general, let me start with you. did you support the president's decision to draw down 33,000 u.s. surge force by the end of the summer and do you still support that decision? >> i was on record in doing so and i do still. >> is that reduction on pace? are we on track to withdraw the remaining 23,000 troops of that 33,000 surge force by the end of september? ..

relative to the pace of further reductions. can i ask you whether or not that was your idea, to wait until after the removal of the 33,000 surge forces before you would make that recommendation? >> that was the result of the conversation was chain of command, sir. >> is that an idea that you think is a wise idea? pie do mr. chairman.

i think it's the best way ultimately to identify the state of the insurgency, the state of the fall isaf force to include the u.s. force and also to evaluate the operational requirements in order to make a comprehensive recommendation mr. chair. >> is that timetable, it would be sometime in the last say three months or year that he would make that recommendation? >> i believe so, sir. >> president obama and president karzai in their coordinated statement last week committed themselves to two key dates. one is the 2014 date, which was agreed to at lisbon for when african -- afghan security forces would have full responsibility for security throughout afghanistan and then the 2013 date, when the lead for combat operations will shift to

afghan forces and u.s. forces in support. it is the 2013 timeframe for transitioning the lead for combat operations, is that consistent with the lisbon plan for completing the transition or for afghans having full responsibility for security throughout afghanistan? >> chairman, the lisbon summit envisaged that there would be several tranches of the geography of afghanistan that would transition over time. it ultimately, we determined that it would be five tranches. the first transition transition now in the second has just begun implementation. we are in the process of deliberating on the third. we anticipate that the fifth and

final tranche of transition will be announced by president karzai probably in the summer of 2013 with implementation to begin at some point thereafter and that is generally 30 to 45 days thereafter. >> technically for the lisbon summit, when the fifth tranche of transition ultimately begins implementation, afghan national security forces are in the lead for security across the country. that is a process which will continue that leadership assisted by the isaf forces, in different ways based on the geography of enemy threat out to the end of 2014. i hope that answers your question. >> 2013 being in the lead is consistent with the 2014 date for being, for having full responsibility. >> it is, chairman. >> according to "the wall street journal" article that the u.s.

has proposed reducing the size of the afghan national security forces from the 352,000th thousand and strength goal for this year to 230,000 after 2014, partly to reduce the cost of sustaining the afghan forces and general then olds are out of our training mission in afghanistan cited the same proposals based on what the international community will provide financially and as i said in my opening comment, i believe it is cost-effective to sustain a larger afghan security force compared to the cost and that is the cost in both dollars and lives. now, it seems to me general, given the fact that you and our military leaders agree the key to success of our mission in afghanistan is the transition of responsibility for the security of the afghan people to the

afghan security forces and by the way it is a position which i wholeheartedly believed in right at the beginning. your statement today, your eloquent statement about transition being the lynchpin of our strategy is a very sustained and very strong way of stating that. but given the fact that a transition to a strong afghan security force is the key to success of this mission, why would it be, why would it make sense to talk about reducing the size of the afghan army by a third and have you participated in those deliberations and have you concluded that we should see the reduction of the afghan force by one third? >> chairman of course the number

352 is the surge force. it was always intended that the temporary number so the recovery of that surge force would occur at some point in the future. the study, which was undertaken that was to look out to the year 2017 and look at the various potential intelligence realities that the afghan national security forces could face potentially, that series of studies created a number of different force structures, which we believed had varying levels of capabilities based on the most likely potential enemy scenario. of those scenarios, the one which we thought was sufficient in capability, which was the most him port and the initial finding, was one that had the correct balance of both afghan national police and moi presence and ana presence.

that force is about 230 but there are a number of different options that we are continuing to evaluate, all the way from the current force, the 352 force which will continue to exist for several years once we have implemented it, down to a force that was smaller than 230 which probably doesn't have the right capability, the right combination of capabilities. the 230 force, which is a target number and not the specific objective at this time, a target number, was the right number given what we think will be the essential enemy scenario for 2017, sir. >> so there has been no decision to reduce the afghan force below the 350,000? >> i think the decision ultimately will come both from the west side and the consultation. >> we haven't decided it should be reduced from the 350. >> i don't believe we have sir

and another considerations. it is not a decision solely for the united states. >> i know but we decided that it was our position that it should be reduced. >> it is our decision that ultimately therefore should be reduced between 350. >> is not we have not decided to what level? >> not that specific member to my knowledge. >> i would hope that would be carefully done and not be dependent upon the financial issues. >> served that is a very important point and very importantly to this we will be continuing to monitor the quality metrics as to the ansf and those quality metrics will also be accompanied by any consistent evaluation of the security environment as well and that security environment will be ultimately the key indicator of whether that drawdown should ultimately occur so it will be condition based and i submit those metrics every six months and starting with the next set of metrics we will begin that process of evaluating what we

think this scenario will be for the post-2014 period and evaluating the conditions ultimately for the drawdown but for now serve there is an expectation we will draw the 352 force down to a number the number that we think it's generally the security environment. >> do those indications submit that 350 is the right number and that is what you recommend? >> yes sir that is my hope that at this juncture again based on the studies, based on the intelligence scenarios for which reran the analysis, at this point to 31 to 236 was about the right number, the combination of army and police capabilities. >> senator mccain. >> sure would be interested in seeing those studies that bring it down to 230 and 236th general because that would contradict every study that has been done in the past. so past studies were fraud and

inaccurate or the present study is fraud and inaccurate but it all fits into the scenario that concerns many of us and that is that the news is dominated by how fast we can drawdown and how much we will draw down and when we will draw down. we don't hear any more commitments of victory. we don't hear any commitments to success, and it shouldn't surprise you or anybody general plan president karzai exhibit some of the behavior that he does, that the taliban feel that they can wait us out, that the pakistanis continue to support the haqqani network and continue to hedge their bets because all they hear about general is withdrawals. they know what is on the front page of "the new york times" when it says within the administration about the pace of

drawdown. not achieving goals and then drawing down, but how rapidly we can drawdown. so i am also interested in the fact that we can't make a decision on force levels in the year 2013 until the end of the year 2012. is that what you are telling this committee? >> i am telling you senator that after withdrawing 23,000 troops from the drawdown, after moving through, after conducting operations during the fighting season, in the aftermath of that i need to be able to evaluate whether that force structure of 68 k. plus about 40,000 isaf forces will be the kinds of combinations of forces plus the progress that has been made with the ansf in combination to handle what i think will be the operational environment of 2013. >> basically you have no opinion about the end of march of 2012 about what our military presence would be in 2013?

