secretary kerry, president of the united states said on so many occasions that war will end militarily, there has to be some political end to this conflict and there ought to be some way to see if reconciliation is possible. but there's a second principle as well which is, i always felt in the time that had this responsibility that this is kind of diplomacy got to be backed by force. . .

certainly makes you think about it very carefully and watching the film on women and women's right is what is this reconciliation all about. and that is about an afghanistan that works with the rule of law and that supports the rights and responsibilities of all citizens, but particularly women. on the questions of reconciliation i'm sure they are still high on the administration's agenda but the principles remain very much the same. the second point you asked me to talk about our the elections. he's done a wonderful job on that. two things that are important to me. one is what is the outcome here

and it is an election that is seen by most afghans as legitimate and a leader as someone they can say here is someone we can support going forward into second being appointed ambassador made that the united states has no favorites and has no candidates in this and the election is a matter for the people of afghanistan. they will choose the future leaders. the final point on that is a good question andrew asked and that is what about the politics of the relationship in afghanistan? and again if you consider this from an american perspective and i will leave afghans to speak for themselves there needs to be thinking about how to structure the future of this relationship and i would give you for thoughts. first of all as the ambassador said in the number of people said earlier today, that is the first really important thing and

that is the message that comes from afghanistan about the willingness of the afghans to have a relationship with the united states and also to recognize the sacrifices of americans have made in our international allies and partners and friends have read over thmadeover the past 12 yean afghanistan. right now if you speak on afghanistan around the country here we would like to have somebody say thank you for what happened in afghanistan and fighting for afghans that is something they will put on their checklist to make a contribution to the future relationship. second, i go back to the question in the region. i think for americans to continue to be interested in afghanistan is to put it in the regional context. this isn't only just about afghanistan but america has a larger interest in central asia and pakistan and the whole south asian areas of it is an important part as well. third, i come to the point that often i think is overlooked, but

the ambassador dobbins made an important point on the keynote address and that is to keep focus on the economic aspects of the future of this relationship. so before indirect investment and the connections between the economies in south asian economies and the interest in the american companies and the important resources that are there to bring to the world market. so the economic aspects whether it is the new silk road, whether it is the fbi or promoting afghan businesses is something that i think americans will continue to be interested in this relationship and finally something i don't think that needs to be much detail but i think that he focus on counter extremism, not just counterterrorism but extremism in afghanistan and that is a very important part as well. so the region and the economic issues the counter extremism for

the future relationship in afghanistan and the united states. >> thank you, claire. i would like to start by thinking the organizerthanking l that they do on afghanistan in the region and for this timely discussion. i've been asked to focus my remarks on governance in iraq like to look back at the last decade in which all a few lessons. shortly after the tragedy of 9/11 a few miles from here a few days after 9/11 he convened a small group and reflected that it would likely be an invasion that the u.s. would use military force. it was then it would collapse and he said the key question was going to be how do afghan individuals and groups agree on

the rules of the game by which they would govern a society and it seems that was a great question to ask if perhaps it the right question to ask today. now he put this question at the heart and that process as we know has many flaws but to the extent that it worked i think it is because it constructed a building consensus between afghans on this question. and there were successes and failures along the way and i would like to highlight those in the spirit that we have done too much in the last years but not enough on the real achievements the afghans themselves have made. and at the heart of this many would argue and have argued that in fact there was a settlement and the political settlement was inventeembedded in the constitu. and then the rules that fall under that constitution and that was the result of the process as

many of you know bringing together the afghan citizens around the country, elected delegates to the second constitution and to the commission. while i think there is a legitimate debate about the changes in the constitution by and large it remains the documents most afghans belief is the right framework for how the country should be governed and in fact many of the amendments people see are already in the constitution. it's a matter of implementation and can't station for example the constitution itself mandates the city level that hasn't taken place yet but it's in the constitution. second feature of the last decade many reforms were completed and not only that afghanistan had a considerable basis of governance capability

in place. when i arrived in the country in the early days of 2002, i was astonished to find -- especially because i had been reading the un and world bank documents because there was nothing there -- completely reversed with the civil servants in place across the country at the district level. and yes, by then the head and/or almost two decades of the war. there were resource constraints and so on but the capacity to spare. over the last decade a number of reforms completed. but i don't think the issue is one of capacity or capability. what has been a success, these have been well documented, so i won't go in depth into them but it's the currency reform by the finance ministry, telecom, the health program for the national solidarity program and think government village level. government isn't something abstract. it's about how the resources have channeled for the public purpose. so how is the system built, how is the education system built?

those are the questions of government in guessing those policy frameworks right. and i think there is a good news story here and it's all credited to the afghans. sometimes the international organizations have helped him sometimes they have hidden away but overall the story is one of success. afghanistan claimed the first and furthest id and any decade and it's a remarkable achievement. and the foundation poll that was launched this week i'm 80% of the country believed that their government isn't controlled in their area. at the trust particularly remains extraordinarily high. when we look at what works and launching a study of what works in the coming months, i think even now we can look at some of the attributes. it was an evenhandedness in the treatment of the groups across the country, the space in the communities to be involved, the

governance is not about building the state from th the top down only, just as much about creating the policy framework at the community and the private sector to be involved. having said that, there were also many mistakes and there were some flaws and i think to some extent it was the large one of the most tragic flaws it's part of the population that began to lose trust in the process. and for my perspective that happened around 2004 to 2005 there were many reasons i was debated over time and i suspect there is only one of those. but internally, certain segments of the population began to feel right or wrong but feel that they would choose unfairly so they began to look at other means to protect themselves or to realize their interest. and externally some of the neighbors that signed the declaration back shortly after the process in afghanistan pledged not to interfere in the

politics in afghanistan and pledged to support afghanistan's process. they began to turn to other avenues to protect their interest in it and i think we saw the unraveling between the states, between the nations and between people. so, what does that tell us looking forward? i agree with the keynote speaker and the panelists that there are enormous achievements and especially heading towards an election that is going to be respected. but looking beyond that democracy isn't just about one day of elections that they years in between. it's not just about 1 liter. it's about the team of leaders and if we look at the countries around the world that have transitioned successfully from the conflict in from the difficult regime to better governance that this has opened the lette liver by a group of l. i had the pleasure to introduce some of them around the world

and it is about a great man, sometimes a great woman, but it's always been about a team of people that work together across geographic boundaries or ethnic or religious boundaries, so one of the key questions is going to be welfare be an inclusive politics here you can there be a mandate that all of the governments can agree upon and of the team of leaders that can deliver upon us and can there be a national discussion or national dialogue that the citizens agree on. i know there's been talk in the need for dialogue about who think that we rightly pointed out they are also having one every day. then i couldn't agree more with the ambassador grossman and ambassador dobbins the region is so important. if there is peace and stability it is going to be about the regional politics of the countries connecting to th comm- interference consulate in afghanistan -- wedding be afghans have a chance at building the future that they

have so desperately worked for and they need. so the question of how is the rule of the game the reality of noninterference in afghanistan to come to be. and at the heart of this is going to be the foreign policy of the next afghan administration toward its neighbors. together with the internal consensus building process and the regional process of agreement is publicly the key step to peace and stability. and perhaps then we need an adjustment in a way that we conceptualize the way that we conceive of the peace process. it may not be that big of a deal and i would argue it isn't that that would lead to the peace and stability in afghanistan. it would be those many lands and careful processes building the consensus and trust between the countries and between people within the country that will deliver the endor in peace and stability of the country so desperately needs. and then agreed very much that

is going to be imported into the taxpayers in the u.s. and europe are feeling backed out on the contributions that they have made to the region with an enormous amount of resources he spent on the country. and any of the news world, not all of the news world, but i think going forward with those resources are going to be at the lower level. so the sooner that afghanistan can generate resources, the revenue to underwrite its own stability, the better. and the shorter the bridge that will be needed from the external commitments to sustain that soa does the question of what i see in the world bank called the enabling environment that is a socially the trust of the businesses in the rule of law. and there's not a shortage of money. they are regional investors who would like to put money into the question is can they trust the rules of the game to do that and that govern in particular.

