order. afghanistan has been at war since 1979. the human suffering has been horrendous. real threats to u.s. national security have followed, as a

result the u.s. has had no choice but to engage in afghanistan. first, we helped counter the brutal soviet invasion, then we helped dislodge the taliban and combat al qaeda after the september 11 attacks. afghanistan has been called america's longest war. thousands of americans have lost their lives. we have spent hundreds of billions. this investment aims to achieve a stable afghanistan that does not harbor international terrorists. should the afghan government fail, the vacuum would be filled. isis and the ayatollah would be among those who would benefit. today, we will ask where should we go from here.

we currently have 14000 u.s. troops in afghanistan, this is dramatically down from a high of 100,000 in 2011. the current focus is training afghan security focus and counterterrorism. fortunately, many allies are still with us, but afghans need the ability and the will to fight for their own country. last week, there is a brief cease-fire. there is renewed outreach to the taliban which the administration endorsed. yet, the taliban continues the fight and has rejected offers to enter into negotiations with the internationally recognized and backed afghan government. this conflict does not need a sustainable political resolution of some sort. that could fall apart.

what it needs is a well thought, sustainable situation that will hold for the people of afghanistan and that leads to a credible, confident afghan governments. with the administration moving in the right direction by scrapping restrictive rules of engagement that had hamstrung u.s. forces. it dropped a politically driven timeline for engagement established by the previous the ministration. is putting more pressure on pakistan which aids in abets the taliban and other jihadist groups. taliban finances are being targeted. these are good steps but it's unclear if they will change the fundamentals that have frustrated unacceptable resolution for so long. after all of these years, what we know about the taliban? how fragmented is it?

can it ever be brought into a durable political state. would pakistan, russia, or iran both increasingly engaged with the taliban sabotage any settlement? we should be proud of our accomplishments including dramatically expanding education and the cause of women. this, despite rampant corruption. i have met with some of the women, the girls can now go to schools that were prohibited under the taliban. i talked to teacher whose have had the soles of the feet slashed when they were taught teaching girls. the stories of the girls are incredibly inspiring. the stories of women who are not part of the government in afghanistan. it is inspiring. frankly, another ways we have

been treading water. while leaving today would do more harm than good, our substantial military commitment cannot be open-ended. we need to see more progress. with that, if we have a ranking member is not with us yet. but he will make his statement after your opening statement. this morning, i am pleased to welcome alice wells, principal deputy assistant of state for south and central agent affairs. he has been serving as the principal deputy assistant secretary of state for south and central asia affairs since jun june 2017. she is a career foreign service officer and previously served as the united states ambassador to the kingdom of jordan.

she has held numerous positions within the department of state and has extensive experience in south and central asia. we appreciate her being here today. without objection, the full prepared statement will be made part of the record. members will have five calendar days to submit statements or questions or extraneous material for the record. i last ambassador wells to summarize her remarks. then we will go to questions. thank you. >> chairman and ranking member thank you for inviting me to appear to discuss the administration strategy. this is a timely hearing. last week a cease-fire, the person 17 years brought peace to afghanistan. like many americans, i was struck by the images of afghan soldiers and taliban praying together side-by-side. with afghan troops and what soldiers can pray together, then the afghan people have every

reason to believe their leaders can come together and negotiate an end to the war, helping to jumpstart a peace process is among secretary pompeo's highest priority. it has been my focus since assuming responsibility for th this. the south asia strategy announced last august is making a difference. it's conditions -based approach has signaled they cannot win on the battlefield and has provided president connie with renewed president to pursue a negotiated settlement. his february invitation to the taliban to enter without preconditions was unprecedented. equally was president connie's announcement of the temporary cease-fire for the week surrounding the holiday. the national outpouring of relief and joy was unlike anything afghanistan missing. taliban fighters wandered the streets of the cities, they took

selfie's, they sampled and worshiped alongside those they had been exchanging fire with a few days earlier. for many afghans taliban a pro-government it was the first taste of what peace could look like. the united states is make clear that that we are are ready for direct negotiations. we will support all afghan stakeholders as they work to reach a mutually agreeable settlement that ends the conflict and insurers afghanistan is never used as a safe haven for terrorist groups. our desired outcomes are clear and have not changed. the taliban must renounce violence, break ties and except the constitution including its protection for women and minorities. although there are potent enemies the strategy is having an impact on the battlefield