>> my opinion is -- >> what is your opinion at this particular juncture? >> my opinion is we will need significant combat power in 2013 sir. >> like 68,000? >> 68,000 is a good going in number but i/o the president some response on that. >> and the response about the chairman's question on support of the past reductions and forces that have been made to support those decisions. didn't you all safe to say that it increase increase the risk? >> i did, sir. >> so, does it surprise you when president karzai starts looking at a situation where the united states recently -- does it surprise you when the isi continues their support of the taliban and killing americans when we are sounding an uncertain trumpet, general? >> sir there may be an uncertain

trumpet out there but much of the coverage has not been helpful to this process. but i am very clear that i believe we will be successful in this campaign. >> i do too militarily. strategic partnership agreement is close? >> we have not begun the final negotiations on the strategic partnership yet serve. we think it is close. >> thank you and i would like to especially thank the administration for their efforts in this, but i would also like to thank my two colleagues, senator lieberman and senator graham and their consistent efforts to get this done. there is no american that knows more about the detainee issue than senator graham does and i am very grateful for his continued participation in the

whole detainee issue and senator lieberman's assistance in a many times unpopular position on this issue. the strategic partnership agreement seems to me is more important than just an agreement about detainees and about night grades. there is a commitment on the part of the united states to remain present and force in afghanistan in the foreseeable future. do you feel having that degree of importance? >> it may be one of the most important outcomes in recent years of this conflict, sir. >> and so, you and ambassador crocker are working very hard on that? >> we are, sir, working very hard. >> dr. miller do you share that view? >> senator may cain, yes i do. i think it's critically important to reach a strategic

partnership. the president has stated clearly that we have an enduring commitment to afghanistan and the strategic partnership will be a concrete substantiation of that. there will be a lot of work to do after that but it's a critical element. >> and you are encouraged by recent progress? >> yes, sir, understanding the tumultuous last couple of months with the events which is talked about, i am very encouraged by the progress and encouraged by the progress is on the ground. >> general allen do believe the two remaining major options for success in afghanistan are corruption in the karzai government and continued sanctuary support of the taliban by pakistan? >> may i hear that again? >> the two remaining obstacles to success in afghanistan, the corruption issue of the karzai

government and a pakistani sanctuary and isi assistance to the taliban. >> i do. >> have you seen any change in those two major obstacles? >> sir i think we have done good work with the afghan government of late. there have been a number of initiatives in partnership with president karzai and his government. he has appointed a presidential executive to the commission headed by minister of finance to partner with isaf and with the international community on the issues of reclaiming borders and airports. that is an important move. >> have you seen any change in the isi relationship with the taliban -- the haqqani network? >> i have not, sir. >> general, as you know the american people are war weary. public opinion polls show that most americans want out of

afghanistan and into this decade-long conflict, more than a decade and more than 1000 lives. you had a chance to speak to the american people about what is at stake here. what would you say to them? >> personally what i would do senators to thank them for their incredible support to the men and women and to the campaign and to our services. we have come together in afghanistan to accomplish the mission which is to deny al qaeda safe haven and to deny al qaeda the opportunity or the taliban the opportunity and the governments of afghanistan. i would thank them for that and that is the first thing i would say. i would say that the investment in this campaign by the united states in its 49 coalition partners has been to shape that

insurgency and build an afghan national security force capability which would also take over the campaign, the counterinsurgency campaign, become the defeat mechanism and that is happening. that transition is occurring and i would point to that as an example of the success, as an example of a successful outcome of the investment that has been made by this country and the other countries of the coalition, ultimately to deny taliban the opportunity to ever overthrow this government again and to permit afghanistan to sink once again into the darkness of the taliban which would welcome al qaeda back into afghanistan. they have made no effort to separate themselves from al qaeda and if that were to happen afghanistan could once again become a launching pad for international terrorism and i think the progress that has been made at the societal level in the progress that has been made within the afghan national security forces to push back the moment some of the taliban and to deny al qaeda safe haven has

been remarkable and it has come from the sacrifices from a population of this country and the other 49 states that are part of isaf and i would tend in -- thank them thank them for that sacrifice. >> i thank you general and i would hope they would hear that sentiment is a -- exactly as you you said a. >> thank you for your thoughtful testimony in general allen thank you for your service, you and your family and thank you also for one of the most compelling statements that i have ever heard here, which reflects sincerely your profound appreciation of the dedication to the men and women that you lead. thank you very much. i am going to oversimplify i think what you're operational challenges are but they seem -- there seem to be two in my mind. one is to be able to embed nato advisers with afghani forces and

second to be able to operate 24/7 and in fact be able to operate in the evening, the night when we have technical advantages. both of those issues have been shaken by incidents and discussion over the last few weeks. first with respect to the night raid, there has been some discussion of authorizing a raid through afghan through procedures and warrants which to me was seriously impeding nato's ability and the afghan military forces ability to operate. is that something that is seriously considered? would effectively undermine our ability to operate? >> senator is my intention with respect to the outcome of those negotiations that the memorandum of understanding on night operations that we not impede the contributions of those night

operations made every single day in the battle space. just as we are accomplishing transition in other areas, it is appropriate as time goes on and is afghan takeover greater security operations, that we would acknowledge the afghan constitution in that process as well and as you recall in iraq and we went to a wire-based system. that system was successful and it was successful because we were able to streamline the judicial process in ways that supported the operations rather than impeded the operations. so we are just beginning the negotiations in this regard and as you might imagine -- i assure you we will get it right. we won't get it fast but the outcome will be night operations that continued to contribute to this campaign with afghans deeply in the process which is appropriate ultimately to the