minerals are going to be a magic bullet, but the oil and gas resources that have been discovered recently are quite immense and it isn't inconceivable that in ten to 15 years we underwrite the cost of sustaining stability and services within the country. in conclusion let's move from the quick fix is in a magic bullet and understanding the peace and stability and governance would be at the peace of stability and it is the many small wins rather than the deal that would be liver on that for the afghans at the question is can a politics deliver what the afghans believe in more than 90% of the leaving the law and order that future to realize it. >> thank you. david? >> thank you very much, andrew. it's a great pleasure to be here

and i will join you and others in thinking asap in sponsoring this. it's humbling to be up here sitting with three people used to work for coming ambassador dobbins coming ambassador grossman all have to suffer through my having to have me as a part of their team. when i first went out to afghanistan in 2002 to be the deputy chief of mission in charge of the embassy from ambassador dobbins told the afghanistan was going to be something very different than anything else i've ever done in my life. he was 100% right and it continues to be so. he also told me it was going to be different than anybody thought it was going to and i thought that was perceived as well. i also need to think ambassador grossman for mentioning the sacrifices that have been made during my time, particularly at the department of defense where he met with so many americans who have served enough gas and at the behest of their country some of them believed what they

were doing that all of them believed in their country and they all have done a great job of which their nation should be very proud. that's why i would like to speak on the national security forces that but i want to start off a e more broadly earlier people talked about the fact the polling shows two thirds of the american people think that going into afghanistan was a mistake. interestingly enough two thirds of the afghan people think the effort to help them has been a great success. all of the frothing about the bsa and president of karzai and the back and forth are the fundamental successes and a lot of them have been laid out by others that have been speaking and i want to stress however on the military side the building of the afghan army, the police and the intelligence agencies have been a tremendous success.

making any progress is a huge challenge even if things are going well even if there is sufficient resources and cooperation among the regional countries. doing such a task would be hard. he mentioned when he was in 2002 i was on the other side of that debate. it's interesting that 12 years later here we are. the progress has been worth the investment that we've made and that is a very serious statements to be made. and to set up here and say that isn't saying something important but it's best to buy the dialogue into the discourse of the american people. recently the diplomatic editor of the corporation john simpson

has been covering afghanistan for over 30 years. i went back to afghanistan and did a story. what people in washington and london think is the case but in fact afghanistan is succeeding. succeeding. afghan species they are succeeding. the ambassador grossman mentioned i was in afghanistan two months ago in december and met scores of afghan young people under the age of 30, brilliant people who were there preparing to live the rest of their lives in their country and they were universal in giving thanks to the partners. they recognized how lucky they are and the benefits they've got in from the sacrifices and they are prepared as the ambassador said to fight whether they are in the military or fighting for their country or whether they are in the civil society or building the businesses. many of these people could be

someplace else besides afghanistan. but they are still there and they are there because the sacrifices and the effort and because of what the united states and allies and partners have put into that. a lot of the topics i was asked to address was the bilateral security agreement, and i want to take a moment here to pay tribute to those that worked on math, and we have one of them here -- we have several of them here in fact i want to signal the ambassador to the united states sitting in the front row. he led the team in negotiating the bsa. those negotiations were very collegial and very professional and they resulted in what i think and what i believe everyone who's looked at the agreement including the afghan representatives and the afghan think of an agreement that is both in the very best interest of the afghan people in government and in the united states. i want to thank you, ambassador. please give the team a round of applause. [applause]

i will also mention of course ambassador jan and ambassador grossman and ambassador dobbins who did a great job so we have an agreement in place. what is the future with that agreement? it's going to be difficult. afghanistan faces challenges in all of us are aware of those challenges, but i think the odds are very much in favor of success with the bsa in place. the afghan people have spoken. the afghan presidential candidates, a number of whom i spoke to when i was there, are all in favor of starting the bsa. so i can ge think is a certaintt bsa will be signed. the issue with their president karzai signed or not is irrelevant. we need to plan effectively for him not signing it and moving forward. i truly hope that any of the costs that the ambassador dobbins mentioned might occur if there is a delay or mitigated

very effectively by the great planning capacity that the military, state department and agencies have. i personally don't believe there's any neethereis any needr cost as long as we keep our eye on the long game at the topic of the panel. in returning to the topic of the afghan security forces, which i have visited afghanistan about 20 or 30 times and lived there for a couple of years when andrew and alex and i were working on afghanistan in the earlier decade. the afghan security forces have to determine this job. a year ago, we turned over to weave security responsibilities to the afghan security forces. at that time, and many people outside of afghanistan in the u.s. government, u.s. intelligence agencies for example, predicted that that would not be a very good success. but the afghans would lose significant amounts of

territory, they would be overrun by the capitals might be threatened, none of that happened. the telegram didn't gain any ground during the last 12 months. in fact they lost ground in some areas. no district centers were lost, no capitals were threatened. the telegram maintaine maintain, however, to inflict serious damage on the afghan people and they've continued to do so. the taliban attacks have killed hundreds of thousands of afghan citizens, primarily noncombatants. they've also targeted officials including some of the female police officers that he saw in thyou saw inthe video earlier. they've targeted foreigners. they targeted afghan officials throughout the country. that is going to continue as long as the thailand continued until there is a peace agreement as the ambassador grossman repeated before. however, in order for the country to stay in one piece, in order for the country to move forward with the election the

way they are as the ambassador dobbins described in for the economy to continue to prosper as it has despite the predictions it was going to crash and it's continuing to move forward, the basic security effort at the afghan army police and intelligence agencies are going to carry forward. and it needs to be successful. all of the indications are that it will. unfortunately, because of the continuing ability of the telegram to inflict violence, there will be many casualties. the afghan police and particular but also the army have suffered high casualties and continue to do so. nevertheless in a story that is rarely understood were told here, afghans continue those services even though the dangerous high. people in afghanistan are willing to sign up to b be into police custody in the army in the intelligence services to serve their country but they don't do so because they think afghanistan is going to fail.

they do so not just because of the money they are paid although i do think it is and shall we continue to fund those sources but they do so out of the sense that afghanistan is their home and they would like to protect it. the fact that we the united states particularly the military that oubut our partners and alle helped build institution to allow the people of that country to move forward with what they want, which in many cases is exactly what we in the united states and our partners want for the future of afghanistan is a great tribute to those afghans, but also to those that have supported it. and with that, i will close and it turned oveinto turn it over t speaker. >> first of all i want to start out again by thinking the organizers for this event. the common thread that runs through the images up there is that they are both institutions and individuals who have demonstrated just an incredible

amount of devotion to what we are assembled here to talk about today. and that's incredibly important not only for afghanistan, but for the united states that we have institutions that carry these burdens. i also really want t to say how honored i am to be sitting up here with everybody i served in one way or another with everybody here. in fact, when i first went to pakistan in 1993 i was given the name to look up as one of the few people who knew what was going on at the time. and although there are more people who know what's going on, andrew remains about the best. i also want to acknowledge the incredible work of the ambassadors. you have both installed words for your nation and you sit here not only representing yourself, but the incredible work and part are shipped that we've had with

the afghan government. so it's great to see you. and i also want to acknowledge the three folks here. steve hadley, congratulations on taking over the board chairmanship. i know those of us that have worked here and are proud of this institution are thrilled with you stepping up to do that. jim dobbins is someone that has taught us now i won't say how long but going on at least 15 years about how we need to think about peace and security and the u.s. involvement. so the fact that you have stepped up to the school there couldn't be a better person and perspective and i want to acknowledge bill taylor who i saw walking in. bill is also -- i met bill first in afghanistan in 2002 and he remains one of the best examples of a diplomat and boss that i've ever had. when i traveled to afghanistan for the first time 21 years ago, i would come to witness what i

believe is one of the greatest foreign-policy mistakes that our country has ever made and that was the abandonment of afghanistan and the gradual or sometimes not gradual distraction to afghanistan, its communities, its infrastructure, its relationships with its neighbors that we are still climbing out of today. i have over my career watched conflict unfold slowly into the development unfold slowly. and conflict is much more efficient. and it costs actually a lot less to perpetrate. decades of understanding that were built up between communities in afghanistan for example in the 50 years preceding the soviet invasion intand the gradual emergence of

democratic politics were undermined severely and rapidly by a few massacres that we are still talking about today. electricity grids that took years and billions of dollars undermined by cutting down a few lines, knocking down poles. but paradoxically, conflict imposes a far greater cost. if we hadn't seen the lost 30 years of development in afghanistan, imagine where we would be today. afghanistan's gross sonesta products today stands at about $20 billion into the incredible story that we have heard over and over again this morning is that it grows fourfold just in the last nine years, which is an incredible change.

