to do this. and you saw in the last campaign, a lot of great examples of that and compelling examples of that. you've got that florialready in. >> we're at the midpoint of this republican primary. we don't know how it's going to end up. we don't know who the republican nominee is going to be and one of the lessons from your book in 2008 is to expect the unexpected. so size up campaign 2012 and what stands out so far. >> well, i think the wide-open nature of the republican race and the context of a tea party movement on the other side, an occupy movement, that really has created a much more inflamed environment than in any presidential election i've covered. and then you've got a series of republican candidates who have gone up and come back down. half as dozen people. and then a lot of candidates who chose not to run. so you have a republican field

that's left many of the republican voters and elected officials and activists wanting, looking for the right person. and then, again, a president who proud of his record and is right that he inherited a lot of problems and dealt with them but at a time with the job situation is really the dominant, most important story in the country today. how we are going to turn the economy around and deal with the unemployment rate. there's just a lot going on in terms of both personality as well as the environment in which the race is taking place. and as you said, we're not done yet. we don't know who the republican nominee is going to be. and i think it would be wise to not make any assumptions about that but to just watch it all play out. >> mark halperin, you have a title for the book yet? >> "heilemann and halperin project." we can't have a title until we know how it ends. we have a couple of guesses but no firm total. "game change 2." if you like that. >> we'd like to call it "gamier,

changier." >> your thoughts about where we are in this 2012 race and what we can expect moving ahead. >> well, you know, i think mark laid it out pretty well. you know, i think, you know, mark referred earlier to when we were -- he was answering your question about how this nomination fight is affecting the ultimate nominee, whether that is mitt romney or rick santorum or newt gingrich or ron paul. there has been, i think in the republican party, this is one of these moments where there are deep kind of ideological and demographic factions within the party. so we've seen -- this is a party really in deep transition. you have a -- the coalition that has been behind mitt romney which is a more upscale coalition. the coalition that's behind rick santorum largely right now is a more religious coalition. the party is pretty deeply fractured. that doesn't mean the ultimate republican nominee can't win. but in the past if you think back to races where similar things have happened like 1976 between gerald ford and ronald

reagan or 1964 and barry goldwater and nelson rockefeller, those have been hard races to win. when the fight goes on for a long time and deep divisions represented in the party it ends up often, if history tells us anything, kind of -- you ended up with a disunited party. a debilitated nominee. i think it's going to be a challenge for whoever gets the republican nominee to overcome that in the face of the difficulty that always obtains when you have an incumbent in office. very difficult to beat an incumbent. especially one if the economy is improving. in a measurable way, even if it's a small way. it's going to be hard. not impossible, but it's going to be hard and everything that barack obama was in a very bad place politically six months ago. when his approval rating was down to 39% and the economy still looked -- he's improved tick by tick in terms of the -- his approval rating, the right track/wrong track numbers are moving a little bit in his direction and the economy still seems to be getting a little bit better. now a lot of down side surprises

that could happen. whether that's a spike in gas prices or some kind of -- some bad scene in iran, a collapse of some country or other in europe. there are many bad things that could happen. very unpredictable. but right now, obama is in a stronger position than he has been in a year and the republicans are in a weaker position than in a year. but i think on both sides, and especially within the president's re-election team, they expect this to be a really, really close election. and that barack obama is not going to win 53%, 54% of the vote. it's going to be very tight. in any race like that, it's a deeply divided country we have. and both sides are going to be heavily mobilized. and in that kind of an environment it would be crazy to try to predict what the ultimate outcome will be but it's going to be fascinating to watch for those of white house care about politics. >> the book is entitled "game change," obama and the clintons, mccain and palin and the race of a lifetime. "game change 2" coming out after the 2012 campaign. our guests joining us from new york. john heilemann and mark halperin. thank you for being with us.

>> steve, thank you. thank mr. brian lamb and thanks for c-span and all employees in the cable television industry for its gift to america. >> and ditto from me. watch super tuesday results tonight on the c-span networks. use our second screen web page with your tablet or laptop computer to see result maps, social media posts from candidates and reporters and a public forum for your tweets. you can monitor our mentioned on c-span blog where we'll be posting super tuesday programming information and news stories. use a laptop or tablet to extend your c-span viewing at our brand new web page made for our super tuesday coverage, c-span.com/screen2. this afternoon, the senate foreign relations committee looks at the president's 2013 budget request for the u.s. agency for international development or usaid. agency administrator rajiv shah testifies. usaid is asking for nearly $52 billion, an increase of a little