with tactical level support the afghan security forces has slowed the tele- bands momentum and had a doubling of special forces creating conditions for political process to achieve lasting peace. alongside the military campaign were working with their partners in the gulf to help strangle the illicit revenue of four sources. were supporting the governments outreach to the global muslim community to delegitimize and we are called on afghanistan's neighbors, especially pakistan to take additional steps in support of peace despite indicators we have not yet seen pakistan take this step we believe it should pursue including expelling taliban

elements will not come to the negotiating table. right encouraging the reform and to stop the insurgency. upcoming elections it must be timely, transparent incredible. we are providing targeted assistance to assist with the voter registration more than 6 million afghans have registered to vote for more than 5000 candidates will be standing for public office. president connie is an economic performer but they still rank toward the bottom. there has been some progress but it has been slow. there have been bright spots. the government has improved its performance and funding a greater share of its budget. the u.s. share dropped about 50%

to 25% today. the afghan people who face this every day understand the need for peace and so do the personnel working to implement the strategies. the key question, will they join the peace process they're prepared to test this. thank you for the opportunity to prepare before your committee. support is crucial to our progress and i look forward to addressing questions. >> we now go to mr. elliott. >> thank you for calling the hearing and for your time in service. our policy is critical, 15 american troops remain in we

provide assistance every year. back in september 11 our troops and allies have performed heroically. there has been progress once estimated as many as 5000 there now thought to be in the low hundreds unfortunately those gains are what most experts consider a stalemate. they trimmed the new strategy for afghanistan in south asia. it is meant to be a conditions -based approach and includes a stronger lining a larger role for india expands authorities

commits to sending additional troops. in some the administration look set forcing the taliban to the negotiating table. what happens if that is not broken the u.s. special director has what we called from the shared districts in afghanistan controller influences 56%. we need to be honest even with the best military in the world. it's not possible to kill every member of the taliban. even members of the administration agree that if it's not going to win on the battlefield they need a strategy based on facts. i think all of the countries who committed troops to the fight in afghanistan. i worry with attacks on nato and

our allies coming from the president we are undermining the coalition fighting for the future. rather than putting more americans in harm's way, the administration should focus on achieving a resolution to the conflict. many great americans have parish is a fact we need to deal with in the old adage is true we don't make peace with your friends. the taliban has maintained an interest in talking with the united states even after the president told the secretary that the u.s. was not par prepad to talked right now. that was a mistake.

by negotiating directly we should stop kicking the can down the road. the taliban claims that they will separate themselves and reese respect the rights of women and minorities, it's time to see if they're serious. this could give us an opening. the recent cease-fire a potential convergence of interest against the growing threat, so far we have squandered the opportunity and have heard nothing about how will we will look at the cease-fire. that's no real surprise. as i been fighting for many months, the administration doesn't prioritize diplomacy. they found that the bureau south and central asian affairs laws both staff and expertise. that was as a result of the reckless falling out of the state department. among that was peace talks and

reconciliation. so now that the hiring freezes over were interested in hearing how they plan to reconstitute their expertise. we can't miss the next opportunity. diplomacy will be at the center of solving the challenge. after many years of wars it's clear there's no military solution to in the fighting in afghanistan. that doesn't foreclose the past to peace. now is the time to make peace and security our number one goal and implement a strategy that will help us achieve it. the women and men who serve our country in uniform and those who gave the ultimate sacrifice fighting this war and those who pierced september 11, 2001 and my home city of new york. i look for it your testimony. happy to have you here.