march toward sovereignty. >> let me just put it in context. is it accurate to say that the haqqani network and the taliban operates frequently with attacks against the operations at night and that would not be inhibited by potential positions? does that happen? >> it is is operating 24 hours a day. those operations are particularly valuable in neutralizing their networks and the other networks. >> let me turn to another issue, nato forces, more precisely nato forces. has that giving you cause to rethink how you would do this not only in terms of the safety of nato personnel but the -- of

the afghan security forces and global populations to small groups of nato personnel operating with companies of afghani nationals? >> it clearly is a potential challenge. you are correct in how you phrase that question. i'm going to watch this very closely. we take a lot of measures obviously to reduce what are known as green-on-blue attacks and i can go into greater detail about that issue if you desire but it is something of which i am significantly concerned. we are going to watch it very closely. i take heart on the success of the afghan local police as potentially a model and an indicator of how this will unfold because as you know across afghanistan there are multiple, tens of afghan local police garrisons of which our special operators are embedded across the country and in all of those, well over 12,000 afghan

local police there is yet to be an attack on any of our green berets, seals or marines. i believe we will do this correctly, obviously. i think we can continue the process of embedding our security forces and their platforms and advisers into these formations, and undertaking the measures for protection that we now have underway, sir. >> dr. miller, chairman king has been asking general allen about some of the major challenges ahead, the corruption and other factors which might be generally put in the category of a fundamental issue which is tactical success on the ground. if the government fails, then most experts, suggested me and we will not be successful.

one of the tensions in afghanistan has historically in the last 10 years been between a central government and decentralized traditions there. are you exploring ways in which we now promote constitutional changes that the government will respectively decentralize and the afghani's can more effectively decentralize because again, from my perspective, that might be one way to facilitate more effective governance or at least to accept the reality on the ground of what is happening. >> senator let me answer in two parts. the first is to say that the central government that kabul government is going to remain critical to the success of afghanistan over time and that the work that is underway needs

to continue to do with minimizing corruption and providing stronger institutions will be vital so sir as you indicated and a senator mccain indicated there is much work to do and we will continue to work on institution building. that is true with the department of defense and also share with other agencies that we look to to strengthen them over time. server at the same time the second , what i observed when i was there two weeks ago was the importance of district level and sometimes village level leadership. the elders of a village, the role of the mosques and the important role of districts and provinces of the government and chiefs of police so i think what we are looking at for success is a model that includes a strong government in kabul where

corruption has come down over time because it has resources that are able to provide not just for its own protection but provide an avenue of resources that down to the local level and at the same time continue to build that from the grassroots if you will the big village and district level, build strong governance. it is not an either/or, i think it's both. >> thank you very much. thank you gentlemen. my time has expired. >> thank senator reid. next is senator chambliss. >> thank you center lieberman. gentleman first of all thank you for your service. general allen you picked up right where general petraeus left off often we thank you for that. the kind of leadership that you provided and please express to those troops under you how much we appreciate their service. >> we will do that, thank you

sir. >> just following up on what senator reid was talking about with respect to night raids. having been in afghanistan a number of times and visited with some of those troops, afghan troops who are doing those night raids in a very professional way and the way in which has minimized even the risk of civilian casualties is pretty important part of our process as we move towards ultimately achieving the victory there. i'm really concerned about this potential shift and general alan my question to you is will that shift increase the possibility of casualties in their ability to finish? >> and important questions are and i believe senator that if we do this right, it will not impede either the operations nor will it increase civilian

casualties. as i presume you understand we are in about 2400 operations, special operations a year. this last year we had about 2200 night operations. up those 2200 or so night operations, 90% of them we did not fire a shot. on more than 50% of them we got the targeted individual and 30% more, we got the next associate of that individual as well so 83% roughly of the night operations be got either the primary target or the associate. an an olive is not operations even with 10% where we fired a shot, there was less than 1.5% civilian casualties. now i don't diminish any civilian casualties by reducing it to his percentage point. everyone every one of those is

tragic but after 9200 night operations, 27 people were killed or wounded in night operations. that would argue for the power of night operations, preserving and reducing civilian casualties in and all of the kinds of operations than necessarily being a risk of creating additional civilian casualties. that is in my mind as we go through this process of negotiating an outcome for the afghan is a nation of night raids. >> those are very impressive statistics and unfortunately they are not reported in the afghan press. they seem to only highlight the negative aspects which are very very few. with regard to afghan-taliban reconciliation deep the of administration is made it conscious decision to overtly seek reconciliation with the taliban and part of that action

on the part of the of administration is then to offer up five detainees and who have been identified by the taliban themselves as the five that they would like to have released as they show good faith according to the administration. if the united states is serious about negotiations regarding reconciliations, personally i am offended by any negotiations with terrorists who are killing our men and women up beside that, i am really offended that there would be some calmer station about releasing five of the meanest and nastiest killers in the world to the taliban as a show of good faith, particularly to have them housed in a country where our experience has not been very good and they are detaining the individuals that have been previously released to them. now i understand that the

negotiations dr. miller have moved from the department thence to the state department. i understand also from comments made by secretary panetta yesterday that these transfers are now on hold because as some of us suspected, now the administration does not have confidence that the government is not going to be capable to living up to the requirements and conditions we put on them for these five individuals. my question to both of you is, do you think that the release of these five individuals to the taliban, even under the conditions that are being discussed is a wise move when you consider the rate of recidivism that we know now to be about 27%, and when we particularly now that these are five leaders of the taliban who have previously been declared to be too dangerous to be released

and are likely to re-enter the fight. dr. miller i would like your comments, please. >> senator chambliss the department of defense and secretary panetta support the process of reconciliation and our efforts to support afghan-led reconciliation. we are doing that with eyes wide open and understanding the nature of the individuals that are involved. working closely with the state department and others to see how we can assist the afghans. let me say sir that no decisions have been made on the possible transfer of detainees and as you know the law requires the secretary of defense with the concurrence of the secretary of state to certify to congress in the necessary security measures that assurances are in place before a transfer can occur. we are in absolute agreement that these assurances must be in place before we can go forward but as i said no decision to do so has been taken.