so that's $15 billion a year of economic activity. and when you multiply that over decades and you think about the cost, they are far greater than any amount of investment that we have made on the civilian side. as for the conflict to perpetrate and it has a far greater cost to our own society and to afghanistan. even greater than those others are the lost generations of afghans who haven't had the opportunity to enjoy the basic tenets of human dignity, peace and security, sufficient food, access to education, access to healthcare. afghanistan until a decade ago was basically accepted from the wave of globalization that has

brought hundreds of millions of people from extreme poverty and into the global economy that has brought them to enjoy a greater rights and the opportunities that democracy affords. my current job as the head of policy planning and learning for usaid causes me to look across the country is t countries to ss working and what's not working. and i'm going to repeat a few of the things you've already heard because they think they are so fundamentally important. when we look at the losses of afghanistan has suffered over this period of time, the question that comes to us is that the answer and keep answering can we actually do something about it, can the instruments we have as the united states government of an international community and in afghan government, can we actually changed some of these conditions and write some of these wrongs. can the investment in a fragile

place like afghanistan actually yield results quicksand of the astonishing fact that we have come to learn in the past few years is that not only were we able to move the needle in afghanistan: to be, but we have been able to fundamentally change a lot of the conditions in that country. ambassador dobbins spoke about the fact i still find phenomenal but the human development report last year found that afghanistan has made more progress than any other country on earth in the last decade. granted that is going from some of the lowest bass lines, but that problem was not inevitable. i and many of you have heard this the story about what happened in public health in afghanistan because it remarkable. 6% of afghans could walk within

an hour to basic healthcare and we are not talking about the mayo clinic. we are talking about doctors and nurses with minimal training for things that are literally pennies a cure make the difference between life and death for a mother and father or a child under the age of five. and by changing that rate of access from 6% to over 60% and making the decision to invest through the afghan government institutions not by predating the parallel systems that workinbut workingwith the afghao create a health network that could reach over 60% of its people in a country where it's hard to reach people that change has been for nominal. afghanistan's life expectancy went from 45 years to over 60 years and less than a decade.

but progress is unprecedented, but it's also the explainable because of the steps that we took to choose basic services over extensive services and to choose going through the afghan government rather than setting up parallel systems, to choose focusing on other tha others ano children where the lives could be saved. and that impact will present day throughout afghanistan for years to come. a similar story in education. we made a decision to focus on basic education, one that often been criticized as you have to look at the long-term education needs as well but the fact of the matter is there were only 900,000 afghans almost al all bs in school in 2002 and 8 million children today 40% of them are girls. literacy rates since 2005 have risen 50% for both boys and girls. and again these are long-term

development assistance. they are not things that change the economy overnight or the political system overnight despite having chosen -- by having chosen to invest in those things over the long term, we have in afghanista an afghanistn 2014 that is fundamentally changed. the last story i want to tell on that note is revenue because i think it's so important. the afghan government needs to be able to pay for itself in increasingly into the services that it delivers over time. it can't do it today. but since 2004, the afghan government revenue collection has gone up 1000%. afghanistan last year surpassed the 2 billion-dollar mark in terms of revenue raised so that

means they are raising more of their revenue than the united states government is supplying in the system which is a fantastic watershed for them to have passed through. all the stories however are not just about those particular games. they are about something more deeply important is the which ie development of afghan institutions. the future rests on afghan shoulders. we can and must and will continue to support afghanistan through this transitional process. but it will be increasingly afghans and increasingly afghan revenue is an afghan that will carry this burden. there is no greater example of this at the time in my opinion than looking at the electoral institution. if you followed since the first one, that you liked oral institutions and some of the great thing that the ambassador dobbins laid out about the complaints and where they are

and how many people have been registered, these are being run by afghans almost entirely this time around and that is a great sign. that afghanistan does remain on one of the poorest countries in the world and i think what everybody is trying to understand is what comes next. first of all many of our colleagues have said up here i can't emphasize enough the fundamental importance of a peaceful and successful transition this year. all development progress in afghanistan fundamentally rests upon the success of this transition. second, while there are many uncertainties facing afghanistan there are a few things that we know. first of all, afghanistan has been eventually changed when you look at its education, its access to information, mobile

phones, taste of democracy, women and the economy i believe having watched afghanistan so intensively over the last 20 years those are all powerful genies that are going to be really hard to put back into the bottle and like somebody sai san the panel i think it was the ambassador grossman i believe the afghans will fight for what they have heard this decade because they have to. ultimately it is their life, not ours but hang i that hang in th. and i think that the transition and anyways represent the afghans taking responsibility for so many of these things and i think what you will see is that there are millions of afghans many of whom were not a life most oalive most of whom ie not alive in 1991 when the last

transition occurred and see a different future for themselves for the country and the region. we know it has been proven by the statistics ie and others have laid out is that we know that we have the afghan government and afghan institutions can successfully deliver in this environment. i think there are a lot of concerns about whether our assistance is still going to be accountable coming forward, whether we will really be able to track the dollars and measure the results and have impact. but i think that that has already been demonstrated. so much of the work that we do today is directly to the afghan institution. both of our international partners rely mostly on afghans for their staffing. when we talk about the great act of cultural program that we have in helmand, that isn't americans running around planting seeds.

it's afghans working for international and local organizations and afghan farmers and the afghan government to make these changes have been. so i think that we have already been able to deliver the critical evidence of success that can carry forward. the final thing that we know, and no one i think more than jim dobbins is responsible for us knowing this, is that the rapid withdrawal of american support in this time will be one of the most critical factors in afghanistan's failure. if afghanistan does not maintain some degree, strong degree of international support through this transitional period, the increase in likelihood that afghanistan will become more fragile, conflict, unstable goes up traumatically. so that leads me to my final point, which is that amazingly i

think in afghanistan and the incredible work that has been done to put in a strategic partnership agreement with afghanistan and the united states to negotiate into the incredible display of international commitment that was demonstrated in chicago and tokyo in december and in istanbul in the summer of 2012 when the entire world to study together after a decade of incredible investment and said we'd be leaving afghanistan, and we are going to keep going because this investment is making a difference, and it's that important to the world. and we can't lose sight of the fact i if we are taking the long view that we often get that wrong. we often don't make that long-term commitment once the cameras turn away.

