partnership. concluding a strategic partnership will send a clear statement that the united states remains committed to afghan security. such an assurance must and will continue beyond our planned transition in 2014. as president obama said in his state of the union address, quote, we will build an enduring partnership with afghanistan so it is never again a source of attacks against america. the need for a long term commitment extends also to coalition partners as nato secretary said in december, quote, our commitment does not end with transition, we will finish the job to help create a secure afghanistan for our shared security. achieving a durable peace in afghanistan over time will require some form of reconciliation among afghans. it is no means certain, by no means certain, that this reconciliation effort will bear fruit in the near term but it is very much in our interests to try. as secretary clinton said any

negotiated outcome must meet our red lines for reconciliations. insurgents must renounce violence, break all ties with al qaeda, and they must abide by the constitution of afghanistan. success in afghanistan depends on the support of afghanistan's neighbors particularly pakistan. like afghanistan's other neighbors, pakistan has legitimate interests that must be understood and addressed. and pakistan also has responsibilities. most importantly it needs to take steps to ensure that militant and extremist groups cannot continue to find safe haven in pakistani territory. pakistan has powerful incentives to do so, in 2011, some 2,000 attacks in pakistan resulted in about 2400 deaths. mr. chairman and members of the committee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify here today. we embarked on this fight more than a decade ago to ensure that the terrorist network that

struck in new york, in washington, d.c., and in the skies over pennsylvania would never again be able to use afghanistan as their sanctuary. thanks to the great courage and skill of the u.s. armed forces and civilian personnel, our coalition partners and our afghan partners are, our strategy is working. while success in war is never guaranteed, we are on a path to meet our objectives, to deny safe haven to al qaeda and deny the tail ban the ability to overthrow the afghan government. i would like to conclude by thanking the committee for your continued support of our effort in afghanistan, and your strong support for the great men and women of the u.s. armed forces. thank you and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you so much, dr. miller. general allen. >> chairman levin, senator mccain, distinguished members of the committee. thank you for this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss our operations in afghanistan. it is a pleasure to be here with my friend dr. jim miller who is

the acting undersecretary of defense for policy, it has been a pleasure for me to get to know him over the last several weeks as he has been a very important ally of mine in helping to explain some of the policy issues with which we deal on daily basis. let me begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to all of you for the support you provide to our men and women in uniform every day, that they are well equipped, well trained, and well led is a great testament to the efforts of this committee and to the work of this congress. so on behalf of those troops, on behalf of their families, thank you for all that you have done for them. now, in the past eight months have i walked the ground of afghanistan with many of those troops, along with my friend and partner ambassador ryan crocker, and my nato compatriot senior civilion representative sir

simon gass i have met with the leaders of most of the other 49 nations serving along side us in the international security assistance force, isaf. and all through this i have been in close consultation with afghan civilian and military leadership, most of whom have been enmeshed in this country's conflict from the soviet era to the civil war through the darkness of the taliban through the ten years plus of this conflict, enmeshed in this conflict for well over 30 years. i have got tune know them all quite well. from those experiences i can tell you unequivocally three things. first we remain on track to ensure that afghanistan will no longer be a safe haven for al qaeda and will no longer be terrorized by the taliban. second, as a coalition, the largest in recent history, we are well along in our progress to meet our 2010 lisbon summit

commitments to transition security lead to the afghan national security forces by december 2014. and third, our troops know the difference that they are making every day, and the enemy feels that difference every day. now, to be sure, the last couple months have been trying. and the wake of the revelations that american troops mishandled religious text to include the koran, protests, some violent occurred in several but only a few of the regions across afghanistan. 32 afghans lost their lives in these riots and even more were hurt. and just since the first of january the coalition lost 61 brave troops in action, from six different nations and 13 of them were killed at the hands of what appear to have been afghan security forces, some of whom were motivated we believe in

part by the mishandselling of religious materials. just as tragic we're investigating what appears to be the murder of 16 innocent afghan civilians at the hands of a u.s. service member. each of these events is heart wrenching and my thoughts and prayers go out to all of those affected by this violence. coalition and afghan alike. but i assure you, the relationship between the coalition and the afghan security forces remains strong. just two weeks ago i was in the hellman province visiting with marines and local commanders, in the wake of the koran burning incident when the violence was at its peak. a young marine said he and his unit were told about the demonstrations by their afghan counterparts. the afghan troops told them, quote, let us patrol outside the wire for a couple of days. we've got this for you.