>> do you have any comment on that issue? >> i think as long serve as the secretary in accordance with law as dr. miller said can certify that they will not be calm recidivists there is the break potential he on the process and i support the secretary's view in that regard. >> senators allen previously you noted that one of the greatest short assist -- shortages were rotary and fixed-wing and an increased requirement for recognizance platforms in full motion video. he also remarked that intelligence analysts and associated systems were also necessary to properly exploit. do you believe that since we last had a conversation about this, that you are getting the kind of support from dod and the intelligence community in terms of prioritizing and acquiring

those assets? >> i think we are in better shape than we were before and we are grateful for that support. general mattis and the department and the resources that have been made available to the air force and from the conference have helped to improve that situation. to include even the arrival of hyperspectral capabilities in the theater has been very helpful to us in that arrival has been most welcome. >> thanks again for your commitment and the commitment of your family. >> thank you, sir. >> thanks senator chambliss. it's a privilege to be occupying the chair while senator levin had to go to the floor. i i will take the liberty to say very briefly that i share chairman chambliss's concerns and i personally know that the taliban has said in the negotiations of this is the way to build trust.

it's much too much, too soon to give up five of these detainees. there other things we have to do before we get to that point to build up the trust and frankly i don't know how secretary panetta could ever certified that these five would not be recidivists so personally i hope he never does. senator ben nelson. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you general allen and secretary miller for your testimony today and for being here and general allen, please take your appreciation back to the men and women in uniform. and the civilians they are working together to help solve a very challenging problem that we all face. one of the things that we have struggled with as a country and as individuals and as a government and a military is trying to outline progress and put it into a metric program to

understand weather was 25% of our goal or 50%. unless there is some definition, the metrics associated with that, one persons success is another person's loss so we establish some time ago the benchmarks in afghanistan and i'm interested in both of your analyses here of our efforts in achieving those benchmarks and last october, the report on progress towards security and stability in afghanistan revealed that the f. garden army units assess only 30% were effective independently and likewise only 44% of the afghan police assess were similarly

affected -- effect it. could you give us at least a benchmark thought about how that direction is going? are we going from 36 to 40 or 54 and army and up to 44% with the afghan police? >> servlet may offer you a couple of comments here but i would like to take the question so i can give you a level of specificity that your question deserves. in january 2011 there were 155 battalion sized units in afghanistan. 101 of those were rated effective as advisers or effective with assistance. none of them are rated as independent at that point. year later there are 168 kandak sized battalion sized units who have gone from 101 to 127 that

have been rated in the top three and 11 have been rated independent with advisers. in just a year there has been significant improvement and it's not a linear improvement. is really an improvement that gains capability over time in a nonlinear way. there have been similar improvements with the police as well but let me take that question and make sure i get that to you without level of specificity that it deserves sir. >> dr. miller are you -- there has been progress and improvement in these areas of benchmarks that we have established and i know they have been worked on with the secretary of state as well as the secretary the secretary of defense. >> senator nelson, yes i am satisfied that we are making progress and i know there will always be times when they slip back and have to refrain --

regain progress we have made before but his general allen said what we have seen is very significant progress and we will provide detailed numbers as you requested, sir. and let me also deal with the issue of the numbers of personnel that are now in the afghan national security force. both as to the present number in the future number because we can always evaluate everything simply on the basis of cost. i think we are set to know what the cost is. can you tell me how much it cost the u.s. taxpayer to support the current afghan national security force? i guess let me ask you secretary miller. >> sir, let me pull up the numbers. my recollection is that the request for fy12 was a little over 11 but we requested 5.8 for fy13. so if you look at that cost

compared to the overall cost of the conflict, it is relatively small. >> i know generally you don't evaluate the needs simply based on what the cost is about we can't ignore costs and i appreciate that fact that you are not saying well, all we have to have the best afghan national forces that money can buy and the money we can afford but it is a factor for the american people to be aware of what the true financial cost and financial burden given the fact that the debt continues to rise and we are trying to control our deficit and at the same time right size the budget to take care of our national security needs as well. secretary millard to you agree with that? >> senator nelson, yes i do. >> i always appreciate short, crisp answers one possible.

in looking towards alternatives to violence, it's my understanding that insurgents may be looking toward alternatives to violence. at the same time, the taliban seems to be threatening more violence and more sensational violence. is fair, there, apart from the sensationalism right now of the threats following the koran and the unfortunate slaying of civilians, is there actually a bona fide effort at trying to find alternatives to the violence among the insurgency? general? >> senator nelson, that is a really important question because he gets at the ability to decompose the insurgency and it is pursuing the process of reintegration. in any spectrum that would occur in a counterinsurgency on the one hand we have the political

agreement that would be called reconciliation on the and on the other and we would have the individual opportunity for the insurgents themselves to come off the battlefield for whatever reason we would be able to entice them to come off. that would be reasonable and where we have seen some pretty substantial success in the last years in the area of reintegration. my own experience from iraq and on bar province was when we began i began to see the individuals reintegrate, to come off the battlefield because they had for whatever reason, either their grievance have been resolved or they had elected finally to give up violence, that began a process that decomposition from the bottom up of the insurgency and when enough of them began to come over the leadership had to listen very carefully. what has happened in the last year in afghanistan which i think is very important is that the karzai administration to a minister within the afghan peace

and reconciliation process and peace council is the current ceo if you will of that organization after the assassination of president rabbani who headed the high teens council. we have created, assisting the afghans, their integration of process throughout the country, a bureaucracy which has a provincial peace committee in each of the provinces and the joint secretary to support. on one january of 2011 there were about 600 insurgents who had reintegrated. today there are 3800 there is another several hundred that are in the process of reintegrating. there aren't number of others that we call informal reintegration. we don't know that number but there are even more. that is something that the insurgency has to account for. we have attempted to intimidate them but very few have gone back