thank you and i yield back. >> the key question in terms of factions in the taliban or those to reach a settlement goes to their intentions. there have been cease-fire but yesterday 30 afghans were killed would they lifted that cease-fire. in your judgment, is the taliban at the end of the day interested in a political settlement? what to circumstances tell you and how would you we get there? we saw president connie offer a series of moves and prisoner releases a medical aid for the wounded soldiers. the latest cease-fire that presumably might bring down

intentions. yet here was the attack yesterday. give me your view on this. >> the taliban long says they support political or negotiations, but only with united states, not with a sovereign government of afghanistan. what we have learned is how much the foot soldiers and commanders do desire peace. their celebration was spontaneous and it was countrywide. where we are now is the taliban leadership, many who enjoy sanctuary don't feel the pressures of day-to-day war have not yet been convinced to come to the table despite what has been a forward leaning offered peace before by president connie in february. that piece office offer was

unconditional. it included the author of considering constitutional amendment to ensure that the taliban's views were better reflected in the institutional and structure. that offer has been endorsed by the international community. the strategy has to be focused on increasing the pressure the taliban's field to take up that offer. >> one of the difficulties in this coming getting an organization like that to the table is the financing for that organization that makes cash ready at hands every time there moving narcotics. one of the great frustrations for the last 15 years is the u.s. government has spent a billion dollars focused on trying to shut that down. today, it is still the biggest

cash crop in afghanistan. in theory, what could be done to try to diminish the narcotics trade in the legality that drives as well as support from the taliban from a financial standpoint? >> the narcotics account for about 60% of the budget. they fuel a criminal network and it eat away at the institution of state. what we have done is partly it's a problem of security. many are controlled or contested by the taliban. the key element is continuing to improve on the battlefield which are starting to see.

we are also building the institutional capacity of the afghan government to prosecute and go after narco criminals. that is working with the national investigation units, working with president connie in support of a national drug action plan. there has been some successes. rather than going after individual farmers faster we had 84 joint rates. we interdicted about $360 million worth of drugs. there's a counter not caught x justice center which is prosecuting the narcotics cases with 99% conviction record. security is key, as is the facet over the last 16 years we have built up a cadre of afghans of the responsibilities to

undertake the responsibility reside in their institutions. >> another thing that needs to be a pre-requisite is within the government of afghanistan, that government has two credibly combat corruption. that has been a long-standing problem. we have our special investigator with reconstruction where we spent 55 million per year just to make sure funds are not misused. my time is expired. but i would suggest tripling down in terms of the pressure we apply on the government there to have transparency into and the practices. that is the only sure way to rally confidence on the part of the afghan population. >> thank you mr. chairman.

thank you besser. i have that you support negotiation with the taliban. as far as i'm concerned your support ads to the mixed signals were hearing from the administration. when you and secretary pompeo say that we should negotiate, not sure if you're speaking for yourself for the administration. the white house has not been clear. the way i see it, if we can go up to kim jong-un, certainly we can talk to the taliban. we know the taliban is interested so i want the administration except the offer, if only as a bridge to broaden talks that would eventually include the afghan government? >> the south aged strategy is premised on achieving a pathway to dignify political settlement. that is victory into the south asia strategy. we have worked diplomatically in support of that campaign to

build an international consensus behind a peace proposal before by president connie. we've undertaken various lines of effort to bring them to the table. the tele- venice had a defect office for many years. there has been no lack of talking of the taliban hearing from the international community and from the afghan government. the sincere desire to begin to negotiate the political process. the offers on the table. we been clear about how we see ourselves playing the role in the negotiation as participants in supporting the process. but, the leadership has to understand the very nature of a peace settlement when you talk about forms of governments and rights of individuals, prison

releases, these are sovereign issues, these are issues that need to be negotiated with afghans not over the heads of afghans. if we recognize the taliban as part of the legitimate fabric, they have to recognize the afghan government and the many communities are part of that legitimate fabric of afghanist afghanistan. >> in your testimony you state we have a condition space strategy but those conditions have never been spelled out. what are you referring to specifically? >> the conditions are cessation of violence a rejection of terrorism and respect for the constitution.

this is under the umbrella of not allowing afghanistan to be a safe haven for terrorists who are planning to attack the united states or allies. what significant as they are not preconditions. we have not sought to impose any obstacles to the beginning of the political negotiation between the taliban and afghan government. we want to see what comes out of that process. >> we have 40 countries contributing troops to the nato support mission in afghanistan. it remains one of the most enduring examples of how we can work with our allies, germany's the second largest contributor after the united states. the president seems to indicate that he does not agree with the multilateral partnerships such as how the nato mission continues to serve the mission of the united states.