we often wait for an election and then look elsewhere and it takes me back to 1991 and 1992 when america had one of its most amazing foreign policy victories of the cold war and entering the post-cold war world. and instead of seizing that success and building on it, not that we were solely responsible for anything in the period, but we failed to act. and that action has cost us dearly. and so i deleted that the investments that we have planned to continue building afghanistan's economy and to continue building its capacity of its people and to continue to set it on a path for its own self sustainability is a critical opportunity that now more than ever we have to

reconnect to. thank you. [applause] >> we are trying to pack a lot into basically don't have much time for question and answer but i think we have about 15 minutes where we can take some questions from the audience. we have microphones that can be handed out. if you identify your self. i would make the plea to keep your questions or comments of short so that we have time for as many people to ask questions as possible. please identify yourself. we will start there, close to the microphone. >> i think that afghanistan is the only democracy where there are no political parties which are so crucial for any democracy. so why it didn't happen when the community led by [inaudible] why didn't they help them have

mainstream political parties? >> thank you. we will take three or four questions and then come back to the panel. in the back. >> i had a question about the cuts in humanitarian and afghan national security forces aided. i know there have been a lot of aid moved to the accoun accounto forth but what impact will it have in practical terms and also messaging? >> thank you. now in the front just to keep you running back and forth. >> right down here. >> columbia university. alex, i appreciate your comments on development and i wonder if you can follow that through the importance of development in afghanistan in terms of the regional context and security

considerations. >> okay. maybe time for one more in the back. right there. >> [inaudible] my question would be for the panel to respond what is your input on the peace building efforts in afghanistan and how do you assist the on and off peace talks? do you think people pay for these peace talks and what is the goal of the u.s. in the talks and how do they continue their involvement in the talks? thank you. >> okay why don't we come back to the panel. the political party, peace talks, the political system. alex, let's start with you. >> i think that there are three major areas that are going to boost afghanistan in terms of employment generation and income

and regional development. the first is agriculture. agriculture is enormously important to afghanistan and it is by far the greatest generator of employment. it is fundamental in afghanistan, which has been traditionally one of the most food insecure countries in the world. buthat afghanistan's agriculturl potential if so tapped. this is one of the reasons why u.s. aid in the last couple of years has invested so heavily in mac. the part of afghanistan's potential is also about trade and exports. and so, when i think about the regional development context, afghanistan as a trading partner for the region and as a place where the region can trade with each other is fundamentally important. and there've been huge advances both in terms of infrastructure

but also customs revenue. when i talk about the afghan government revenue is actually customs which has been the fastest growing sector for the afghan government in terms of revenue. we all know that the region that afghanistan fits into is one of the most economically frustrated in the world. the great dream of trade between salvation a and central asia, and then eventually through and up into europe and beyond is growing. it still remains stalled. and the opportunity to open up the trade pathways will be ivy league fundamentally transformative for afghanistan's region. and at the last thing i want to say which isn't related to the regional thing that is fundamental, one of the u.s. aid has been invested in is getting afghan women into the economy. that is half of the people in afghanistan who have not been economic actors. the women have great potential

in afghanistan particularly also in terms of the agricultural economy and diversify the agricultural economy. and i think some of the greatest growth potential afghanistan is going to see his bike generating the meaningful economic opportunity for the women in afghanistan. >> i will say a couple things about the cuts. people here have used euphemis euphemisms, cost and risk. let me put a face on what we say cost and risk. the cuts in assistance in more people are going to die and in particular more afghans. i was in afghanistan a short while ago and i visited a hospital in the salt a 2-year-old girl, the same age as my 2-year-old grandson here in the u.s., her foot had been blown off by an ied and her parents were despaired about her future because the future of a handicapped person in afghanistan is difficult.

there will be more children's feet below nothing more afghans police officers and soldiers killed because of the cuts in the systems. when we do the systems less effectively, that the the ability of the people we are assisting more susceptible to death and injury and it means more people on the civilian side, as alex pointed out, we were able to deliver the assistance more effectively. we are going from six to 60% of people who have health care as determined as accomplishment but to continue the improvement they continued resources the u.s. and other countries have pledged in afghanistan. so these cuts that brings the ability to carry out the pledges we've already made is a serious question and bring our ability to support the afghan security forces to be effective and are leading to hardship, pain, suffering and death right now.

>> clare. >> a comment on the question of cuts and assistance i think it is at the reality of what money can buy and it's also the question of the message of the commitment that was sent to the afghans and was discussed. the afghans have asked and we are asking them to assume an enormous burden for the responsibility of their own country. but the question is whether the partners are going to continue to send the message to be on the question of the regional economic cooperation, the secretary announced the new silk road and secretary kelly has been creating a new office to follow this up and i think that it's incredibly important initiative. you're not after world war ii found a way for the countries within europe to cooperate with each other, but the heart of that was cooperation of germany. and i think one of the questions

for the central south asia region is what is there = is to be fueled. and as explained it is the trade and transportation which is critical getting goods from china to go through europe but there are others, and one other to highlight is the question of energy and power. there are meetings of the forum is here where the regional political business leaders got together and what they got excited about is when they discovered some of the central asia republics have somewhere between two to 6 kilowatts in our dark producing 13 to 16 cents per kilowatt hour an and t the differential is an enormous trade and then there are others that increasingly are being discovered, but in that search for the regional corporation is what would help create the incentives for the peace and stability. let me see if i can add just the

question of the peace process and i talked about this a little bit before the session. i would make four points if i could. one, it's important to start this as david said in his intervention to remember that we are fighting these televangelists continue to attack and attack and as david said not long combat since the terrible attacks on the afghan national security forces into the effort to kill and maim american forces and international forces as well so this is an enemy that is still out there fighting and i think that any consideration of the peace process is going to begin with the question of whether they are interested in doing some kind of enrichment and making than arrangement andmakik with the people of afghanistan. second it is also worth saying out loud that i can understand and everyone should understand why they are outdoors and worry about peace process because they

worry that people are going to make decisions to have a reconciliation process that might chip away some of the important progress has made over the last 12 or 13 years and that's why it's important that seems to me that this would be a conversation among the afghans about what they want in terms of reconciliation. if i could put in parentheses here i think as alex and claire noted it is extremely important that women make their progress inside of the afghan economy it seems to me that one of the natural barriers to work with backwards in the reconciliation process is to have powerful women who have powerful economic interests in afghanistan so they can speak for themselves about what their future will be like. and then the fourth fight to keep coming back and back what

is the role for the international community particularly the united states and that is to talk to other afghans that reconciliation is not about the united states or the national community making some arrangements on behalf of the afghan people. it's about afghans making an arrangement that they wish to see. since you have to make your own decision but it does strike me as right that this is a conflict that isn't going to end militarily. there will be some political ending to this that the reconciliation therefore among the afghans is important and second, as i sai said i interven iin myintervention it is the reo be in favor of the sign that reconciliation is a reason to be in favor of the american and international forces in afghanistan after january 1 of 2015 because the town of them is watching what it is we are going to do and they are not going to arrive at this voluntarily.

there has to be some efforts made to fight this terrorist group. finally, it is the question of the ending conditions to make sure that there is a break with al qaeda, that there is an ending of the violence against the afghan people and also there is a reconciliation that supports the kind of constitution effort that our friends here were talking about especially so i think there is a role for this but the very important thing i think is for the voices to say so much of what we said on the panel this morning, this is afghan responsibility that we have the privilege to support. >> certainly in the future if i think the parliamentary

democracy will function effectively in afghanistan you do need to get the political party stronger and upgrading more effectively in terms of disaggregating and organizing the interest to make the function. i think the original from my perspective goes back to 2004 when the voting system that was selected up to go much into the weeds that the non- transferable vote, one of the first publications was on the voting system as highly critical about choosing the voting system precisely because it works against the interest of the political parties and in the interest of independent candidate. if you want to keep the executives strong and powerful, the system is a pretty effective way of doing that. i think that is now more widely recognized but once people get elected in the votes, they are the ones in power and have the

incentive to preserve the system which is now why it is a recognized problem that is actually quite difficult to reverse that it is an area where there does need to be more awareness raising and political parties need to get organized themselves and improve their own lobbying effort to get that voting system changed in future elections. unfortunately, we have run out of time, and i apologize. we don't have more time for this session. we are going to have a coffee break. but i just wanted to begin, think every one of the panelists in particular. also, did want to also recognize the investor jerrod who very ably represented afghanistan and washington over the years at a very critical time in afghanistan's history. also ambassador dobbins and the panelists, thank you very much. it was a good session. the challenge is that i'm not

arguing let's not be pollyanna but what's also have a realistic assessment as long as moving forward because if we focus on the failure and have the narrative of defeat, that fuels the sentiment that we should give up and as alex pointed out we pay a very heavy price when we did 20 years ago but not repeat that mistake. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

as you heard this event is taking a short break. when it resumes we will hear a discussion on the media in afghanistan. ..