and i think that is a very important advance and your question addresses that very issue. >> i appreciate that response. i would hope that the reconciliation effort might be successful with the top leaders as well but i suspect that his image more difficult challenge. >> it likely will take longer, sir. >> again thank you. is the thank you senator. >> thank you senator nelson. senator sessions. >> chairman levin and ranking member mccain, i think you have achieved a great deal of wisdom over the years dealing the issue that we face and i think senator levin has indicated his strength in support. general allen said the soldiers deserve our report and they have

it in this plan that i believe you are working on. senator mccain has likewise said that. dr. miller, you said that afghanistan will meet the challenge in your opening statement. you expressed confidence that we can be successful. you quoted again president obama statement, we will build an enduring relationship with afghanistan. senator mccain talks about the vision that we had for the success in afghanistan. we had bipartisan support for that, and we are having some difficulties now, certainly in the press is not on the ground. we have had the problem with the koran and we have had the problem with the afghan killing of and it appears one of our

soldiers has build unjustifiably men, women and children and president karzai has made a very odd statement as far as i'm and it also causes me concern about where he is. i guess general allen is a person on the ground and i ask this question of general petraeus when he went to lead the surge in iraq and the question is, in your best judgment, working for the american people and you are required to give this congress your best opinion of the military leader concerning our effort there. is it an effort that we move smartly ahead following the vision we have had, it seems to be a bipartisan decision and if the circumstances reaches a

point where we cannot be successful will you tell us? >> i will tell you the moment i believe we cannot be. >> how you would describe the series of negative public events? how does that impact your impact. we are members of the great congress and of the great nation. we are in policies that have ups and downs in them and sometimes we have an event to change her mind. is this one of the situations in which you believe that the adverse event can be worked through and that this is not a failed event in our relationship with afghanistan? >> senator i believe we can work through it all. >> president karzai and his

comments, mr. graham and senator mccain and several others, i was taken aback about some of the comments that were made and you are with us in that meeting three or four weeks ago and senator made clear his concern, crystal-clear. is important, open direct exchange that i thought was valuable but i know president karzai has made additional comments at the same nature since then so what can you tell us about where we stand with regard to the president on afghanistan? >> senator you up have put your finger on the issue that there is frustration with these events and these events in many respects have struck it low at the core of the relationship. and this president, president

karzai, has to be able to speak to the afghan people about putting our relationship in the context of a long-term relationship with afghanistan. so i understand his frustration, and i understand that it was just one event we would have a particular view but we have had several events. the video, the burning of religious materials of the koran, the shootings and punch way and the aggregate. those are significant events. but i believe he is committed to a relationship with the united states. he was very clear in a strategic, in a video teleconference in which i was in attendance with ambassador crocker. he was very clear in his commitment to a strategic partnership with the united states. but these incidents cannot be ignored. he has to explain those

incidents to his own population. some of the terms that he has used i reject. i reject the use of the word demon when it is applied to the 130,000 plus troops that serve in isaf and the u.s. forces among them and i reject the equivalence of our forces with the taliban in the same sentence. i understand why in frustration and anger those words can come out but on behalf of our forces, on behalf of the american people and the populations of the 50 states of isaf, i reject that term. those magnificent troops are sacrificing every day. many are sacrificing their lives. just before i walked in, i was given a report that one of our troops who when he saw a small

child underneath one of our mraps in afghanistan through himself under the vehicle to pull the child out so he would not be harmed in the process paris himself. now that his sacrifice and that is dedication to a cause just as william stacey, sergeant stacey stacy was laid to rest recently and dedicated his life to this cause. i've believe and president karzai understands that and i believe president karzai appreciates that as well and he has said that publicly but it is difficult to get past some of these recent incidents and in the process words might be spoken that we offer grit, and i reject the term daemon as it is applied to our forces and satanic and inhuman. those are terms that do not apply to us but i can understand how in moments of stress and anger they might be uttered.

>> thank you very much general allen. i have to say people who live compared your leadership in afghanistan universally are extremely complementary in what you are doing and your integrity is unquestioned and i take comfort in your honest analysis. dr. miller, if you want to comment on that. my time is up but perhaps he would also like to comment. >> senator sessions i would simply like to associate myself completely with general allen's remarks and say that it has been an incredible period of about a month and during that time, during an incredibly difficult time, we have also in addition to the conversations with president obama and president karzai and the video at conference telephone calls, we have also seen general allen

conclude the memorandum of understanding on one of most sensitive issues of detention operations. during these challenging times. to me that as a signal that there is resilience and it also signals general allen's terrific leadership as you describe. we need to have an enduring relationship and this general allen said we need to understand that tragic events will happen and we will continue to have challenges but that the strategy under which we are operating, and the plan that we are implementing, we need to have the courage and wherewithal to make changes. >> thank you mr. chairman. senator graham and gauged president karzai about that strategic agreement. when we left, we were worried. we didn't know what would happen

so it is a very very important agreement and i'm glad it has been worked out because without it i think we would have problems and with that i think we can develop an enduring relationship. thank you. >> thank senator sessions. well said. senator web. >> thank you mr. chairman. general i would echo the comments of a lot of people and i would echo your comments. it is a very tough situation that you are confronting and we are appreciative of what you are doing. let me ask you, to begin with, about two years ago general jim jones, the national security adviser estimated there were fewer than 100 al qaeda in afghanistan. how many al qaeda would you estimate are in afghanistan? >> i think about the same, sir. >> about the same? i would say as a starter in terms of our mission of denying

al qaeda sanctuary in afghanistan, we have been pretty successful. i would like to make another point. we are talking about the frustration of the american people with how long this task has been taking. there is obviously a difference between toppling a government and developing long-term security practices and what afghanistan has gone through but it is rather frustrating i think for a lot of people in this country when we are defining success at this point as having an afghanistan military and police force that would be capable of taking charge of his own security operations by late 2014 which is about 13 years

