finally at chicago there was a strong message that partnerships are essential to nato's success. our meetings were a recognition of that reality. and an opportunity to discuss with our partners how we work together and how we can improve our cooperation. we have built up a powerful momentum. now it's vital to keep going. that's why later today i will meet the prime minister of new zealand and next week i will visit australia. countries are making a real difference to 0 our mission in afghanistan. i particularly welcome australia's recent announcement that it will take the main

mentoring role. this demonstrates the countries such as australia and new zealand may be far away demographically but they are very close to us in terms of values and commitment. together we will discuss how we can come even closer together. and with that i'm ready to take your questions. >> okay. we'll start in the first row here. geo-tv. [ inaudible ] >> it seems according to our information it was soft, you had a meeting with pakistan

perspective this visit of the president of pakistan was no more than -- it was useless to go to chicago for him. can you comment on that? >> first of all, i appreciate that president sadari attended our meeting in chicago. i called him and invited him to participate in the meeting because we want a positive dialogue with pakistan. it was definitely not useless. on the contrary the president sadari confirmed it is his clear intention, it is the intention of pakistan to engage positively in finding solutions to the conflict in afghanistan. as you all know, we still have

an unsolved problem as regards transit rules through pakistan. i still hope to see a solution to that problem in the very near future. >> german tv? >> a follow-up to the pakistani question before. how far are the talks now? is there any progress? have you just agreed on that you can use pakistan transit routes 0 to bring the troops home? is it just a matter of money or what is the question you have to deal with here? that is the first question. the second would be, he was in chicago and afghanistan now. is the figure more cler now how many soldiers will he take back now from afghanistan?

will this be 1,000 or 2,000 or is it still to be figured out? >> first on pakistan, i'm not going to comment on details in negotiations with pakistan. i will just reiterate that i still hope that a solution can be found in the very near future. at the same time let me stress that we actually concluded a number of very important transit agreements at the chicago summit and, of course, that will contribute in a very positive way to our operation in afghanistan as we gradually wind down our combat operation to the

end of 2014. as regards france, i would leave it to them to comment on concrete figures. i have taken note of the very clear statement from the president also expressed in clear terms at the chicago summit that france will stay committed to the isef operation and continue to contribute to our training mission throughout the transition period towards the end of 2014, and i highly appreciate that. >> german radio. >> from german public radio, two questions. the first one you mentioned the

reverse transit three contracts. does anywnato pay for the rever transit? and the second question is on smart defense, the next steps. probably you can give me the next steps for the smart defense initiative in regard to the fact that some countries, for example, germany, always have to give green light when they would like to participate or send troops somewhere if they would like to participate in a mission. thank you. >> the first i will not comment on details in the rance it arrangement but it goes without say that go we have concluded agreement that are of mutual satisfaction of the gulf part mers. as regards to the next steps as far as smart defense is concerned, we decided at the

chicago summit to initiate some follow-up. first of all, we will it continue to develop multinational projects and, secondly, of course, we'll have to find solutions to a number of issues. one of them is the topics you mentioned, how we can presume the availability of multinational capabilities. but based on what i heard it at the chicago summit, i'm quite optimistic that there is a strong political commitment to actually use and deploy multinational capabilities when

it is needed. obviously that goes without saying it is at the end of the day a national decision whether a country wants to participate in a military operation and deploy military assets and how, but i think all nations realize that if in the future we will rely increasingly on multinational capabilities, we also have to enhance the presumption that such multinational capabilities will actually be available. if we don't enhance that presumption, then, of course, some countries will be reluctant to actually invest their resources in multinational capabilities. all nations are very much aware of that aspect and all 28

endorse the concept of smart defense at the chicago summit knowing that this is a challenge and based on that i'm sure there is a strong political commitment to actually deploy assets, also multinational assets when needed. >> ap? >> secretary-general, could you elaborate on what exactly has been done on the follow-up mission in afghanistan since the chicago summit? and what's the time frame for coming up with the definitive proposal? >> we have started preparations already. it's a work in progress. i would be reluctant to present any exact deadline. ultimately, of course, the