members at their annual winter meeting. he is scheduled to speak at 4:45 eastern and we will have live coverage on c-span. >> deaths from other major diseases like heart disease, stroke continue to decline. deaths from alzheimer's increased 50% last five years. five million americans have alzheimer's. at this rate, 35 years as many as 35 million will have the disease. third reason i'm here to show people they are not alone. so few people share personal stories. so few people have something to relate to. if me and my wife saw somebody like me talk talk about this it would make us feel less alone. americans whisper the world alzheimer's because the government whisperses alzheimer's. whisper is better than silence the alzheimer's community has been facing for decades it is

still not enough. it needs to be yelled and screamed until it gets funded and attention it deserves and needs. i can go back to being lazy self-involved man child i was look to be. people look to their government for hope. i ask when it comes to alzheimer's disease you take more steps to provide more. >> this weekend an c-span, actor seth rogen on capitol hill for increased alzheimer's treatment and support. on booktv. "in depth" at noon on c-span2. on c-span3, american history tv visits the national gallery of art to hear about colonel rob beard shaw and the 54th massachusetts volunteer infantry. sunday as 6:00 p.m. >> we're back at the u.s.

institute of peace awaiting a panel discussion on the future of media in afghanistan. that is scheduled to begin in about 15 minutes. until then we'll show you remarks from this morning a from the state department's special representative for afghanistan and pakistan, james dobbins. he spoke about the political and social changes happening in that country and as well as the prospects for a bilateral security agreement before u.s. forces withdraw the a the end of the year. >> alliance for the support of the afghan people for organizing this event and for inviting me to join you today. to the extent that afghanistan has impeded on the american consciousness over the past year it is largely been the security transition that has dominated. most news stories focused on the u.s. and nato drawdown, increasing role of afghan forces in conducting and leading the

fight, and looking forward on the, on the fate of the bilateral scatter agreement and continued uncertainty about whether the united states and nato will continue, will be, staying or going in 2015. in afghanistan by contrast, increasing attention is being paid to another transition, that has been put in train, that from one elected leader to another. if the security transition goes badly it may not make any difference who is governing afghanistan next year. but the reverse is also true. if this political transition does not take place successfully nothing achieved in the security sphere is likely to endure. so, if the bad news is that, that uncertainty about the conclusion of the bsa continues to cloud the security transition the good news is that the

political transition continues to move forward on schedule and so far without significant disruption. important progress this past summer including passage of elector laws, appointment to electoral institutions, the finalization of the electoral operation plan, all these have put the afghans in a much better place than previous cycles. additionally the candidates nominated, nomination period concluded, vetting of candidates took place. hundreds of complaints against both presidential and provincial council candidates were adjudicated and final candidate lists were announced including a list of the 11 presidential hopefuls. the independent electing commission has demonstrated its growing capacity and institutional strength in preparation for the upcoming elections. the announcement of a electoral timeline, operational plan, ballot procurement, design and

distribution alongwith administrative guidance, staffing and regular meetings with candidates, civil society and electoral organizations continues to help create an environment of transparency, contributing to rising confidence in the electoral process. the successful voter registration drive begun during the summer of 2013 in which new voters registered by the millions largely without incident, also demonstrates greater iec capacity. although there is, although there is thus room for optimism in the iec's performance, overt political pressure could of course still derail this progress. fortunately political entities have so far largely refrained from interfering in the electoral preparations and indeed afghan officials have even been disciplined for engaging in political activity.

the independent electoral complaints commission is a relatively new institution. permanently established through the passage of a new electoral law. the ecc successfully ajudicated complaints stemming from candidate registrations in october but has since made slower progress. the slow pace of appointing provincial officers key laid the establishment of provincial election commission complaint offices and a memorandum of understanding between the iec and ecc to colocate in provinces and clarify relations between the two independent bodies has not yet been finalized. however the publication of the electoral complaints commission rules of procedure alongwith the february 18th inauguration of 102 province a.m. ecc commissioners does represent important progress. the afghan security forces are hard at work with security planning for the upcoming elections and they are devoting

all available resources and energy to planning for many plausible contingencies. they're working in coordination with the electoral commission to strike the right balance, to increase participation, without increasing the opportunities for fraud. on january 12th, the ministry of the interior issued its assessment of polling center security and concluded that 414 of the 6845 polling centers would be inaccessible on election day. since then the iec has added an additional 323 polling centers to this list of those that would probably be inaccessible. on february 19th the iec published, publicly released its list of 6775 polling centers with 21,663 polling stations across the country.

the iec does not intend to add any additional polling centers to this list but given the dynamic security environment some of those that have already been announced as open could call into the closed category by election day. the release of polling, of the polling center list six weeks before the poll takes place marks a significant improvement over the 2009 elections when the polling center list was released only days before the election. election monitoring and observation is one of the best ways to mitigate fraud and insure credibility of the electoral process. consistent with afghan responsibility for afghan elections, domestic observe vision efforts are being -- observation efforts are being bolsters to enable 12,000 domestic observers to monitor the upcoming elections. over 300,000 candidate agencies are also expected to participate

in these monitoring efforts. the iec is also inviting international observers to take part. national democratic institution, ndi, democracy international, and the international crisis groups are the three american organizations who are currently fielding international observation groups accredited to the electoral commission. the european union and the osce also plan to send electoral monitoring teams. usaid has awarded $8 million to support two independent international election observer missions for the upcoming elections. the u.s. will continue to support the election process in a variety of ways while in no respect, absolutely no respect supporting any particular can kate or party. let me say a few words about the campaign to date. posters, as the presidential campaign kicked off in kabul

beginning on april, sorry, on february 2nd, posters appeared overnight and thousands attended rallies. enthusiasm for the election is on the rise and afghan society is showing increased democratic political sophistication with lively media coverage focusing on candidate rallies, platforms, and voter opinions. a series of television live debates focused on issues rather than ethnicity, have been particularly well-received. afghan news outlets offered minute by minute debate updates on their portals, facebook pages, and twitter feeds as candidates exchanged views on security, foreign affairs, the bilateral security agreement, corruption, economics and women's rights. four weeks in the various presidential campaigns are increasing their presence outside of kabul. independent afghan media outlets

are highlighting citizen requests for the candidates to travel to the provinces and present their plat forms in person. afghan civil society organizations are also inviting candidates to events and questions and answer sessions to explain their platforms and thoughts. for example, one conference earlier this month brought together many presidential candidates and campaign officials with women from 34 provinces to discuss substantive policy concerns. the first time something like this has ever occurred in afghanistan. overall a cautious sense of optimism has taken hold in afghanistan regarding these elections. whereas a year ago many afghans doubted that these elections would ever take place more afghans are now confident about the process and hopeful that the elections and hopeful about the elections. if successful, the elections can pave the way for afghans first

peaceful, democratic transfer of power in its history. afghans are heading to the poll at a time of rising incomes, rising longevity, rising literacy, rising mobility, rising political engagement, and also of course rising uncertainty about the future. despite this uncertainty about the security transition and about the continued international commitment, recent polling suggests that afghans remain more optimistic about their future than most americans are about afghanistan's future. indeed afghans tend to be more optimistic about their future than americans are about america's future. that's the most recent poll find that 67% of afghans believe their country is headed in the right direction as opposed to only 33% of americans who hold a similar view regarding our

country. another striking figure is that 77% of afghans believe the upcoming elections can make a difference in their lives. afghans may be divided by ethnicity, language and religion but they don't seem to be experiencing gridlock, and the current presidential campaign is not, does not evidence polarization but rather the opposite. as public debates are surfacing more agreement than discord on all of the major issues facing that country. according to a recent asia foundation survey 76% of afghans believe they are better off today than they were under the taliban. again i think the american figures for americans would be much lower. and it is easy to see why the afghans feel this way. between 2000 two and 2012. , afghanistan experienced a greater improvement in health, in education, and in overall standard of living than did any

other country in the world as measured bit u.n. development program. in education, literacy has increased from 12% of the population to 30%. in 2002 an estimated 900,000 boys were in school and virtually no girls. today there are over 10 million in school, nearly 40% of whom are girls. the number of teachers has increased from 20,000 in 2002 to 175,000 today. higher education has also boomed. according to the world bank student enrollment has increased from 8,000 in 2001, in higher education to over 100,000 in public universities and institutes of higher education today and there has also been a significant increase in students enrolled in private higher education.