after 9/11 and after the taliban government was toppled. we know the reality here that we are discussing that is not really the end of the war. it is a time when we are looking at a point where the afghani's will be able to fight their own war or take care of their own security measures and we know that this is a culture that does know how to fight. i think we are presumptuous when we talk about how we are trying to train up the afghanistan mathilde -- military and police forces. they have been fighting for hundreds of years and the fact we should be of -- remind ourselves that it was actually the afghani said throughout the taliban with the assistance of some highly qualified but small number of americans. we didn't do it, they did it. and i was very taken by one of the comments that you made in

your testimony when you are saying that they are actually better, better than we expected him to be, the forces that are operating right now and in fact they are better than they thought they would be, so let me ask you, if they are better than we thought they would be, would one of your considerations when you're making your recommendations be accelerating the pace of our military withdrawal could actually see that as a signal of success of our strengths strength rather than a weakness? >> as i said to the chairman senator webb, i am going to, and the recommendations i've made to the president and the chain of command, a very important consideration will be the state of the ansf. wade -- they are better than we

thought they would be because i believe and i know with your own personal experience you have seen forces that just require the opportunity to get into the fight to come into their own and that is what is happening now. so we are going to watch this very closely and we are going to do all the can with the visors to accelerate that process and a part of the outcome of my evaluation is that there is a reduced requirement for u.s. or isaf combat power i will make that part of my declaration, sir. >> thank you for that. dr. miller, you are in a little precarious situation in that your confirmation hearing is a week from now. officially to occupy the position that you are now acting in, but i want to ask you a question about the strategic partnership to kiss from my perspective and from some others appear in the senate, the nature of the strategic framework agreement that took place with respect to iraq should have been

subject to much more vigorous participation by the united states congress. ..

but won't be the last milestone. i accept to follow an agreement that will address a number of issues. for example, including babies and so far it, then i guess with the give more to the types of issues that you are concerned about dan racing. so at this point, let me say that she will commit to consulting with congress as we move forward on the strategic heart airship and that we will be prepared to explain how it relates to future steps and understand that you will have the view about what role congress should have come the senate should have in each of those steps. >> let me express my concern because if you will recall, what happened in the situation with our relationship with iraq,

there were two agreements. when was the strategic framework agreement, which relate to find a nature of a longer-term relationship in the other was the soap, which is more nuts and bolts, as you know, everywhere we have american troops, we have some kind of a sofa. but neither of them were brought for the formal consideration of the congress. we actually the previous administration had to go to him as if the document were classified and it was not. in signed in order to retrieve it, in order to read it. so is pretty much kept out of the public eye and away from formal congressional consideration. and i attempted to bring it to evoke quite frankly. i'd lost that attempt, but i believe when you are defining this type of far-reaching

relationship between two countries that should not be simply a matter of the executive branch and this conversation will be continued, but i wanted to visit today. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator webb. >> thank you. generale, lance corporal eddie dyke is from greenville, mississippi was shot in the head by an afghan army liaison nco, and other plants corporal doc as his unit in the helmand province. yesterday, my staff and i received a briefing on the details of this case in the marine corps and the naval criminal investigative service mcas, the ongoing marine corps and mcas investigation in this case has revealed that the afghan soldier responsible for the shooting has a questionable personal history previously unknown to the u.s. military. i was informed by the marine

corps that the afghan soldier would never have been allowed to embed with our forces had we known of this history. as such, i believe robust recruits screening by the afghan security forces that have helped avoid the tragic death of this brave young man. general, will your team at isaf headquarters hope the marine corps and mcas to provide with a detailed written report on the circumstances surviving lance corporal taketh his murder? >> yes, sir, we will. >> and what is your current assessment of the insider threat facing troops in afghanistan from rogue elements individuals in the afghan security forces? i understand this is -- this happens so frequently that it is known by the term green on blue attacks. in other words, on nato or isaf force attacks. how many isaf and american personnel have died as a result

of green on blue attacks and how many such attacks are still currently under investigation? >> senator, i will have to get you the final number on the members under investigation. but we have had 52 americans who have been killed and another 60 or so, 68 who have been wounded since 2007 when we first started to track these events. we have taken significant steps to work closely with the afghans. i will talk about what the afghan side is doing and then i will talk about what we are doing on our site. on the afghan side, we are trying to accelerate the counter intelligence capabilities of the afghan national army to ensure that they have the ability down to the battalion level to detect an insider threat that may develop. they have improved the vetting process of individuals who are

coming into the afghan national process which includes require me to have a valid i.d. card, letters of endorsement or recommendation for village elders and other aspects, criminal background check and so on. there is an unprecedented level of cooperation between the national director of security they are intelligence director and the ama and the anp to embed counterintelligence agents from the nds in basic training in the basic training schools, the follow-on schools and ultimately to have counterintelligence operatives working closely with the ama and anp in theirs as well. >> how long has this nailed eight step process been in place? >> just months commissary.

>> and it strikes me that is a very high number of green on blue attacks. >> since 2007, sir. we have had six that have -- six americans who have been killed this calendar year. >> do you think they have tapered off? >> i don't think so at this point. i think that the measures being taken now, once they are in place, the measures that the isaf and u.s. forces are undertaking, those in combination i believe will begin the process of eliminating or reducing to the maximum extent possible the insider threat as it is called. it is colored green and blue for the purposes of reporting. but those measures have really only gone into effect in this calendar year. so we'll work very hard, both within isaf and a partnership with the afghans to reduce as much as possible.

