washington journal continues. urab thisk at morning, the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction. always nice to have the and learn more about your reports. remind our viewers of your work and mission. guest: it has been about six years.

our office oversees the $126 billion we have spent over the last 17 years on reconstruction in afghanistan. we are and inspector general's office, we have criminal restriction, we can investigate and bring people to prosecution for theft and miscondt, as well as we do audits and issue lessons learned reports which try to bring out best practices from the experience over the last 17 years. host: your latest report is that the efforts to stabilize afghanistan over the past 15 years have failed. why? guest: we underestimated the difficulty. we overestimated our capability. districtscused on that were extremely difficult to stabilize. i should explain what is stabilization, it is actually a technical word of ours. it's not reconstruction, it is

not the entire $126 billion. it is about $5 billion that was very important and spent on that period after you have cleared the taliban and terrorist from the district, you bring in the to tryn officials to stabilize that area, to try to make it safe for the afghan government to come in and get support from the afghan people for the host government. and to make sure the taliban don't come back. what we did was focused on the most dangerous districts. we gave unrealistic timelines to do the stabilization. those are two of the reasons why a failed. host: the key findings, the u.s. overestimated the ability to change government institutions and attempt to secure dangerous districts proved to be a problem. when did this stabilization effort begin, undewhat

administration? or the different approaches and any other network? guest: some of it worked in certain areas. the main focus of our report was 2014.me between 2009 and that is when most of the money was spent during the obama administration. orknew we were getting out, at least there was the hope that we were getting out, so there was a surgeon troops. there was also a surge in development. that is one wayward applying this doctrine of once we clear the taliban out, we wanted to stabilize it, bring the afghan government in as a substitute. as a host government should be providing some services. the that we spent too

much money and too fast in these districts, and as some of the afghans who were brought in, the government officials, the police officials were just as bad as the taliban. the afghan people really preferred the taliban sometimes to the officials that we brought in for the government and that was a serious problem. host: what was the taliban offering and what could they do successfully that the united states and afghans couldn't? guest: that is interesting because we try to reinvent a lot of these districts, try to turn them into little americans are little norway's. the taliban offers, as much as we don't like them, they offered a service to these peasants, these afghan farmers and their families. aat was that they gave them model of security from other terrorist groups.

they offered dispute resolution. we may not like their justice, but to the afghan people, they actually got justice from the taliban. you didn't have to offer, you didn't have to reinvent the you didn't have to do major programs in these districts to win the hearts and minds of the afghan people. that is the unfortunate thing, too. we spent so much money on programs that the people didn't need. they just won to double that of security and a little bit of justice. they weren't getting it from the warlords and corrupt officials that we brought in with the stabilization program. host: instead, the u.s. try to offer what? what were some of these services they were offering and why couldn't they do them successfully? is as i classic example said, the taliban offered some protection and security. some ability to protect the citizens from criminality.

what did we do? we brought in corrupt police, corrupt officials who were the real reason before that the afghan people went to the taliban. they wanted a little bit of justice. what do we do? we build courthouses. j would hire correct udges, and corrupt officials. we spent money on sending them to schools, all they want is a modicum of justice and we didn't offer that. why did we make this mistake? reasons.of number one, we didn't understand the environment. we didn't understand the afghan countryside and what they needed. secondly, we were under this tremendous time constraint. our military knew they had 18 months to stabilize. they focused on that. the rest of our government

agencies knew they had 18 months to do it and they just poured the money and with very little oversight. host: was impossible to do in 18 months? guest: the timeline in and of itself isn't wrong, but then you have to determine what you can do in the 18 months. it was a combination of the timeline with totally unrealistic goals. then, we are doing it in the wrong districts. we are doing and the most difficult areas of afghanistan, rather than focusing on those districts where ere was a modicum of honest governance where you could focus on that. it is sort of like a tipping point. this districts could have tipped over to the government support. the afghan people could then rely upon the government, and you could use it as an ink blot. drop in some ink and a gradually goes out. what we did was weept going into districts we had to keep sending troops back in because the security was so bad. host: how is it that after l

of these years, we don't understand yet the culture and what is happening in afghanistan? would you say right now, we still don't understand? guest: i think we have a better understanding, but we didn't understand. congress,sked me from can you describe what you have learned in afghanistan in one word? . said no, i can give you two over us and mendacity. a sanity we had that we somehow believed we knew what was best for the afghan people and we can do all. the mendacity was that we oversold it. many officials oversold what we could do to congress and the american people. we joke in my office about kites and balloons. fromme you see a report

afghanistan and you see kites and balloons, don't trust it. they are selling you something. we should have been honest to the american people and to ourselves that this is a very difficult country. it has been very diffilt to roll it for years and understand it and work accordingly. i think we still have a little bit of that hubris. that is why we issue these lessons learned reports. you don't see kites and balloons when you look our reports. the hard facts are it is a difficult job. we will be issuing a lessons learned report next week on counter narcotics which is another difficult issue where i think we oversold what we could do in the time we had in afghanistan. host: where can viewers find that report? guest: this report is all of our reports can be found online at www.sigar.mil.