in health the life expectancy has increased by more than 20 years. i don't think in the history of such is a cystics any country has experienced such a dramatic and stark increase over a such a short period of time in longevity. as i said, in 20 years since 2002 it has gone from 42 years to 62 years. infant mortality has decreased from 257 to 77 deaths per 1,000 live births. and under age five mortality from 172 to 97 deaths per 100,000 births. maternal mortality fell even more drastically from 16,000 to 327 deaths per 100,000 births. and indeed these statistics are the ones that are largely behind this increase in overall

longevity. as regards the economy, afghanistan's gross domestic product has grown an estimated 9% annually since 2002. overall the afghan economy has more than quadrupled since the fall of the taliban. exports have increased from approximately 69 million in 2002 to 31 million in 2012. -- 381 million. legal and regulatory reforms improved the business environment and already resulted in more than $1.5 billion investment in the telecom industry alone. in 2001, there was one mobile phone company with 20,000 subscribers. today there are four telecom companies with more than 16 million telephone subscribers. some offering 3g services. telecommunications networks

reached 90% of the afghan population. in 2002 only 6% of afghans had access to reliable electricity. today over 30% of the population has such access. there's also been, as has been noted, considerable progress regarding democracy, governance and press freedom. constitutional democracy is steadily taken root. afghanistan constitution is arguably the most progressive in south and central asia. over the past 12 years afghanistan has had two presidential and parliamentary elections and two elections for provincial councils. 27% of the seats in parliament, one governor, three cabinet members and 120 judicial positions are currently held by women. in 2001 there was one state

radio television station. today there are over 75 television stations and 175 radio stations. all but two of which are private. regarding the status of women, female literacy has increased to nearly 15% nationwide. 30% among girls age 15 to 24. and almost 40% among young urban women. in approximately the last five years nearly 120,000 girls have graduated from high school, and an estimated 40,000 are currently enrolled in public and private universities. in the executive branch three women out of 25 serve as cabinet ministers and in the legislative branch women hold 68 of the 249 seats in the national assembly. women make up approximately 25%

of the elected provincial councils. maybe the most stunning figure regarding the changes in afghan attitudes that have taken place over the last decade is the that today, five out of six afghans believe that women should have an education. this is a an indication that the kind of changes that we've seen are likely to endure as long as this political and security environmental louse them to do so. despite all these improvements, afghanistan remains one of the poorest, least-developed land on earth. and also one of the more violent, although by mo means one of the most violent. despite its ethnic, linguistic and religious divisions there is no ethnic cleansing going on in afghanistan and no purely sectarian violence but there is an ongoing insurgency.

one conducted by those who would seek to reverse much of the progress of which i've spoken. these advances thus remain quite fragile. a recent congressionally mandated study by the center for naval analysis find that afghan security forces require not just external funding but continued international military training, advice and assistance for several more years if they are to sustain themselves against the taliban insurgency and maintain control over the major population centers. this is certainly consistent with the administration's own analysis and that of our alliance partners. this is why we have negotiated a bilateral security agreement and why nato is negotiating its own status of forces agreement. our intention was to have concluded the bilateral security agreement last fall to have announced our intended 2015

troop commitment shortly thereafter and to spend 2014 working with our nato allies on the disposition and functioning of this new force. unfortunately president karzai, president karzai's decision not to sign the accord that he negotiated, that he is in fact not seeking to change, and that he agrees is important for afghanistan has thrown this timetable badly off. on tuesday president obama told president karzai he is open to waiting until later this year to conclude the bsa if necessary but that this delay would not be without cost. while we still continue to plan for a residual force to train, advise and assist the afghan security forces and to conduct limited counterterrorism mission, the scale of this commitment may well wane as uncertainty over our welcome persists and we will also need

to plan for the alternative of full withdrawal. there are those who foresee a repetition in afghanistan of our experience in iraq three years ago when a similar uncertainty led ultimately to complete withdrawal, but afghanistan is different from iraq in a number of respects. back in 2001 the iraqis didn't want us, they didn't need us, and we had signed an agreement several years earlier promising to leave. no iraqi figure, no iraqi political figure was then ready to argue publicly for a continued american military presence. iraq had plenty of its own money. and the u.s. had signed a legally-binding agreement several years earlier committing the united states to work for all of its troops by the end 2011. afghanistan is different in all of these respects.

the afghans want us to stay. they need us to stay, and they signed an agreement two years ago committing us to a long-term security partnership. even president karzai repeatedly acknowledges the importance of the bilateral security agreement for afghanistan and nearly all other afghan leaders have urged its early conclusion. indeed, it is not much of an exaggeration to say that the only prominent afghan to speak out against the bilateral security agreement has mullah omar. the afghan state and its security forces in contrast to those of iraq are much more dependent on continued american and international support. since 2011 iraq has seen a slow increase in terrorist violence but iraq was not then in 2011 and is still not yet in the midst of an all-out civil war.

by contrast in the absence of a continued, trained, advise and assist u.s. nato military mission afghanistan's descent into more widespread vie violence an political disintegration is likely to be more rapid. recognition of afghan's continuing need for american support led our two governments to conclude this strategic partnership agreement in 2012 and to then immediately embark upon negotiations of the bilateral security agreement in order to lay the groundwork for that aspect of our partnership. now, i think we all know that most americans are tired of the afghan conflict and believe that the results have not justified the costs. but most americans also recognize the need to withdraw gradually and responsibly. 2/3 of americans say the war was not worth fighting according to a recent "abc washington post

poll." but 55% nevertheless still favor keeping some u.s. forces there for training and counter terrorism purposes. this margin of support is narrowed and likely to diminish further as long as uncertainty about our welcome persists. president obama's decision to leave open the possibility of concluding the necessary agreement with a willing partner later this year provide hope that this all can still be worked out. despite president karzai's continued refusal to conclude the agreement now but i am afraid that this delay could still prove costly. thank you. [applause] >> united states relationship with afghanistan. i'm david ensor, the director of the voice of america and i will be moderating this second panel which will be a little bit looser because i'm a tv guy. so i like to walk around with a

microphone and things like that. we have a very irdistinguished panel. i will introduce them in a minute but i wanted to say a couple of things and i want to show you a bit of videotape, again being a television person i can't resist doing that first of all i spent and really why i'm here, i spent 17 months in 2010 and 11 serving at the united states embassy in kabul as the director of communications and public diplomacy and so like many others in the room i fell in love with afghanistan and with the afghan people. but there were, i want to remark on three things i noticed in the area of the afghan media and it struck me and perhaps will help us get started here. the first thing which led me in the end to the job i have now at voa was vouching television and seeing that there was a program on the evening news on the radio

television afghanistan, rta, very able leader is with us today, mr. ansor, thank you very much for coming but in partnership with rta, voice of america has an hour of news every evening and what struck me first was that it was a very well-put together program but secondly, all my afghan friend watch it. the the effectiveness of that conversation and that reliable news made quite an impression on me. the second thing and i think practically everyone in the room if you follow afghanistan or afghan media issues at all, has been struck by this one time or another, is the extraordinary adventure called tolo-tv. the extraordinary impact, enthusiasm, energy, that particular private company has brought to the afghan media

scene. more about that in a minute. they're not the only ones. as ambassador dobbins mentioned there are something like 75 television stations and 175 radio stations. there is enormously vigorous, varied conversation going on the airwaves in afghanistan among afghans. tolo tv may be the largest but only one of many so that is a very notable piece of the media landscape. the third thing is that as a embassy official i went around the country and i often visited little tiny fm stations in villages and small towns around afghanistan and there are a lot of them and you go into a, perhaps it is a one-room fm station somewhere in a small town that doesn't have too much going for it and you find young people at the microphone,