it is important also to note that the afghans have suffered nearly as many casualties as we have from the same kind of growth. so it is in everyone's interest that we have a combined after to be able to sense and to eliminate. >> i may make it clear. you are speaking of green on green. an afghan soldier killing another afghan soldier? >> said is correct. it is in our interests to be able to sense the presidents of extremists in the ranks. we can provide this to you. as i do have to provide accounts of investigations that have occurred in the last seven months where we have accepted, arrested, detained individuals to intent it was either afghans

or isaf forces or records as far as the incidents since 2007 srs when they occurred just a picture review as it is getting better or if it's getting worse? i understand that lance corporal taketh this killer is being held in custody by afghan security forces. what steps will you take to make sure the afghans do not either intentionally or unintentionally released this individual and will your team at isaf headquarters keep me updated in writing on the latest developments on the afghan soldiers case as it makes its way to the afghan legal system. >> will certainly do that, senator. i've been a a personal, personal

contact with general carini we have spoken on this and he has assured me he will do this but didn't fully shirking and they will prosecute him and i have every reason to believe he will be held accountable. any case will be watching the case and keep your price. >> i have a follow-up question. my time is and it deals with more particulars on the screening process and the way we are involved and help screen the afghan security forces. i will submit that in writing. >> will take it for the record. >> senator wicker. senator udall. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good morning, gentlemen. general allen, good to see you

again. as always, cheney that for your service and dedication in this crucial mission. and senator jack reid and i were in afghanistan last fall and october, we talked at length about plans for this year's campaign and about the particular training plan for the afghan national security forces. i want to make sure you have the resources to recruit, train and equip viable security force. dr. miller, good to see you as well. how to make sure also that the administration and dod are in the process of developing models and plans for after 2014, after the nato combat troops have left afghanistan. i have to tell you i believe that insufficient contingency planning for what might happen after the taliban were routed in 2001 after saddam's fully -- regime fell in 2003 in the today's long arabian moors in the last decade and they want to be certainly will not make the same mistake by failing to plan

and prepare for post-nato afghanistan. so in that spirit, i know we have been justifiably focused on the counterinsurgency mission, training ansf can ever ansf, working out corruption in the afghan government and working through a lot of other issues with an eye on the 2014 step back. i would like to talk about what happens after 2014, what capabilities of the afghan army has, what missions will they be able to perform? in other words, do you envision the afghan national security forces as the defensive force or one that is capable after going after the taliban and disrupting their operations? >> stir, let me start with that. the nsf that will ultimately be shielded, the 352,000 person force at the end of 13th will continue in force for some

period of time after 2014. again, as we discussed earlier, it will be based on quality metrics, the assessment of the enemy situation, the operational environment and so on. i would expect to see the 352 force continue for at least a full year after the 2014 fours. the nature of the force we envisioned now will be a force primarily capable of conducting counterinsurgency capabilities to continue to deal with what they call operationally significant and searching capabilities. so wherever we may find there is still in its urgent threat, the capacity of that force will be focused on continuing. ask questions, comments that have been made this morning applied to one of the challenges we continue to face will be the insurgent threat across the border to safe havens. the nature of the force as is

currently envisaged to be disposed around the country, based on the operational environment may require that more of that force ultimately be disposed should be deployed in the eastern and southern forces of the country that had been originally imagined. but i think that is fine. as we are talking through this now, with afghan leadership and of course it will ultimately be their decision, but we actually having conversations after the end of 14 now on our bilateral campaign plan and beginning to discussions about the period from one january 15 until the other end of 17. the expectation would be that we would dispose of forces in afghanistan in direct proportion in direct response to the operational environment and the insurgent threat. the expected force will ultimately be a force that has sufficient policing capacity to

provide protection to the population and an army and air force that have the capacity to move sufficiently quickly to the point of requirement, either back up the police is necessary or to conduct additional and counterinsurgency operations. so we look for a force that has those balance capabilities, sir. >> dr. miller, which liked to have anything to that view? >> senator udall, general allen is pretty well covered it. i will say we understand that the composition is to be up to 332,192,150,000 afghan national police. the composition and the overall number and assess numbers are it is based on condition is not yet commissioned. as you think about the post-2014 planning we are thinking about different situations and understand that while one has a

plan at the end of the day come the plan will need to be adjusted over time. >> sir, may come back very briefly. i apologize. we will still see the force disposed him him will certainly want the original plan. but elements of the force is again based on the enemy situation with the deployed in an expeditionary manner for periods of time and then go back to the very basic. so the forces of the forces otherwise deployed to the north will still be terrorists in the north, but elements we imagine will begin to be determined with detailed plan aimed to deploy to those areas where their specific schools are additional combat however will be needed. we envision this to be temporary deployments. so we still see the army bases we have envisioned across the country. but the force that match is necessary to deal with his operationally relevant insurgent hotspots. >> so that we don't see a broad

reconciliation process, peace talks, tell it being included in the afghan national government, these forces would be prepared to take the fight to the counterinsurgency construct to the taliban and, to the haqqani network and others who would have physical to undercut stability and security of afghanistan. >> that is correct. there demonstrating capabilities already. >> on those capabilities, who is responsible for determining what those capabilities of the afghan national security forces should be in for measuring the process and meeting those requirements? is that you, general? is it the, like, who all are involved? >> clearly they are measuring a spell and prepare those measurements. within the isaf forces it is both an assessment that is done by the nato mission of afghanistan but also by the operational commanders. >> talk more about the afghan local police. you shared with us last fall

your plans in hopes they are in the alp seem to offer an opportunity as well. >> it is i think a substantial contribution to the security of afghanistan. the alp does a number of things for the campaign. the first is to provide the opportunity for afghans to defend themselves. they are not malicious, not individuals that are hired apart from a local population and inserted. a special operators will go to a village or town and spend some time living without population. they will ultimately in conversation with the leadership determine that they seek to basically be mobilized as a community to defend themselves. when they make that decision and it is their decision, then we began to recruit the afghan

local police. the individuals of any particular garrison are guided by the local altars and of course for police record. they are technically and officially associated with the ministry of interior through the local district chief of police. they are trained by special operators are then let amongst them and continue to mentor their capabilities. what has happened with the alp that has created large amounts of the rejecting of the taliban and there have been various cuts we have about gotten where taliban commanders have said if you can kill an alp commander, so an afghan local policemen who is leading his own tribesmen in that particular village, if you can kill an alp commander, it is worth 10 coalition soldiers. the taliban are very threatened by the alp because the significant terrain in a