deadline is by the end of 2014 but for planning reasons, understandable planning reasons, we need clarification some time before that. but having said that it's also a fact that the exact profile of the first 2014 mission will very much depend on the actual security situation on the ground as we approach the end of 2014 and this is the reason why i would be reluctant to present to you any exact deadline. but i can assure you we have started preparations already and, as you know, the core of that mission will be a training mission with the aim to train,

assist, give advice to the afghan security forces. >> translator: regarding the intent to with draw some forces on the part of allied nations, the number is increasing. we now have five or six nations who have expressed their intent to withdraw their troops. some say this is down to security, protecting the lives of troops. others raised the question of nato's budget. apparently there is a financial crisis within nato. how do you explain this? second question, several months after the fall of gadhafi's regime we are still waiting for

the operational report from nato. how is that coming on? >> there is no financial crisis within nato. quite obviously there is an economic challenge. but i feel that we have found responses to that at the chicago summit. the solution is indeed our smart defense initiative. we are going to promote cooperation on a multilateral basis and, as you are aware, we have adopted a certain number of multinational concrete projects

and this is a very compelling response. this is the path to be followed in order to avoid that the financial crisis will become a security crisis so there is no financial crisis within nato. we are, indeed, facing an economic challenge, and we have found a solution to that challenge. would you mind reminding me of your question on libya? several months after the fall of the gadhafi re jagime we haven' had a final report of operations in libya. why not?

we have reported to the united nations in keeping with the established rules. >> secretary-general, a question about the common funding. the purchase of the ags, as we all know, was achieved with some political difficulty. the financial mechanism, and that is a group of 17, now 18 nations are buying the equipment and a large part of the operating costs will come out of nato's common funding. however, this model is not a rule. it's an exception so far to the way sip works. and my question to you is for smart defense to move ahead if you're going to pursue more of these multinational models, don't you need to reform or do the 28 intend to reform the way that funding is used within the common -- the sip fund? thank you. >> yes, definitely, and that is

also one of the follow-up works we adopted in chicago. we will look -- we will look closer into how our funding mechanisms work to make sure that they are fit for purpose, that they work efficiently, that we make the most efficient use of resources, that they are completed transparent. so, yes, in order to promote multinational projects, we also need to reform our funding mechanisms so that all allies feel confident that multinational projects and common funding are efficient ways of doing defense business.

>> that does mean as loosening of the rules. >> you might well argue that is also strengthening rules to make sure that things work transparentally and efficiently. >> thank you. i'm here. now it's okay. the last week started operations in the north to remove the barricades and soldiers were attacked by local serbs or whoever they were. the statement coming from the serbian officials was that by this is endangering peace and provoking there. for each barricade removed, serbs can build two new.

so are they going to continue the game removing barricades in order to see the new ones or this time to ensure freedom of movement in the north of kosovo? >> three points. firstly, our troops acted in self-defense. secondly, i would commend the way in which our soldiers handled the situation. and, thirdly, i can assure you that they will continue to implement the united nations' mandate to maintain a secure environment and ensure the freedom of movement. and conducts its operations in a

status neutral and impartial way. i strongly regret that we saw violence in recent days. i urge all parties to do their utmost to stop violence and ensure peaceful solution to the problems in the region, but i can assure you that kafur will continue to implement fully the united nations mandate. >> we have another question from ko kosovo media. >> yes, the newly elected serbian president is sending very dubious signals to the region, telling the few towns that belong to serbs, denying genoci

genocide, during the air strikes in 1999. from the perspective of having a mission in kosovo, what do you think should you be more cautious now that there is a new political elite in belgrade? >> first of all, on srebinica, i think it's for the tribunal in the hague to make the legal judgment, what they have done alrea already. in general, of course, we monitor the situation closely. for my part i will not rely on, with all respect, on media reports, from statements from the newly elected serbian president. i hope we can continue the

positive dialogue we have had with serbia. my vision as with regards to the western balkans is very clear. i would like to see all countries in the region integrated in the european union and nato and i also hope in that respect to see improvements in the relationship between serbia and nato. >> belgian news agency? >> yes, i have two questions concerning the reverse transit. the first is you have an agreement with three neighboring countries -- [ no audio ] are you also in agreement for the transit to russia, first, and, secondly, are there some limitation restrictions, for example, nonlethal equipment and so on?