i am concerned about the repeated remarks denigrating the alliance. when ask a simple question, do agree the u.s. is besser by continuing the work of the allies? the answer would be us but i'd like to hear that. as the president continues to attack those fighting on our side how that string cooperation makes it harder to implement our south asia strategy. >> having a united international force and diplomatic effort is essential to the campaign to stabilize and were deeply grateful for the support of our nato allies and partners in the resolute mission. what we have been able to do is look at the burden and the key goal of the administration in order to ensure that we are all playing a part in the

contribution to afghanistan stability. it is a telling statistic that since 2012 our contribution to civilian assistance went from 50 up to 25%. we want to make sure that we and our partners are pulling in the same direction with the same intensity. >> thank you. >> we now go to florida. >> thank you mr. chairman and it is a pleasure to see you again. when the president first announced our strategy the administration told congress it would seek a coordinated effort to get the taliban to the table as we have been discussing easy layers of diplomatic efforts. this was with the possibility of russia and iran. but x that would you say russia and iran are supporting the

taliban. how does that impact our layer diplomatic approach? i know the administration suspended military aid to pakistan as part of our strategy to get pakistan to change how does business when it comes to the taliban in providing safe harbors. you said that there on notice that we expect unequivocal cooperation endings sanctions. but, we haven't seen pakistan do the sustained are decisive steps we would expect when the new strategy was announced. to have any evidence they have taken steps to cut off the flow of arms were support for the taliban? have we allowed for any waivers are made exceptions to military systems to pakistan since the

suspension of the aid was announced? >> we are concerned when we see reports of countries that typically by viewing the taliban as a legitimate force and fighting isis. our strong views the only way to defeat terrorism and to bring peace is to strengthen the afghan government and the government's ability to fight terrorists. that said, both countries like russia and iran to have an important role to play in the future stabilization of afghanistan. afghanistan's neighbor will have to support any peace process that emerges. that's why we work hard in many ways to ensure that they are formed by the process and the

principles that have been put forward. next week i'll go to a meeting with over 30 countries gathering including russia and iran to reinforce our supports for peace in the region. continue those diplomatic numbers. pakistan has a crucial role to play. as testified, without their active support it will be more challenging to achieve our objectives. we like to see pakistan bring to the negotiation table taliban leadership. today, while we have seen some positive steps, our assessment has been that we have not seen the sustained and decisive actions required to show that they take that peace process

seriously. >> one other thing the cobble compacts and what president connie said will take a lot of steps and there's a hundred initiatives and i hope in the q&a you can give us an update. i haven't heard much about the reforms. we have a minute. maybe you could tell us what benchmarks the president has and how do we tend to use those as commitments to preconditions? >> the afghan government established the afghanistan complex which has to measure the performance and anticorruption in governments, economic performance and reconciliation efforts. we meet quarterly with president connie to review progress under those metrics. this is an afghan government initiative and not something we

put forward as part of our a conditionality. >> are you making progress? >> we do. there are areas we make progress faster and when there's less progress we have the kinds of top-level political conversations to keep the momentum behind the reform. >> we go now to mr. brad of california. >> it is to see you. it raises the question, one is the administration going to appoint a permanent assistant secretary for south and central asia? have they indicated that? >> it when secretary pompeo testify he indicated he would be moving to make appointments. >> did he criticize or apologize

for the fact that throughout his tenure was nominated for the position as important as the one you're acting in. >> am very grateful that those undersecretary tillerson and pompeo. >> still, the word acting in front of your title undercuts what you do, the uncertainty of whether you will keep doing it if the administration had the wisdom to simply give you the position. i would not have be asking this question. the some 30 personnel positions were cut between the south-central asia office and the special representative for afghanistan. is there any chance those cuts will be restored? >> and are they needed? >> some of the cuts were the results of two bureaus been emerged. when you overlap some of the staff we are able to take advantage of the efficiencies.