next week's report will be coming out on june 14 at the new america foundation right here in washington, d.c. narcotics is another area we have spent a billion dollars and have very little to show for our efforts. st: and issue our viewers have certainly followed over the years. we want to invite you all to call in with your comments and questions on what has been happening in afghanistan. the latest report from john sopko and his team is the stability factor and he says their findings is that it has years, $5r the past billion spent. also, a special line this morning for afghanistan war veterans. we want to hear from you.

john sopko, how many times have you been to afghanistan? guest: i hate to count. i go aboutvery month 20 something times. i took off sometimes because i had an incidencoming in off of a helicopter, so i wasn't able to travel for a couple of months, but it has been about 20 times. host: give us a story or an example of this stabilization effort in one community and what happened. guest: i can give you a good news is story. and everybody criticizes us because we are always negative and dr. doom here. we did the right thing in tune kunar province. we have the ght military leader on the ground who had his civilian compatriot who knew the region who also worked very closely with the afghan

government and the leaders in that community. they all worked together, they didn't overpromise. they did small projects, projects that they worked with the afghans before hand to see what they wanted, what they needed and it worked. for the time that they were there and there was a strong u.s. military and afghan presence, and you had a good afghan police officer who ran the police, he was honest, he wasn't a terrorist in himself, they worked. for the ti that we were there during that 3, 4, 5 year. , it worked. they fixed some canals and build some bridges, they provided with the local citizens needed. the citizens felt

that the central government is good, it cares about us, we then support them. unfortunately, the drawdown comes in, power forces are removed, and the latest we have heard is that whole area is under taliban control again. that is the other lesson we have learned from this is it takes a long time. going slow sometimes is better than going fast. in this case, you still need that military presence to keep the bad guys from coming back. host: what is o military presence right now? guest: about 14,000 u.s. troops. it increased a bit under the new tegy we have coalition from our nato allies, so thatncreases it by a couple more thousand. it may be over 16,000 or 18,000. next week's report, can you tell us with the major findings are? guest: briefly, we spent about

$8 billion in fighting counter narcotics. the finding is that it failed. no significant success in fighting drugs in afghanistan. afghanistan is now the largest producer of opium in the world. it doesn't impact the united states directly, because we get unfortunately most of our opium from nearby, from mexico and latin america. it does affect europe, and effects asia, and actually canada. ironically, the canadian government tells us 60% or 70% of their opium comes from afghanistan. why are we interested in fighting narcotics? because narcotics fuels the insurgency. narcotics fuels the corruption. afghanistan is also one of the most corrupt countries.

therefore, hurts us in building or helping to build an afghan government that the afghan people support because they see the narcotraffickers, they see the money they give, they see their local police officials living in mansions or sending their kids out of the country, avoiding serving in the military. it is a significant problem. it is also significant because if we ever do this again and some other country, that country will probably have a drug problem also worried if you look around the world, and other hotspots, there is usually a correction problem, i rule of law program, a governance problem, of the stabilization oblem. these lessons learned reports we are producing are not only useful, but also if we have to do it again. our threat is less from former

soviet union and nuclear power from a state threat, our threat is mostly from a destabilized state. estate where there is terrorism running around, where you have all these other problems. host: let's hear what our s have to say. let's go to marry. -- mary. caller: you said there were justice many times. after 9/11, ink, report,elevision a news anthere were films of women being dragged onto a soccer field, women in burqas who couldn't see what was going on because of their burqas. they were young women. they dragged them on and they ot them dead. as they were people in the stands, what seem to be ordinary

citizens, were enjoying this spectae. taliban probably was more in charge then, i don't know. justice, butwant when i see the way females are dragged around in burqas and confined in burqas and can't leave their home, and especially when they dragged young women onto a soccer field and shoot them dead, and i don't even think they knew why they were being murdered. host: ok mary your time is up. guest: i don't want the collar and listeners to think that i support taliban rule of law. i don't. what i'm describing is the reality of the situation in afghanistan. when you talk to afghan citizens, when you talk to the

farmers, when you do surveys, when our troops get out, even sometimes when i travel and i afghanso well educated who are working for their own government, they say that their family who still lives out in the provinces will go to the taliban for dispute revolution toresolution before they go the afghan government. the most depressing time i had in those twentysomething trips , over one trip i met bright, very young educated afghans who both told me that story that they had disputes, the family did who lived out in the provinces, and they would prefer taliban dispute resolution because the taliban will make a decision.