finding some way to get a little music on with some kind of a basic tape recorder and in many cases these stations were started by locals with help from ngos, prominently by internews which is represented by some senior people from internews are here today and thank you for coming. and many of these stations while they run some local content, maybe have a local talk show, run some music, also run the flagship show of the that whole network of community radio stations. so again, another green chute and strung one and important one, diverse varied source of strength for afghanistan going forward. so we're here in this panel to discuss what i frankly think is one of the most important advances over the last 12 years. we heard of many others from the

previous panel. obviously i'm a little biased because i spent nearly 30 years in the business of journalism and i'm still sort of in it. but freedom of speech, if you don't have that, you ain't got much. you have to have a democracy which afghanistan seeks to be, really has to have a sense that people say what they think and that the media, maybe there are some limits but fundamentally can do so as well. and it's that subject that i'd like to get us to talk about and i want to talk about what, how can we support the media sector in afghanistan going forward. there are a lot of different aspects to this. i will introduce our panel in a minute but before i do that, it isn't just about journalists and journalism, important though that is and well-represented though that sector is on the panel here. the media is much more than just

good newscasts. it's entertainment. it's informing. it's story telling. by the way afghans are some of the best storytellers i have ever met. so in that spirit i think that the effort that we've seen over the last 12 years by many different westerners, different countries, different support systems, has been much broader than just trying to provide freedom of speech and the news, though that is for me job one and to allow afghans to learn how to do that as they so much have but it is also kind of helping the media to become a full part of the country's culture and its strength. so in that spirit i wanted to show a seven-minute clip from a wonderful new documentary produced by a young australian filmmaker, eva, eva, i have not

got her name in front of me. eva warner, right. some of you may have seen this, right. to sort of broaden the discussion before we even get started, here is seven minutes of "the network" by eva warner, this is focused on the television and broader issues of journalism and women, other topics that are important about afghanistan. so here is a taste and this seven minutes focuses on a particular television show on tele tv. can we roll the film, please. ♪ >> i've been out -- drama series for afghanistan was probably one

of the hottest spots drama series. i'm very ambitious. ♪ tungurahura. >> our instructions, to film this, was that this was, needed to be -- this is production values in afghanistan [speaking in native tongue] >> this is huge production, on the streets of kabul. [speaking in native tongue] [screaming] >> we were speaking this very

last sequence by the ministry of agriculture. we had a guy wearing -- the police were chasing the bad guy and then a police car comes up and he got us trapped. every shot kept betting faster and faster and the last tape we honestly thought our actor was dead. it was frightening. 45 minutes later, head of security said that the ministry of agriculture wanted to shut down the shoot and want you to leave everything that you shot today. and so we packed up our entire shoot in five minutes and that was it. [gunfire] when we were doing eagle fall, we someone that can do bullet wound and scars and burns and you name it and i sat down asked him what can you do? we had a chat about it. she said she would practice.

♪ [speaking in native tongue] >> what is amazing about karima i think out of any local cast member, only karima can walk straight from a set in afghanistan to a set in any country and do her job without any problem. she is just fabulous. [speaking in native tongue]

♪ [speaking in native tongue] >> what we were trying to do with that show was to lift the profile of the afghan security forces. one of the biggest fears of transition in this country that once we pull out the security forces here won't guaranty the situation and won't guaranty people's safety. once the international forces go, that's their security forces are adequate enough to look after us. [speaking in native tongue] >> the show was to promote the force with integrity and create heroes and that, you know, that you can trust the police that are around you. >> throughout the nine provinces, 76% of respondents their attitude toward the police had changed for better after watching the show.

it was a noticeable spike in recruitment during the run of the show. so in terms of messaging it was highly successful as well. [speaking in native tongue] >> things change, people will have to know that the police are out there working for them. >> great. so, never let it be said we don't have entertainment value here at this conference. and that afghans don't have the sense of the theatrical. let me, i would also like to read a quote here before i introduce the panel. this is a letter from kabul by doran townsend. are you here? you are, excellent. i'm going to quote you. this is in foreign affairs relevant to this. he wrote that, and he worked for

unama in kabul, when western legal technicians are asked about these programs typically dismiss them as peripheral and prop began disi can, sideshow to serious institution of stayed building, audience surveys say that the shows make powerful impression comparing their own police, lawyers and judgings to more virtuous ones on fictional television. he didn't use the word fictional. viewers expected hope for clean, efficient justice system with new sense of your again system. mention as another show, crime scenes, producers received hundred of phone calls, to ask authorities to look into the violations highlighted in the shows. before we get into this, now we will, to broaden it slightly, what do we talk about when we talk about the afghan media? so we have a, a very strong panel to talk about this with us. on my left immediate left, peter bergen, national, director of the national security program at the new american foundation.

author of manhunt, the longest war, the bin bin that knew, bin laden that i knew, and cnn analyst that knew. we worked together at cnn and been together for decades and another member of the kind of the tribe that believes in afghanistan here in the united states. next to him, najibsharifi, director of afghan journalists safety committee and afghan voices. distinguished afghan journalist and afghan patriot. worked for "the washington post," "the new york times,", bbc and ncr and understands the western media and its odd did i -- oddities and vague you areries and weaknesses. to his left, danish karo kel, the founder of the pajhowok afghan news. one of the bedrock afghan media

institutions founded in the last 12 years. a source of strength for so many other media organizations. you can't really have good radio and television stations if you don't have a good wireless service or two. those of us in radio and tv know that well. we can't cover everything. what they try to do is cover everything. that is impossible and amazing how much they do and quality of the work. he is also the 2008 winner of the international press freedom award from the committee to protect journalists. another great afghan patriot on our panel. and on, to, far end, from the united kingdom, james deane, who is director of policy and learning at bbc media action. so for voa, he represents the competition in a way of the friendly competition. but james worked with some others on probably the best

survey and study on the state of the afghan media, done not too long ago. he has some interesting find frogs that and strong views about what we need to do going forward, those of us who care about this issue. so let me start by, let me start with you, danish, if i may. let me ask you,, how strong is the afghan media at this point and how worried are you about its future? >> thank you. thanks to voice of america and b institute of peace organizing this important event. you know, the first station and the beginning mark was so you know, i really came from the negative aspects of afghanistan

which i hear some positive things, you know, the support of american people, you know, the government of usa and i'm so happy to, we believe, we are not alone. we have support which is what very good. i want to start from one of the recent examples, i want to share one story which i recently meet in kabul one of the barbers at a barbershop and he told me, he bought land to build a house for his family for $6,000 and now after two or three months fighting on, you know, he sold

it, sold it by $4,000. he believes if afghan government does not sign the bsa, if we did not have acceptable elections, he is not he is not sure will be 100% free election but he says if we have not have acceptable election, it is means his future will be dangerous. he wants to keep that $400,000, $4,000, you know, how to transfer his family to one side of afghanistan to the other and how to feed his children. it is means that now our future in afghan media future in our country future is different on signing bsa and also the acceptable election, if we all didn't have that, it does mean

our future will be dangerous. our, i will be worried. afghan journalists will be worried and our people will be worried. these two things are one important and like a bridge for our path. we earlier achieve in 12 years good achievement in afghan media. if we compare to the taliban time as before, you know, i have, during taliban time there was not tv channel. there was just taliban radio station. but now have, we have 1,000 media outlets. now our question is that, how we keep that? how we running that? how, you know, and i hope if the bsa signing, if we have a good election, if we pass this, i think our future will be very good and i think we will have

good success in our country. >> najib, same question, how strong is the afghan media, how important is it to the country and how worried are you about its future. >> well it is very strong if we look at the fact that today's afghan media is only the product of the last 10 years. before that we didn't literally have media in the country as danish rightly outlined. we only had one radio during the taliban and two papers which were solely being used for propaganda purposes of the government. in terms of highlightings priorities for central government, in terms of promoting human rights, promoting women's rights, in terms of holding the politicians accountable, very strong. again, we have to look at the afghan media in the backdrop of what we had before that 2001.