we have decided to expand the staff of focus on reconciliation. that team is being built up here and in the state department as well as our embassy. we benefit from what is the whole of government approach. there's experts we have all or part of this one team as we look for ways to move the peace process were. >> does the united states, india and pakistan recognize the line between afghanistan and pakistan? >> afghanistan has not recognized. >> what about pakistan in the united states? >> the line serves as the international boundary recognizes sensitivities associated with it. >> is that the international boundary? >> that is how we approach the

line. >> so says much a international border. >> we believe the border management will be besser when you have countries working together. >> does india recognize that? >> i don't know. >> i hope you respond to that. india is a poor country. it does provide foreign aid. to a limited degree. there are needs in its own namely myanmar, burma bhutan, sri lanka, but india is providing substantial aid and involvement in afghanistan. is there -- what degree of harm does that cause by making the pakistanis nervous and causing

them to support the wrong elements in afghanistan or at least not help us go after the wrong elements. to what extent is the generosity causing a problem with pakistan? >> at first we see the support is very important. they are responsible aid provider the afghan government welcomes that assistance in the afghan government welcomes and seeks the strategic partner with partnership with india. when it comes to the tensions and concerns. >> afghanistan wants a strategic partnership with india. >> yes. >> afghanistan claim to huge chunk of their territory and were surprised is working against our interest for a strong united afghanistan which

asked to be an effective partnership. >> we welcome the discussions to deal with the issues you raise including management of the border. there's been an agreement to establish liaison officers and collaborate more effectively. >> there's also substantial support for pakistan to bad elements and pakistan. you have a very tough job, the only tougher job would be to come toward districts and explain why we haven't destroyed the poppy fields. afghanistan is a battlefield but so are the towns and cities of our neighborhoods. i yield back. >> thank you. we go to chris smith of new jersey. >> thank you for convening this hearing. thank you for your leadership and your cautiously optimistic

take. it's encouraging but of course the way forward is through the obstacles. thank you for giving us that insight exhilarating first taste of what peace could look like. that offers encouragement that this could happen. i would like to ask concerning the intent of the taliban leadership, as you know within the last few hours they attacked a base in big d's and killed 30 afghan soldiers. perhaps later more were wounded. there is always the concern that a hostile power will use the prospects of peace or the cover of peace it is cover to accelerate their violence. how has that but factored into the thinking. secondly on aid which you have

mentioned a moment ago, particularly the afghan local police you're on the front lines of the taliban they've known to recruit children to service combatants for service as sex slaves. in fact a 10-year-old boy was assassinated in february 2016 after he had been publicly honored by the local police officers against the taliban. did you know that child soldiers prevented act requires subject to the labor they seek military aid where the allowing children to be trafficked as child soldiers. could you convey how seriously we are raising that issue with the afghan government? what steps if any did they take

2017 and 18 using child soldiers in their forces. >> i think when it comes to the taliban resuming violence after the cease-fire this will be a critical time to -underscore the dispute within the muslim world over the reason why they are fighting the war. we have seen some important developments. they had over a thousand members condemning suicide bombing in the tactics of the taliban. indonesians gathered and reiterated this condemnation call for peace and reconciliation. it affects over 2700 against peace and favor peace negotiation. the lic is gathering in the next

few weeks. i think it's a real moment of changing opinions about what is going on in afghanistan and taking greater ownership that this is the time to negotiate with an islamic government of afghanistan. will continue to encourage these and put pressure on the taliban throughout the efforts that now is the moment to seize the opportunity. at the same time, you are right that the reforms the government take are critical. when it comes for instance children sex slaves. we worked with the government over many years. that practice is now criminalized in the penal cold. we do extensive vetting for military assistance and who we work with to ensure we are not

supporting afghan officers engaged in that behavior. we have extensive human rights training. through usaid we've done rehabilitation of 6000 victims of this sex slave practice. but child soldiers, the same commitment by the afghan government has been criminalized. there are active measures to ensure that children are not recruited including 22 centers across the country that interdict when they see. this is very much on our agenda. >> thank you very much. >> investor wells, thank you for coming. we appreciate you being here. i have an observation. i'm very hopeful that we have a prospect for peace in afghanistan. i look at the columbia peace

pact and i see what it has done to the drug growth in that country. i just want to make sure that when we talk about peace we take into consideration this is a very lucrative business in afghanistan. i don't know if we want to continue basically saying it's okay for them to keep growing in the opm growth. we see the growth and i hope we do have a piece of afghanistan i would focus on that. you need to have such a growth. my question is that we have a growing concern that afghan politics and society has been increasingly frightening. alongside ethnic and ideological