it will be based on facts, at least the facts as they see it, and it will be correct. -- corrupt. the afghan government, you have to buy your justice, and whoever pays the better price it's the justice. that, to me was depressing. as much as -- and this is where it comes in with the hubris, we have to deal with the facts on the ground. facts.t impose our i think it was churchill who said you have to face the facts because they face you. the fact on the ground is as bad as the taliban is, those afghan peasants, those afghan citizens preferred it to the kabul government. preferred it to the warrds,

preferred it to the people that we sidled up to and were identified with. aslong asy view us siding with the people who raped their children, stole their land, stole their property, just destroyed their country, we have a pblem. stabilization, that is what this whole report is about was trying to win the hearts and minds back from a government, the local government, i'm not talking about the leadership in kabul, they are trying to change it. i meet with the president a lot. they are trying to change it. a lot of those local officials out there were predatory. how large is the taliban presence in afghanistan? guest: i don't have the exact numbers. everywhere.

i think our latest quarterly report was talking about the areas under taliban control, i will be honest with you, i rget the exact number. the amount of territory uer government control, i believe has fallen over the last few years. that is the problem we are facing. host: john from florida. caller: yes, hello. host: go ahead. caller: with all the money we're spending, taxpayers money, -- the $5 billion and $8 billion for the narcotics and control over in afghanistan, what is our exit strategy? i think the money would be much better well spent here in the u.s., where our current issues -- for our current issues, than

afghanistan. over i've never understood why we and i don'tnam understand why we are in afghanistan. it is important for people to understand with the government getting more expensive, we are just dumping our money, the people and citizenry, we are dumping our money into these diids. i am looking for a net that strategy. just get out. host: ok. guest: it is a very good question. i don't mean to sound like i am dodging it, but specter's general, in my office, we don't do policy. whether we should be in afghanistan or not, how long we should stay is aolicy decision that the president and the

congress determines. our job is once there is a stated policy, and there are programs to support the policy, our job is to look at those programs, see if they are supporting the policy, furthered the policy and are handled properly. , good question what is our exit strategy. good question, how long should we be there, should we even be there at all, those are all good questions. again, i apologize to the caller, but it is not my job to answer that. my job is once they have decided -- all of the president has said we are there to kick the bad guys out and ensure that there is a strong enough government in afghanistan so that the terrorists will not come back and use it as a launching pad to attack the u.s.

or our allies. pose is the stated pur for why we are in afghanistan. what is our exit strategy and purpose, those are questions you should ask congress. caller: i saw you last time you were on c-span, and quite frankly, i don't envy your job. point,to the larger the taliban lives there, that is their country. they have been fighting each other in tribal elements for millennia. that is the way they will always be. the military-industrial complex of this country makes billions of dollars by feeding war. they feed our young men and women in this endeavor. they are disabled, they are killed, and when they come back

they are used as props in a sympathy industry for $20 a month. this will never end because the politicians in this country become wealthy by being rewarded with contractors jobs in the military conference when they leave office. their children are educated in elite schools, their children military, asin the the president has showed that. that is the way america will always be. it will be drained of its treasures and we americans will continue to slug it out here. -- theyjustice system need a taliban overhead here that will simply issue what you just called some kind of justice. this is the way it will always be. guest: i am sorry you feel that

way. i don't. don't, and some people may think i am too optimistic, i am optimistic because of you and of callers like you. i think an educated public, whether it is in the u.s. afghanistan or anywhere else in the world is the best defense against problems in our own country. actual, itlds the basis for changes, whatever the changes may be. that is i come here to c-span. i've been a strong supporter of c-sp since i first came to washington in 1982. it is an opportunity to educate the american people as to what is going on. it is nonpartisan, it is factual. we give you the facts.