unquote. understanding the gravity of the risk the afghans had assumed for them the marine continued, our afghan brothers were trying to protect us. this one statement spoken by a young marine conveys the power of this brotherhood in arms forged in battle over the years. it speaks to the trust we have built with the afghans and the shock absorbensy. we know there is much hard and deadly work yet to be done. but the progress is real and importantly it's sustainable. we have severely degraded the insurgency. as one afghan commander told me in the south, in the latter part of 2011, quote, this time around the taliban was the away team, unquote. on top of that success and as a result of our recent winter operations we have seriously degraded the taliban's ability to mount a major spring

offensive of their own. this spring they'll come back to find many of their caches empty, their former strongholds untenable, and many of their foot soldiers absent or unwilling to join the fight. indeed in kandahar back in december, 50 former tallibs decided to reintegrate back into afghan society. and when asked why they laid down their arms, they complained of the unrelenting pressure they were under, they said they found themselves up against capable afghan forces in greater numbers and with greater frequency. and while they were willing to fight foreigners, they were unwilling to fight their afghan brothers especially afghans who fought back with courage and skill because of the training that we had provided them. and the training we provide them is critical to our mission. throughout history insurgencies have seldom been defeated by foreign forces.

they have been beaten by indigenous forces, so in the long run our goals can only be achieved and then secured by afghan forces. transition, then, is the linchpin of our strategy, not merely the way out. during the last 12 months the afghan security forces have expanded from 276,000 to more than 330,000 and they will reach their full surge strength ahead of the scheduled deadline in october. the expansion and the professionalization of the afghan security forces allows us to recover the remaining 23,000 u.s. surge troops. at allows us and makes possible transition to afghans in accordance with our lisbon commitments and on time. security conditions remain very good in areas that have transitioned thus far from kabul

in the east to harat in the west, and later this year, afghan security forces are expected to assume the security lead for two-thirds or possibly more of the afghan population. as the potential unifying influence in afghanistan, the afghan forces are better than we thought they were to be. importantly, they are better than they thought they could be. and as they move to the fore, they are gaining more and more confidence and gaining more and more capability. in the past five months, 89% of the total conventional operations were partnered with both conventional and afghan forces. and 42% of those operations had afghans in the lead. over the next two years coalition forces will remain combat ready but increasingly focused on security force assistance and supporting afghan

combat operations. afghan leadership then is simply key. and i can tell you the afghans want to lead, and they want the responsibility that comes with it. in fact, for the first time our joint coalition afghan operational campaign plan from january 2012 to june of 2013 was conceived and developed and planned with afghans in the lead. they are truly emerging as the real defeat mechanism of this insurgency and increasingly as an emblem of national unity. and this is essential for the long term security of afghanistan. but none of us harbor illusions. we know that we face long term challenges as well. we know that al qaeda and other extremist networks, the same networks that kill afghan and coalition troops every day, still operate with impunity across the border in pakistan.

we know that the taliban remains a resilient and determined enemy and that many of them will try to regain their lost ground this spring through assassination, intimidation, high profile attacks, and the emplacement of ieds. we know that iran continues to support the insurgency and fuels the flames of violence. we know that corruption still robs afghan citizens of their faith in their government and that poor governance itself often advances insurgent messages. this campaign has been long. it has been difficult. and it has been costly. there have been setbacks to be sure and we're experiencing them now, and there will be more setbacks ahead. i wish i could tell that you this war was simple, that progress could be easily measured. but that's not the way of counterinsurgencies. they are fraught with successes

and setbacks, which can exist in the same space and the same time. but each must be seen in the larger context of the overall campaign and i believe that that campaign is on track. we are making a difference. i know this, and our troops know this. i'd like to take another moment of your time today, mr. chairman, distinguished members, to end where i began this morning with our troops and the thousands and thousands of american and coalition partners that are bearing the weight of this conflict and to remember that there will be a number that will never return to their families. and i ask you to please know this, that they are central to my every decision and to every word that i speak before this committee. one of them, a young marine who was laid to rest last tuesday at arlington cemetery was a hero. he knew what he stood for, and