more than 1.5%. the hearing begins at 2:30 eastern. at his monthly news conference in brussels yesterday, nato secretary-general anders fogh rasmussen called the crackdown in syria, quote, absolutely outrageous. the secretary-general also answered questions about nato's future relationship with russia after this weekend's presidential election. the briefing is a little less than a half hour. >> good afternoon. thank you for coming. and the secretary-general will start with a short opening statement and then, of course, as usual, we'll be happy to take your questions. >> thank you, and good afternoon. it's a month since i saw you, and the last few weeks have been particularly tough in

afghanistan. and i would like to express my deepest sympathy to the families and loved ones of our troops who were killed or wounded in the recent violence. these brave men were in afghanistan to build a safer future. and any attack on our troops is an attack on the future of afghanistan. we condemn these crimes in the strongest possible terms. and together with the afghan authorities, we are tightening the measures we take to prevent them. i spoke to president karzai last week, and i encouraged him to take all necessary steps to ensure violence comes to an end and to protect isaf personnel from attacks. and he gave me reassurances in this regard. it is important to remember over

the past two weeks, thousands of afghan security personnel have gone into action at considerable risk to themselves, to prevent attacks on isaf bases. across the country, afghan soldiers have risked and sacrificed their lives to protect their isaf partners. so such attacks are cause for great concern, but they do not define the relationship between isaf and the afghan forces. and they do not change our determination to succeed because we all want a safer future for afghanistan so that we can all be safer in our streets and in our homes. and we all know that the only way to achieve it is to work

together. at our chicago summit in may, together with our isaf partners, we will map out the next phase of the transition to full afghan security responsibility between now and the end of 2014. and as i told president karzai during our call, we intend to make clear our enduring commitment to afghanistan beyond 20 2014. last week the north atlantic council traveled to washington to prepare for the summit which is less than 12 weeks away. we discussed the transformation of our alliance, how to make sure we have the necessary capabilities for the challenges we face in the 21st century.

[ speaking foreign language ] [ speaking foreign language ]

[ speaking foreign language ] smart defense. smart defense is about lining up national requirements and nato's requirements. it's about setting clear priorities, specializing in a coordinated and deliberate way

by design, but by default and cooperating between allies and with the european union so that every effort counts and nothing is wasted. i expect that in chicago, we will make smart defense the new way we do business. and apply it to three strands of work, immediate projects, longer term projects and strategic projects. first an initial package of more than 20 multinational projects that will address critical capability shortfalls. we already have league nations assigned to these projects. and we have confirmed participants. second, we will look at a number of longer term multinational projects that are already in the

pipeline. missile defense, alliance ground surveillance and air policing. air policing in the baltic states is a -- solidarity and a practical way of smart defense. and third, we will target a number of strategic projects for 2020 and beyond. as our operation in libya showed, we still face some specific capability gaps, such as air to air refueling and joint intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance. and we know that we will need stronger cooperation across the atlantic and in europe to fill them. so in chicago, i will look for a commitment to make sure that this is what we deliver. smart defense is about building

capabilities together. but we also need to be able to operate them together. that is why i have launched the connected forces initiative. it puts a premium on training and education exercises and better use of technology. our operations have given a boost to nato's transformation, and we must make sure we keep the lessons we have learned even when those operations end. so we get where we need to be at the end of this decade and beyond because chicago will mark an important chapter in this journey of transformation. but it will not be the end of the story. finally, i would like to comment on the good news from the western balkans. i welcome the agreement between

belgrade and pristina on kosovo's participation in regular meetings. this is a step forward, and it shows that the way forward is through dialogue. i also welcome the european union's decision to award serbia candidate status. this is a sign of progress and a driver for progress. it is a result of reforms and a driver of more important reforms which can only bring benefits to serbia and to the whole region. and ultimately, i would like to see the whole of the western balkans achieve their goal of integration into our euro atlantic family. and with that, i am prepared to take your questions.

>> you know you can just pick up the microphone from next to your seat. >> mr. secretary-general, we just had elections in russia so i would like to ask you if you have any comments to make on the elections and if they change in leadership in russia will affect in any way the cooperation between nato and russia. and my second question is on libya. the international -- commission has just published its report on the violations of human rights in libya. its document stressed on the violations of human rights by forces, opposition forces and the losses due to nato air

strikes. so there is also demand for the investigation of nato side for this. is nato aware of this report and are there any plans to have sanctions investigation. thank you very much. >> thank you. first on the presidential elections in russia, the results of the elections are not yet final, but i have noted the preliminary results, and i also note the concerns voiced by the council of europe election monitors. and from what i have seen from initial reports, the outcome is likely to be continuity in