line. what impact is that going to have for political stability in that country? >> thank you. on the issue of narcotics, i agree that this is not just an issue that involves the taliban. it's an issue that's a perversion throughout all of afghan society. the criminal networks and their ability to corrupt the institutions of the state and society. it is something we take seriously. we are limited right now because of the security situation. to go to an earlier point, rather than undertake eradication which is not supported by the afghan government, we want to go a step up to the drug less and truck networks to get to that level of individuals who are benefiting

more and a greater part of the drug trade. so it continues to respond to the narcotics in the criminal networks behind them. is very much an investment that we have made and will continue to make. we learn from the example of the columbia peace process and how difficult it is. >> on the shiv afghan society being fragmented, you can look at it to ace. last weekend that showed the unity that still exist in afghanistan. the fact that combatants and pro-government supporters gather together tens of thousands of people praying together in places that was the heartland of the taliban in the conflict. that gives hope to those that are there.

but we have seen greater ethnic polarization over the last couple of years. the government of national unity is had to deal with issues of inclusivity and to ensure that all facets are represented in government. there's going to be a great deal of the porton's attached to the credibility in the conduct of the elections coming up. they have are ready been a sensitive event in afghanistan. it is one that we are supporting very carefully in supporting the independent election commission to ensure that is much can be done to reduce corruption and increase the chances that voters across afghanistan and voters, both female and male will be able to participate. >> i read an article were -- with the taliban. >> the russians have been very

unhelpful in both accusing the united states and undertaking propaganda campaign to suggest that somehow we have introduced isis to afghanistan and seek to artificially keep the terrace battles going. we believe that russia has an important role to play in being a supporter of peace. they benefit from it. >> are they funneling arms to the taliban? >> russia denies that that we see them adopt a posture that the taliban could be legitimate against isis. >> i'm sorry don't training your optimism and washing people pray

together, the next step would be sitting around the campfire singing together, as if that had anything with creating peace in this war-torn country. there are a society based on tribalism and ethnicity. our greatest in what has been reconfirmed today is that we continue down the road of trying to remake afghanistan into a democratic system. that is why we are failing. it's totally inconsistent with their national character. we did this from the very beginning over my objection many times. we created the most centralized constitution of almost any country in the world and of people of who are the most

decentralized people in the world. then were surprised when it doesn't work and people are upset enjoy military units. are the -- still the major element if not the dominant element of the taliban? >> yes. >> now we have these and they understand that half of them are in afghanistan and have her in pakistan. let me just say, we have to understand that and deal with that or we will never have peace. we made a mistake in the beginning trying to re-create the centralized government in kabul, and the way permitted critics and criminals to take over the government and lose the

country of billions of dollars and we expect the afghans to say now will have a democratic process. let me note also that the major opium production areas in that country is in the push to an areas, is it not? >> it is dominated in those areas. >> and we have done nothing. we have gone through a lot of pr things that make it look like were doing something. if you want to eliminate the poppy production in afghanistan we could do it within a week. we have technological capabilities and we have not done that. and thus we've allowed the taliban to have a major source of billions of dollars of input, which permits them to have the bullets, and the guns necessary

for the terrace organization and the radical islamic type of regime they're trying to build. do you know what the status for those of you watching or reading this, we realize that what really worked in afghanistan after 9/11 was when we allied ourselves with the anti- taliban forces that were also made up of others. the leader of that group was a general, if you seen 12 strong he organized our efforts to drive the taliban out of power in the first place. where is that general today? >> turkey. >> and he is a turkey because? there is major assassination attempts against a. are the assassination attempts motivated by taliban or by

people in the afghan government we are supporting? >> my understanding is he's in turkey for health reasons. when he does return to afghanistan their legal processes brought against him and some of his security officials for the sodomy of a political figure. >> you can bet that the people hate us and hate the man who helped us drive the tele- been out are willing to state anything about him. he is outside for health reasons because they tried to murder him and 50 of his bodyguards were killed by the time he and ten others escape from an ambush that was not a taliban ambush. we are in a murky situation here. the pakistanis who we have been treated with kid gloves clearly

are pro- terrorist element in this whole flight. until we start realizing this, all these things about praying together and reforms in the democratic centralized process in afghanistan will mean nothing more americans will die. we have to get real or we will lose for good. thank you very much. >> tom of new york. >> think ambassador for being here today. a frustrated in the process of trying to discover what the civilian strategy of the united states of america in afghanistan is. only been here for a short time but i've asked secretary to listen pompeo about it. vest usaid, what is our civilian strategy? we hear about the government approach but i can't get the details of what it is we are actually doing.