he knew his mission. he knew the risks and he knew he might have to give his life for this cause for which we fight. so sergeant william stacy prepared a letter for his family to be read in the event of his death. in it he said, there will be a child who will live because men let the security they enjoyed in their home country to come to his. and this child will learn in new schools that have been built and he will walk his streets not worried about whether or not his leader's hench men will come and kidnap him and he will grow into a fine man who will pursue every opportunity his heart could desire and he will have the gift of freedom which i have enjoyed for so long. and if my life buys the safety of a child who will one day change the world, then i know that it was all worth it. mr. chairman, i can only add

that i'm confident that americans are safer today because of the sacrifices of the magnificent men and women in uniform our service members represented in this letter by sergeant stacy. i am confident that we will prevail in this endeavor. i want to thank you again for this opportunity to appear before you today. for the extraordinary support of this committee, the support that you provide every day to the young men and women of our armed forces whom i am so privileged and honored to lead. and i look forward to answering your questions. thank you, mr. chairman. >> well, thank you, general allen, for your powerful, your clear, your moving statement. thank you for reading sergeant stacy's letter to us. it has the kind of powerful effect and immediate effect that i wish every american could be

privileged to hear. let's do a 7-minute round. we have votes at 12:30. we should be able to get in a first round for everybody. general, let me start with you. did you support the president's decision to draw down the 33,000 u.s. surge force by the end of this summer and do you still support that decision? >> chairman, i was on record in doing so before and i do still. >> is that reduction on pace? are we on track to withdraw the remaining 23,000 troops of that 33,000 surge force by the end of september? >> chairman, i'll make the final decision shortly. i'll submit my plan to the -- up to the chain of command to the chairman and the secretary of defense but i believe that plan will leave us on track and on

pace to recover those surge forces. >> you recently said, general, that you intend to wait until after the withdrawal of the surge force in september to evaluate the situation on the ground in afghanistan, and then sometime before the end of 2012 you would make your recommendations relative to the pace of further reductions. can i ask you whether or not that was your idea to wait until after the removal of the 33,000 surge force before you would make that recommendation? >> that was a result of a conversation with the chain of command, sir. >> is it an idea that you think is the wise idea? >> i do, chairman. i think it's exactly the best way ultimately to identify the state of the insurgency, the state of the full isaf force to include the u.s. force but also to evaluate the operational

requirements for 13 in order to make a comprehensive recommendation. >> is that time table mean that it would be sometime in the last, say, three months of this year that you would make that recommendation? >> i believe so, sir. >> president obama and president karzai in their coordinated statement last week committed themselves to two key dates. one is the 2014 date which was agreed to at lisbon for when afghan security forces would have full responsibility for security throughout afghanistan, and then the 2013 date when the lead for combat operations will shift to afghan forces with u.s. forces in support. is the 2013 time frame for

transitioning the lead for combat operations, is that consistent with the lisbon plan for completing the transition or for afghans having full responsibility for security throughout afghanistan? >> chairman, the lisbon summit envisioned that there would be several tranches that would transition over time. ultimately we were -- we determined it would be five tranches. first is in transition now, the second has just begun, implementation, we're in the process of deliberating on the third. we anticipate that the fifth and final tranche of transition will be announced by president karzai probably in the summer of '13 with implementation to begin at some point there after.

that generally is 30 to 45 days thereafter. technically, per the lisbon summit, when the fifth tranche of transition ultimately begins implementation, afghan national security forces are in the lead for security across the country. that is a process which will continue that leadership assisted by the isaf forces, assisted in differing ways based on the geography and the enemy threat, out to the end of 2014, sir. i hope that answers your question. >> that 2013 being in the lead is consistent with the 2014 date for being in full -- having full responsibility. is that correct? >> it is. >> according to "wall street journal" article the u.s. has proposed reducing the size of the afghan national security forces from the 352,000 end strength goal for this year, to

230,000 after 2014 partly to reduce the costs of sustaining the afghan forces and lieutenant general dan bolger in afghanistan is cited saying the proposal is based on what the international community will provide financially. as i said in my opening comments, i believe it's cost effective to sustain a larger afghan security force when compared to the costs, and that is a cost in both dollars and lives. now, it seems to me, general, given the fact that you and our military leaders agree, that key to success of our mission in afghanistan is the transition of responsibility for the security of the afghan people to the afghan security forces, and by the way, it's a position which i have wholeheartedly believed in

right from the beginning in your statement today, your eloquent statement about transition being the linchpin of our strategy, not merely the way out is a very succinct and strong way of stating that. but given the fact that transition to a strong afghan security force is the key to success of this mission, why would it be -- why doesed make sense to talk about reducing the size of the afghan army by a third? have you participated in those deliberations and have you concluded that we should see the reduction of the afghan force by one third? >> chairman, of course the number 352 is a surge force. it was always intended it would be a temporary number. so the recovery of that surge force would occur at some point in the future.