counterinsurgency is the human terrain and the afghan local police deny the human turning to the television. we are only about halfway through the fielding of the force. so where 12,000 have in the force will grow to an envision strength of 30,000. once we reached the point we will need to make some hard decisions about whether we retain the force, continued in its existence or even expand the force and we do that obviously with the afghans in the lead on the decision-making. >> my time has expired. the power of this concept is very significant. it works up in the tribal in afghanistan. it is not compared if an offense to the sunni awakening in iraq, but there are elements that engage the local population in a tribal worldview. so copy of somebody who wants to support this going forward. i also want to underline the need for post-2014 contingency planning so we don't see ourselves involved in a regular

war with the next decade. we'll continue to be presence in afghanistan. there is much at stake and we do not want to be attacked again, but we can be -- i think learn a lot from what has occurred over the last 10 years than in afghanistan and iraq as the end of the country to the afghans. thank you again for your service, both of you. >> thank you, senator udall. spinach in a thank you. dr. miller, thank you. general, i was honored to serve in afghanistan this summer this summer and meet with you and discuss the challenges and appreciate all of your service and sacrifice in this environment and women serving at first opposed the greatest honor that i've had to do that, especially meeting with you in on the commanders under your command. a couple of things i noted from that trip was the fact that we are contracting with the enemy

and by that trip, senator ayotte tonight with the blessing of the chairman and others were able to address that in a recent defense authorization bill. so is that helping? >> absolutely. the ability to terminate a contract on the spot is very hopeful. the mac gray. and i was also able to learn about some of the bh issues affecting our kriseman and address that as well to the chairman's help and support and getting an amendment that to do that. so just those two issues alone made the trip worthwhile. the other thing i noted during that time. with the amazing amount of audits that you and your command are subject -- subjected to. is that better than it was her work? >> i have to start by saying we have benefited from these artists. >> i understand them.

>> woodcut now within the department of defense and other audit agencies and consolidating lake or identical requirements so that we can get one audit that can provide universal return. is it that has been very hopeful. staff has that been done because i know it's something we brought it the chairman and his leadership in the ranking members were able to put that message out as well. but if you couldn't audit committee are not avoiding, but if you take the men and women who are serving in the put them in the office doing audits, it is kind of productive, especially with the drawdown. is that now working better? >> we think it is, sir, thank you. >> when we have to get the signoff for the neves, i am deeply concerned, probably senator graham is about the rule of law issues. who is intact signing off on these? are these asking judges? if we could just go through the process of how that would work. >> senator, we are really just starting these negotiations and they're very sensitive.

>> i'd be happy to give it to you as an addendum. >> images say i am concerned about the rule of law issues going in observing not only a jammin facility in participating in a review of release, but am deeply concerned about that, saying that you'll take that into consideration. in the green on blue issues, how are those soldiers, how are they actually treated? said they arrested? in jail, what is the status of those folks? >> many were killed on the spot. the others that were apprehended or in the hands of the afghan military, as i said, the one who killed lance corporal blake is is in the military and polish turkey and as i was by general carini, who i believe you meant

assured that justice be done in that regard. i am confident that he will be true to his word, sir. >> no doubt about that. i noted with senator udall, i was able to go to topeka and actually observed in meet the leadership on the afghan local police foreign. i am also deeply concerned that by getting up to 30,000 we do a dramatic drawdown. how does that all work out? do not have been running is it that it's at deterrent for the television to reestablish ties and potentially reestablish terrorism around the region and eventually the potentially moving on other parts of countries in the region. how do you think that is going to shake out? >> i think you'll continue to be an important mechanism for holding the ground in afghanistan.

>> quite a bit less cost and manpower. >> much less cost. the special operators that we dedicated to that, we are in the process and working very closely with our special operations command led by our great green beret general, chris hoss, i think you have mad and i hold in very high esteem. we are working on the process, just as we transition other aspects of the ansf, transitioning the special operators in those units as well to afghan special operators. and that is a natural course of events that should occur. in a freezer per green beret seals and birds to go elsewhere. and if you watched the unfolding of the campaign plan, would have been sent had of the movement of our conventional forces is evil cvs so that gop sites ahead of us. all been nurturing and denying it to the enemy so when our

conventional forces ultimately have to maneuver on the ground are much less population is far more to her present and the ambassadors able to accomplish objectives far more quickly. >> just a simple thing of putting in a road that is connected these villages to one another that has not been connected for centuries or other. and now the taliban is trying to move on a village, with other villages moving in to help, which has never been heard of and you have the alp is out there and you see they are communicating. i forget if it was by battle or light depending on the situation and letting them know there is struggle. are you finding that kind of a fascinating thing that is happening but it's never happened and i think the history of afghanistan politics and tribal negotiations and involvement with each other? >> we are seeing cooperation that they think is really helpful. we are also seeing resilience of the alp that we hadn't

anticipated. they are taking casualties and staying on the check points. you're taking casualties and still going out on patrol. >> i remember going on the post for there have been battles and finally the taliban moved on an island college you should keep us in the loop on that program and if you hear your good is being jeopardized or shortchanged community to let the chairman direct members now and all of us who are your supporters of the program to make sure that we can give you the tools and resources you need to complete the mission. thank you very much, sir. >> thank you, senator brown. >> thank you both for being here and thank you for being patient. we have a lot of questions for you. general, i want to point out and i don't do this that often, but i want to point out, the good excellent job over to

afghanistan. we had a lot of modifications and a schedule. and adjustments are made rapidly, which gave me even more security but what is going unerring sense of our troops to any great job, so i just want to point that out. the colonel did not need to do this. now he will say what did i do it? because you did a great job in a manner trip a lot easier and a very press time. >> thank you, centered >> i like it. let me also say and i know you know this and that is one 10th of the force over there comes from alaska right now. about 9000 troops and i had a great opportunity to see the one to five. i didn't have a chance to see the 425, but it was an incredible team that all the testimony you have given it similar to what i heard and thought in the sense of the changes that occurred since at least they are in may of 09 and