is up to you as a citizen of the united states do something with the facts. nd, i am sorry you feel that way, on the other hand i am glad you watch and glad you called. host: do you and your office have an end date? is based on the amount of money spent. when it goes to $250 million a year, we start to shut down. where we are right now is, there is about $9 billion has already been authorized, appropriated and not yet spent. so there's quite a way to go to that 250 million. i will say this. i think at some point, our little agency should go on a

business. i like temporary agencies. i think that approach to the problem is great, and i think as long as they're spending the money and it is over the $250 million, we will be here to do our job to try to protect it. host: $9 billion authorized for what? guest: i believe dollars for reconstruction has already been authorized. congress authorizes us to spend the money and that appropriate to. when that amount falls below $250 million, we go out of existence six months later. right now, that pipeline of authorized and appropriated is at $9 billion. host: what is that money used for? guest: it can be used for training afghan civil servants, training the afghan military,

providing equipment, boots, food. it also goes to supporting voting roads, clinics etc. taxpayer, we, the u.s. and e coalition, but i haven't talked about how much money they have spent, we are basicall supportihe we are basically pporting the afghan government. think the president and others have said that without the support of the coalition and particularly the united states, the afghan government would collapse. host: john in virginia. caller: thinks for taking my call. spent $5nt to ask, we billion. as far as i'm concerned right now, i think the problem is not only afghanistan, the problem is this gentleman. i don't know how the world that he has a job. he is just laughing and thinking this thing is like nothing happened and we just spent money for afghanistan for nothing.

afghanistan is a divided country, we knew that in the beginning. the problem is there are a lot of contractors who abuse the system. the previous color he does call before me said exactly what it is. people in afghanistan n't get this money. the only people who get this money are contractors hired by the pentagon, contractors hired by government of afghanistan, and the leaders that we need -- -- we don'tupport follow the money. this gentleman is telling us little things happening in a village and he thinks that we have done something for those people. most of the afghan people are still struging. everything that goes there comes back to hear. host: we heard your point, let's have john respond, because this is obviously something you work with. guest: i don't view it in a

joking manner. i take it very seriously. that is why i do what i did, do. more importantly, if the caller has specific information, please contact us. i think we have a hotline for you to call. it is one thing to say everybody is correct in afghanistan, but it is my job to prove specific orple still specific money moved of that money or did specific things, because i am required by courts of law to do that. we have put in jail over 100 people. these are u.s. citizens, these are afghan citizens, these are u.s. military and contractors. that is based upon rule of law. give me fax. or any of thects many people listening and or

watching on tv have specific allegations, then contact us. we will follow up. we do that based upon people in afghanistan giving us information and people here in the united states. just saying boldly that everybody in afghanistan is corrupt is ok. it makes you feel good, but it doesn't help us do our job. now, we have saved the taxpayers over $2 billion. that is $2 billion that we made cases on and recover that money for the u.s. taxpayer. umbrage with somebody thinking that we view this as a humorous will exercise. 2400 americans have died in afghanistan. we're the best insurance policy for the 2400 and the almost trillion dollars we have spent in afghanistan because of we

will track you down if you still money from us and we will put you in jail. individualsou 100 who are now serving time in federal prisons for what they did in afghanistan. we are serious. if you are serious, call this number. host: we will show that number again. you can see it there, email. there is an international line as well. what is your budget? guest: about $56 million. we have a staff of about 200. 33 or 34 of them are in afghanistan permanently. largest u.s. enforcement and auditing presence in afghanistan. couldwhich type of person

try to get rich off of the money that the u.s. is putting into the country? how does it happen? guest: a lot of contractors. , the u.s. occurs government gives a prime contract to somebody. they then subcontract to somebody else. there was a policy in the u.s. government to buy afghans, so he wanted to use afghan contractors. the contractor pays a bribe to a u.s. official, pays a bribe to an afghan official to get the contract to build a highway, etc. that is one way you get it. the big issue has to be with fuel. fuel is like liquid gold. we were involved in a contract investigation where we identified --

instead of paying $700 million for this fuel, it actually cost closer to $1 billion. that was increasing the price so they shared the proceeds. we turned that over to the afghan president, they canceled the contract, he fired all the people involved, and a set of a new procurement system. the other way people make money is they are no-shows. we pay and we have been harping on this. we pay the salaries for the police, teachers, they don't exist. some commanding officer makes them up and they don't exist. he just collects the salaries. we have been harping on this with the u.s. military, department of defense. we just issued an audit with the world bank because we give money to the world bank to pay salaries and we said you're not doing the right job. there are many ways.