the study which was undertaken was to look out to the year 2017, and look at the various potential intelligence realities that the afghan national security forces could face potentially. that series of studies created a number of different force structures which we believed had varying levels of capability based on the most likely potential enemy scenario. of those scenarios, the one which we thought was sufficient in capability, which was the most important initial finding, was one that had the correct balance of both afghan national police, and moi presence and ana presence. and that force is about 230 but there are a number of different options and we're continuing to evaluate what those options

might be, all the way from the current force t 352 force, which will continue to exist for several years once we have fielded it, down to a force that was smaller than 230 which probably doesn't have the right capabilities, the right combination of capabilities. we thought the 230 force which is a target number, it is not a specific objective at this time. it's a target number, was the right target given what we think will be the potential enemy scenario for 2017, sir. >> so, there has been no decision to reduce the afghan force below the 350,000. >> i think the decision ultimately will come both from the u.s. side and in consultation -- >> but we haven't decided it should be reduced from the 350. >> i don't believe we have, sir. i know there are considerations. it's not a decision solely for the united states. >> i know. but if we decided it is our position that it should be reduced. >> it is our position that ultimately that force should be reduced below 352, sir.

>> but we haven't decided to what level? >> not to a specific number to my knowledge. >> i would hope that would be carefully done and not be dependent upon the financial issues. >> sir, that's a very important point and very importantly to this we will be continuing to monitor the quality met trix of the ansf as it builds to a full 352, fully fielded and those quality met ricks will be accompanied by consistent evaluation of the security environment as well. and that security environment will be ultimately the key indicator of whether that drawdown should ultimately occur. it will be conditions based. i submit those metrix every six months. evaluating the conditions ultimately for the drawdown. for now, sir, there is an expectation we'll draw the 352

force down to a number we think fits generally the security environment for the post 2014 sperd. >> if 3 sfeft the number or 325, that's what you're going to recommend. >> yes, sir. that's my hope. at this juncture based on the studies, the intelligence scenarios on which we ran the analysis, at this point 231 to 236 looks about the right number in combination of army and police capabilities. >> senator mccain. >> sure would be interested in seeing those studies that brought you down to 236 because then they would contradict every study that's been done in the past. so either the past studies were flawed and inaccurate or the present study is flawed and inaccurate. but it all fits into the scenario that concerns many of

us, that is that the news is dominated by how fast we can draw down and how much we will draw down and when we will draw down. we don't hear any more commitments to victory, we don't hear commitments to success. and it shouldn't surprise you or anybody, general, when president karzai exhibits some of the behavior that he does, that the taliban feel that they can wait us out, that the pakistanis continue to support the haqqani network and continue to hedge their bets because all they hear about, general, is withdrawals and pace of withdrawal, they know what's on the front page of "the new york times" which says debate within the administration about the pace of drawdown. not achieving goals and drawing down. but how rapidly we can draw down. so, i'm also interested the fact

that you can't make a decision on force levels in the year 2013 until the end of the year 2012, is that what you're telling this committee? >> i'm telling you, senator, is that after with drawing 23,000 troops, the drawdown, after moving through, after conducting operations during the fighting season, and the aftermath of that, i need to be able to evaluate whether that force structure at 68 k plus about 40,000 isaf forces, will be the kinds of combinations of forces, plus the progress that has been made with the ansf, in combination to handle what i think will be the operational environment of 2013. >> so basically you have no opinion here at the ends of march of 2012, as to what our military presence will be in 2013. >> my opinion at this juncture but it's not -- >> what is your opinion at this juncture? >> my opinion is we'll need significant combat power in

2013. >> like 68,000. >> 68,000 is a good going in number but i owe the president analysis on that. >> in response to the chairman's question about you supported the past reductions in forces that have been made, you supported those decisions. didn't you also say that it increased the risk? >> i did sir. >> so, does it surprise you when president karzai starts looking at a situation where the united states leaves a neighborhood that -- does it surprise you when the isi continues their support of the taliban, and killing americans, when we are sounding an uncertain trumpet, general? >> sir, there may be an uncertain trumpet out there and much of the coverage has not been helpful to this process. but i'm very clear that i believe we will be successful in this