and it is extremely important for afghanistan because afghanistan has recently started on the pact of democracy and in the absence of a strong and vibrant media we will not be able to have much success in endeavor of building democracy in the country but it has got its own weaknesses and imaginable, one of the important weaknesses of the afghan government is mainly on part of media owners is lack of a strategic vision towards their media outlets and this itself will lead to the bankruptcy of a lot of, significant number of media outlets after the international forces left

afghanistan because, proportionately there will be reduction in the amount of aid in afghanistan. a lot of afghan media, major source of funding for them is the international community. >> that is what i want to get to. maybe i will try with you, james. how worried are you about looking forward about the future of the afghan media and do you have any sense of how many stations may close if they lose foreign support? >> first of all their acknowledged to be a success. everyone has but i think it is an extraordinary achievement which is very -- my colleagues on the panel here, others in the audience, there is astonishing achievement from, there is tradition of afghan journalism goes back to 1911 but there was nothing in 2001. 10,000 people are now employed in the sector. the spectrum, problems of success, the spectrum is saturated with a number of radio

stations that exist. the number of televisions stations that exist. this is very much down to the energy and entrepreneurism and creativity and of people like najib, danish and others. there is a big success story and big success story is also built on external support. external support by ngos, like people like yourself, david. it is really dependent upon that in quite a significant way as well. >> can i add -- it is also due to a person who doesn't always get his credit for this. it is also due to president hamid karzai who opened up a space and kept space open more or less for, for free discussion and many voices. >> with the most liberal licensing example, regulatory civil in the entire region. it is quite extraordinary.

but how worried am i? really worried. this is built on awful lot of external support. that external support does appear to be drying up. the domestic advertising market by most estimates is, top end, something like $30 million a year. probably more likely $20 million per year. it is nothing enough to sustain the scale of a media that exists in the country. and so only two things are likely to happen if the support does continue to dry up in the way it appears to be doing. one, the media will consolidate and shrink. perhaps a little bit of that needs to happen anyway and the best will survive. but it will start also to be falling into the hands of those who are prepared to pay for it. and those who are prepared to pay for it and it is difficult to verify real evidence and up in members around this. certainly biggest supporters of media in afghanistan, from

external sources, aside from private finance has been the u.s. but for many and many consider second biggest supporter of media in afghanistan is iran. and we are gypping to see and this is something we mapped and charted in the report we did media of afghanistan in transition which we published in 2012, we are beginning to see a going cooperation of media by factional forces, by warlords -- cooption. perhaps that is the worry. if this isn't, managed in a intelligent, constructive way there is this astonishing legacy that has been built but is that legacy going to be secured? and there are real threats to that legacy at the moment. and yeah, we're worried. >> peter, on the neighbors, iran, pakistan, others, what sort of role are they playing

now in the afghan media space and what are your thoughts about that going forward? >> well, yeah, i think it is interesting to compare pakistan and afghanistan in the media environment. just as hamid karzai has been very liberal with granting licenses in afghanistan, general musharraf, one of the good things he did was really create this space for free press in pakistan but there is an interesting kind of comparison between pakistan and afghanistan that really is to redowns to afghanistan's benefit which is, you know, the freedom of press in afghanistan i think in some ways better than it is in pakistan and i will give you a couple of examples. it would be inconceivable to the afghan government to expel a "new york times" journalist who had been in the country for six years and leading journalist for "the times" and that is what happened to him in pakistan, i read only recently. as a western journalist trying to cover pakistan when you get a

visa, your visa is for lahore. not about karachi. when he went to there he was beaten up. friends of mine went into balochistan and was beaten up. you want report in the tribal regions. contrast with afghanistan where independent journalists can go where they want and one final point which also redowns to afghanistan's benefit, pakistan, journalists routinely find it not the most dangerous country in the world for journalists, probably second most dangerous after syria. there are good things going on in pakistan in the media but the situation in afghanistan is, looks a lot better. >> but you talked, james, about iranian money coming in, pakistani money coming in. can you quantify that at all? >> i don't think we can quantify it. i don't think we know or researched well enough and we

have to be careful about just what the effects of that are but, i, there is evidence that the channels of that money is supporting are beginning, are getting quite a lot of money first of all but they're also, even since we publish ad report 18 months ago, a sense that actually those channels are also getting more audience and bit more traction with the population and although this hasn't been a polarized media environment and we heard this morning a little bit about how a lot of the coverage around the elections wasn't particularly polarized there are undoubtedly keshes where the future of this is going to be. a lot of my work is not just on afghanistan but fragile states in general. fragile states tend to be fractured states and we are seeing an increase in the fragmented and fractured media in afghanistan and the most fractured part of that media are arguably getting quite

significant injects of funding at the moment. last thing at one level for a state that is trying to refined itself, chart its own future, its own destiny, its own national identity. it, it's necessarily a useful way of going as if the media becomes ever more fragile and fractured in the way it does seem to be going the way at the moment. >> najib, how solid do you think is the support that you expect to see after the election in terms of governmental support for the concept of a free media? i know there was discussion recently about a new media law. perhaps you can give us a word or two on that and what your concerns may be about freedom of the press in afghanistan. >> well, again, when we compare countries, afghanistan has had a

remarkable, has managed to create a remarkable space for freedom of media, for the media and this is because, we should, you know, give credit to president karzai for allowing this and for letting it to flourish but recently we have been noticing pressures from the government. well not necessarily, this mainly comes from the ministry of information and culture and their faulty way of solving the problems that the afghan media is undergoing. well, professionalism, lack of professional system a problem and the way that the ministry of information and culture sees to resolve the problem is to pressure the media. and what the ministry did a couple of months ago was to, it

proposed amendment of three articles of the media law which further restricted the space for media workers and gave sole authority to the hands of the ministry of information and culture to punish and pry media workers who are seen as violators of media law or violators of the profession. i must say that this is not system i can attempts of the government to pressure the media but there are a lot of individuals in the afghan government who are not very, who can not tolerate them, the freedom that the afghan media is enjoying. well in terms of the future of, after this government, the future government, it depend on who gets elected but, so far we see that the top candidates,

they're all media friendly and they all believe in the concepts of freedom of expression and expansion of media as the constructive component for state building and for for strengthening democracy in afghanistan. >> danish, forgive me if i put you on the spot here. that is the nature of a discussion like this. do you think pajhwok can survive? will it have funding in three, four, five years time? in a way you're an example, an important one, you know. you're the canary in the coal mine. will you survive, do you think, three, four, five years from now? >> in the last 10 years we did hard work to sustain pajhw opt k by news subscriptions and advertisement and we didn't find

enough monty to run news agency. you know the news agency business, as you know needs some support. but based on our learning in the last 10 years, we tried to, to focus on a new stream of revenue in order to sustain pajhwok. i will tell you in our coming in 2014 and 15 and in our business plan we are focusing on some new product like election mining website. we want to introduce a new subscription passage for the mining company, for the candidate and politician which helps us. we are already implemented that. beside that, we want to focus on

our international income, revenue, which is also started and it is good. we want to introduce something which is has been started and help us. we want to expand our news service as before, around 16 million and now it is that we focus on that, like introduce media release service to build a more viable application. we are working on that. we can say, we know that after 2014 or 2014 there will be less money but if we focus on those things, i think we will sustain pajhwok without international money. >> thinking like a businessman. good to hear. peter, back when they were in power the taliban used to tear

up videotapes. they didn't allow much seed yaw of any variety. do you think their view of media has changed out of power? seems to me in some ways they are quite sophisticated practitioners moved earn media now. their internet efforts are impressive in some ways. >> i totally agree with that. you know, when i was, reporting in afghanistan, when the taliban were in power, and everybody on the panel noted there was just radio sharif and there was that. also bbc had a correspondent in the ap and al jazeera. . .