the ways of theft and bribery and corruption e only limited by the minds of the individual who wants to do it. host: we will go to john in massachusetts. you are from afghanistan? caller: know, i am an american. host: you fought in afghanistan? caller: yes. i just wanted to say that i am hearing there is all kinds of corruption there, this thing about you are paying teachers that don't exist and some who takes the money. you're covered to billion dollars and put 100 people in jail, not good enough. the reason why people win in this country and it is the greatest nation is the world -- in the world is because we do better.

we do better, we try harder, we look for the truth. please just do better. this is america. we are the greatest nation in the world. we can do better. we can show the entire world that we can do better. host: who are you saying needs to be better? caller: i am saying everybody in the government including that gentleman you have on the show today. somebody called earlier and said, you are laughing at it. he is not laughing at it, he is ghing at it at all i am looking at his face, but he has got to be concerned. be a man, you sure heart, this is america. please do better. . that is all i have to say guest: i appreciate that and we try to do better.

again, we can only do so much unless we have the support of people such as yourself. people who may have seen something when they served in afghanistan. be were offered or saw people hitting bribes. again, call our hotline. again, i have to follow the rule of law. my staff have to follow certain rules and regulations that we as americans have to abide by. we are always looking for better ways to do our job. we have set up a lot of procedures and done some new things, doing financial audits to try to save money. we have a whole team looking at money laundering. we have brought in some of the best experts on trying to follow the money, but it is extremely difficult. these crimes are extremely difficult to uncover.

we are doing it in a war zone. it is not like, in my background, i used to be a former federal prosecutor with the organized crime and racketeering section. it is not as if you can bring fbi agents or my cigar agents out and do surveillance. it is so dangerous there. it is very rarely do they get outside the green zone or protected area of the embassy. these are difficult times and difficult places to do audits and investigations, but we are trying hard. i will exhort my people to do even better if they can. caller: good morning. c-span, i really appreciate what you do for the country. to quick questions. if we were a monarchy and you are a king, and you are able to change the situation yourself, what would you do?

second, i am an amateur military historian. i have seen some of the past wars have reallyeeabt resources, for example, vietnam and rubber and the middle east and oil. i've come to see in my studies at there is a very significant amount of lithium and afghanistan that runs through the mountains. are we theorhe lithium ande to keep the chinese and russians out and to get our fair share? i'm sure some of this is classified, but anything you could say on the subject would really be important. thank you so much. guest: the color is correct that there is lithium in afghanistan, there may be large quantities of it. i don't believe that is the reason we are there. that is not the stated reason we are there, nor has there been much in development of lithium for the 17 years we have been there.

as for if i working for the day there are a do, number of things i would do. i think the first thing is, before we do something like this -- p, le's , let's ause, let's talk to the experts who know something about the country we are going into, let's also consider what we can actually accomplish while we are there. i think we should all ask a question that one of the other callers did, what is our exit strategy? we actually developed seven questions. any policymaker or anybody running a program in afghanistan should ask before they do it. i don't think we have time for me to go through all the seven questions, but one of the first things you ask is to the afghans want the program?

do they need the program? will they use the program? that is a basic question. we weren't even asking those basic questions when we started this reconstruction in afghanistan. missouri,t in afghanistan veteran as well. caller: i just wanted to make a comment. everybody is concerned about the money, but it isn't the money that is the problem. if we pull out of their, dislike we pulled out of iraq,e are going to have more terrorists coming in there, they are not freedom fighters, they are damn terrorists, and they are going to be in there and take over again and then we will have to go in there and push them back out. host: let's take that point. guest: thais a very good point and that is one of the justifications for why we are there. host: melania new orleans. caller: hello.

i was calling because of the amount of money we're spending in afghanistan. when we have so much that has to be done in these united states. we have had 22 school shootings in this year alone, they think it would cost too much to secure the schools. we have white policeman killing unarmed black man here. we have an opioid crisis. we have crumbling infrastructure. we have great disparity and between blacks and whites. there are too many problems here in the united states that needs to be solved. there is an old saying. don't tell me i need to clean up my yard when yours is dirty. the other thing is, character begins at home. host: we will leave it at that point. sal jump in and

then we will have john respond. caller: i heard you mentioned education. if you are an educated person, you will look back in history and realizehat it has been the from 700,000 years ago -- afghanistan, just get the hell out. that as it.is a dead end . for us to stay in there just keeps feeding this war machine that this country is building up all the time, imperialistic. trump and saudi arabia being buddy buddy, and that is where we are going. guest: again, these are all good

questions from an educad audience. these are questions i can't answer, policy questions, why we are in afghanistan, i can say the reason, but that is a decision made by somebody else, not by me. my job is to try to oversee and protect the money that we spend and try to convince the government to do it wisely by recommendations. good points, but i can't really respond. caller: good morning. i would just like to say, japan, germany, world war ii ended how long ago and we are just now letting japan stand up with an army. there is a reason we are over there and tell a ban is time to take over pakistan with nukes.