you referenced about the 25% contribution of the civilian efforts by the u.s. government. i want to determine first, are you referring to the $3.7 billion per year that was agreed to at the brussels conference at which america's putting up a million dollars of? >> yes. >> that was done under previous negotiations. >> some are lower than that 1 billion-dollar figure. but in general, guiding the approach. >> but is the number 3.7 billion or is it lower? >> i would have to get a breakdown of what has come through question. >> that i would like that breakdown. what is the international commitment for civilian effort

is, specifically with the numbers. i had to get this from outside of u.s. government to determine the summer. i'd also like to know what are we spending our money on and what is the international community's bending it's not money on. what are the specific programs it's been spent on? we've heard about poppy ratification i want to know specifically how much money is being spent on each of the efforts by the department of state, usaid, the doj, the dea, specifically. i've been asking about this for quite some time. what are we spending our money on it what effort. i don't feel like we have a comprehensive strategy. i feel like we have a list but i

don't see it being a strategy. i think the military strategy is clear and we are clearing and holding property in our efforts to transition and redevelop the area. i don't know what the effort is. a very frustrated because i've asked this many times. i would like specifics about how much money we're spending and what programs are spending the money on. could you come off the top of your head give me a rough idea of the billion dollars. , what percentages are being spent on things like infrastructure and how much is being spent on the poppy ratification and on schools are schools were in teaching prosecutors to be prosecutors. how is that money being spent. >> i'm happy to provide and talk to my colleagues to provide a more detailed letter to with a breakdown of assistance.

i'm sure you've heard from usaid the overall principles that drive the strategy and to increase the private sector lead and export led growth and consolidate gains. outside of usaid we have equal funds which is providing the training for the counter not contacts. we have the bureau of counterterrorism providing assistance programs including to enhance the security of kabul and other urban areas. it's a complicated topic. the numbers are confusing. we can provide a detailed letter for you. >> be helpful. even what you told me now how much is being spent on the poppy eradication? >> it is not $1 billion.

when we talk about this for 2017 the monies were about $160 million. >> if it's not a billion dollars can give me a rough number. >> the 2019 request was $632 million. >> the afghanistan numbers are $632.8 million request for 2019. >> and what about 2018? >> it was 782.8 alien. >> we made a billion-dollar commitment in 2016. you and happen to have the 2016 number? >> 847.6. >> were spending $45 billion year of military aid to reduce our commitment from 1 billion to

632 million per year on civilian aid. >> yes. >> we go to mr. ted of texas. >> thank you mr. chairman. lieutenant general said yesterday the biggest problem in afghanistan are the sanctuaries in pakistan that shelter terrorist. would you agree with that assessment? >> i agree with the assessment that without pakistan support it be very challenging to achieve our goals and they continue to exist in pakistan. >> so, over the years we've had our troops in pakistan, i've been on the border as other members of congress have.

they're doing the best job they can, but during the day the taliban's come across the border commit mischief and hide. pakistan government has hidden terrorist leaders in the past. they are sanctuary towards terrorist leaders. somehow we still give them money. with the promise that they will do better. they sweettalk us and say give us more american a, we will go after the terrorists. we do it every year, we continue to do it and have done it for many years. yet, nothing changes. they harbor terrorist, they fight terrorists in their country but they pay for terrorist to go across the border that kills americans and afghan. i think it is nonsense that we continue to send money to

pakistan with the promise that we will do better. that's my opinion. how much money have we spent, taxpayer money over the last 17 years in afghanistan? >> on the civilian side we've had about 29 trillion. >> do you have any estimate will now be a military side so this will be in afghanistan indefinitely. no end in sight, we have been there 17 years with no end in sight. history says the war of the the

hundred year war lasted hundred 16 years between france and england, indefinitely, i find that very alarming that there is no end in sight that were prepared to stay there continuing the united states to send money someone said where empires go to die nobody would ever be there in afghanistan. in our image