russia's leadership and russia's policies. and i would expect that continuity to include a continued engagement in positive dialogue and cooperation. as we agreed at the nato/russia summit in lisbon in november 2010, and since our summit in lisbon, we have made important progress in important areas. we have enhanced cooperation on afghanistan, on counterterrorism, on counternarcotic, on counterpiracy and i hope we will now be able to move forward in other areas, especially on missile defense. i think both russia and nato would benefit from such cooperation. in lisbon, we decided to develop

truth treaty partnership between nato and russia, and i hope to see progress in that respect. now on libya, yes, i am aware of the report from the international commission on libya. as far as the concrete figures are concerned, i don't have any comment because i'm not able to verify these figures. but i welcome the commission's conclusion that nato -- now i quote from the commission report that nato conducted a highly precise campaign with a demonstrable determination to avoid civilian casualties. and the commission also recognized nato's objective to take all necessary precautions to avoid civilian casualties

entirely. and based on the report from this independent commission, i can also clearly state that nato was not in breach of international law in the way we conducted the operation in libya. we conducted operations in libya in full accordance with the united nations mandate and with international law. of course in a complex military campaign, the risk to civilians can never be zero, but we did everything to minimize it. >> just a follow-up about russia. are you not concerned about all the problem about the rearmament that putin made during his

campaign and what about the nato/russia summit. will it be held in -- indefinitely or not? >> well, as a politician, i'm used to many things during election campaigns. and what counts is the concrete steps that are taken once the electorate has made its decision. and as i stated in my previous answer, i would expect -- i would expect continued progress in the cooperation between nato and russia. obviously, we do not agree on everything. we have our disputes. we have our differences.

but those differences should not overshadow the fact that in many areas we do share security concerns because we are faced with the same security challenges. and this is the reason why we should cooperate also on missile defense. and the second part of your question was? >> summit. >> sorry, yes. as far as a nato/russia summit in chicago is concerned, i think it's premature to make any assess me assessment. i think we'll have a nato/russia meeting if we can reach an agreement on missile defense. if we can't, there won't be any meeting. it is as simple as that.

so maybe there won't be a meeting, but as i said in another context, chicago will not be the end of the story. we will continue talks, negotiations with russia also beyond our meeting in chicago. >> putin is going to become the president. so everyone knows his position about further expansion of nato. he's against to expand nato near russia's borders. so will his statements influence further expansion of nato? >> no third country, no third party can make decisions on behalf of nato. nato decides on our open door

policy. and nato's deoor remains open ad that will be reiterated in chicago. nato's door remains open to european countries that are in a position to contribute to the security in the north atlantic region and countries that are in a position to further the principles on which nato is based. this is clearly stated in article 10 of our treaty. and that still stands. so it's for nato to decide on the open door policy. as far as georgia is concerned, we all -- i would like to recall the decision we took in

bucharest in 2008 at the nato summit in 2008. according to which georgia will become a member of nato, of course provided that georgia fulfills the necessary criteria. and we cooperate with georgia within the nato/georgia commission to make progress in that direction. >> financial times? >> thank you very much. speert spiegel for the financial times. if i can get back to the opening question about the libya report. because it's not completely complimentary to nato's conduct. just to read one section. nato's characterization of four or five targets where the commission sound civilian casualties as command and control nodes or troop staging areas is not reflective of the

evidence at the scene or witness testimony. it basically argues that given the information provided by nato, it does not know whether the civilian deaths occurred because there were legitimate military targets. do you anticipate nato will follow up and provide the commission with the information it is seeking to determine whether those legitimate military targets or not? thank you, sir. >> let me stress that we have fully cooperated with the commission. we provided them a significant amount of information, much of which has also had to be declassified. and you can read the reports we sent to the commission because you can see them in the annexes to the report. and the commission concluded that we conducted a highly

precise campaign with a demonstrable effort to avoid civilian casualties. as far as nato is concerned, i can also tell you that we have looked into every allegation of harm to civilians of which has been brought to our attention. and this has involved a thorough assessment of all nato records from target selection to any other data gathered after the strike. and this review process has confirmed that the targets we struck were legitimate military targets consistent with the united nations mandate and that great care was taken in each case to minimize risk to civilians. i can tell you that no target was approved or attacked if we

had any evidence or reason to believe that civilians were at risk. i can also inform you that hundreds of possible targets were passed up and others were aborted at the last minute to avoid any risk to civilians. so we had done everything we could. >> associated press? press. maybe use the one next door. >> secretary-general, you have addressed the issue of syria several times in the past. you said nato was not planning to get involved. do you have any other comments

on that today? >> the bottom line is the same as it's been all the time, but, obviously, we all follow the situation closely. and it's absolutely outrageous what we are witness iing. i strongly condemn the crackdowns on the civilian population in syria. and i urge the leadership in syria to accommodate the legitimate aspirations of the syrian people, introduce freedom and democracy. in