there is a reason we are in afghanistan and thank god for president trump trying to tell people we get to percent obligation. % obligation. we are going to be there a long time so everybody get used to it. go watch the movie "lone survivor." they were with each other. one has more strength them the next one may take out the next one. this is why we are there. we have a foothold there in the money, it does stink that we spent $6 trillion on all these wars, but if we don't do that, believe me, mark my words, the world and us will be in worse shape. maybe there is a reason we colonized places back in the day, because the second you pull

back, they take all the hard-fought ground that we gained. host: is that what you have seen as you have conducted your oversight over this money? as soon as we leave in different pockets, the taliban moves in? guest: unfortunately, it is. i think everybody recognizes that we provide the glue that holds basically the afghan government together. if we do leave, even the afghan sident says the fundg stops, the government will collapse. the concerns that are expressed by the viewers in the questions are real. can i just put one thing in context? as much as 126 but in dollars on reconstruction is a lot, we spend a lot more on the war fighting, up to almost $700 million on that. the reconstruction side in

devepment and foreign aid is extremely small in the overall american budget. i don't know the exact percentage, but i think it less than 1% of our overall budget goes to foreign assisted -- assistance. my job is to try to make certain it is not stolen and it is done well and done efficiently. not so much money that you think it is going to fix, if we and all reconstruction tomorrow and l development aid tomorrow all of the people starving and dying around the world, humanitarian assistance, it is not going to patch every pothole, it is not going to rebuild every school, and it is not going to be enough money to end the opioid epidemic or

protect our kids in school. inis infinitesim comparison to the amount of money we spend overall in the united states. morning.ood i realized that russia tried to do the same thing we with the -- but the economy wasn't strong enough. i know we provide the u.s. taxpayers a single-payer health system for iraq, are we doing the same with afghanistan, providing health care and education? are we the taxpayers paying for that also? guest: we are actually supporting their health care .ystem in response, yes, we are. good morning.

think john isi going to do a great job in helping the economy guide of .his money i don't know much about john, but i think he is going to do a very good job. you can follow his work if website, you can find their reports there as well. we have time for a few more phone calls. what's go to rich in illinois - let's go to rich in illinois. weler: my question is if have approximately 42,000 troops ,n the ground in afghanistan

why aren't there equal amount of troops from the u.n.? thank y. guest: it's not troops from the its troops from nato and our nato allies. that is a problem. i have spoken to our commanding generals in the field and they wish they had gotten and will get more troops and more commitments from nato. know, from again talking to our military officials, they viewed the number of u.s. troops and nato allies and other allies -- because some of them are not even nato allies who have provided some troops. it is a complicated situation getting the other governments to commit. host: going to thomas in yonkers. caller: i was wondering if after

russia got out of afghanistan and seemed to settle down, there were no problems. why all of a sudden now we have to stay there? i don't understand it and it doesn't make sense. actually, once russia did leave there were problems,. there was fighting between certain political groups, there was fighting between the former -- who we supported. the country really collapsed. what little economy there was was destroyed by the internal fighting. that is when the serious problems arose, eventlly, that is where the taliban comes from, because theiban came up as a response to the total mayhem and anarchy that there was in afghanistan.

why we ended up coming in as you remember, the member this goes back to 911, this goes back to the taliban when they took over, they permitted al qaeda and the terrorists who eventually attackeds to settle and be trained in afghanistan. let's not forget why we got in. we didn't go in just for humanitarian reasons. we went in for national security reasons. that is where the taliban, that is where al qaeda was training and getting ready to launch their attacon the u.s. host: last call here. i just wanted to know how much our allies are contributing to the stabilization of afghanistan? guest: i don't have the exact

number, but they are all providing money. not as much as the u.s., but with contributions from all of our allies, japan, germany, the u.k., all the various countries. we are providing the bulk ofhe assistance, both militarily and for reconstruction. as always, we appreciate the conversation with you this morning. viewers can follow along on the work that john sopko and his team are doing. go to