>> yeah, in general, let me say that we do not commend on the concrete content of these transit arrangements. with russia we have a transit arrangement, a reverse transit arrangement already. and the fact that we have now concluded a rance it arrangement, three concrete transit arrangements with central asian countries at the chicago summit will make the use of the russian transit arrangement even more effective. >> japanese media? >> thank you very much. my question is concerning nuclear weapons. in chicago you declared a task

committee to develop a concept including the case to reduce so no strategy nuclear weapons. could you speak on this idea? is there any concrete agenda or is there any -- what is the relationship with this committee discussion and negotiation between the u.s.? >> there's no hidden agenda. you have seen everything clearly expressed in the defense review that was published. it was adopted and published at the chicago summit. the general principles are very clear. we have reiterated what anywnat countries signed already in

1970. in the nonproliferation treaty that the grand vision is a world without nuclear weapons, but we also clearly state that as long as nuclear weapons exist, nato will remain a nuclear alliance. we have indicated in the defense review that we would very much like to see a reduction in the tactical nuclear weapons, but we have added that in that case we also have to ensure the right balance that such reductions take place in a balanced way. and the fact is that nato nuclear powers have reduced their stockpiles of nuclear weapons significantly since the end of the cold war while we still have quite a number of

russian nuclear weapons. and so that disparity has to be taken into account so in case we could writ agreement on a balanced reduction in the number of nuclear weapons, yes, we are in favor of that. we have clearly indicated that, the defense and deterrence posture review. but you can read everything in the defense and posture review. there's no hidden agenda. >> we have time for one last question. afp? >> do you still have to meet mr. putin in the next few weeks, or do you think he doesn't plan or want to meet you right now? >> we have not discussed the concrete calendar issues. as you may recall, i called him

and congratulated him on his election a few days after the presidential elections, and we agreed to meet bilaterally in the not too distant future but, of course, at the end of the day it's also a calendar question and no dates have been fixed yet. >> thank you very much. each week washington journal spotlights a recent notable magazine article. on wednesday "vanity fair" contributing editor michael joseph gross talks about the internet, how it was created and regulated. tune in and call, tweet, or e-mail "washington journal" live

at 9:15 eastern on c-span. federal reserve chairman ben bernanke is on capitol hill this week. he's testifying before the joint economic committee. he's expected to address may's job growth and the unemployment rate. join us live on thursday at 10:00 eastern here on c-span3. finally on a personal note, michelle and i are gratefulful to the entire bush family for their guidance during our transition. i will always remember the gathering you hosted for all the living former presidents before i took office. your kind words of encouragement plus you also left me a really good tv sports package. [ laughter ] i use it. >> last week portraits of former president george w. bush and first lady laura bush were unveiled at the white house.

it was their first visit since leaving office. >> as fred mentioned in 1814 dolly madison famously saved this portrait of the first george w. now, michelle, if anything happe happens, there's your man. >> watch the entire event online at the c-span video library. federal communications commissioner robert mcdowell gave an update on a proposal to give the united nations more control over the internet. the proposal is backed by china, russia, brazil, and india. other speakers include the state department be and representatives from google, verizon, and the advocacy group public knowledge. this is about an hour and 45 minutes.

>> okay. well, that was very nice. i appreciate the cooperation. i'm randy may, president of the free state foundation. i want to welcome all of you to today's event. as most of you know, the free state foundation is a free market oriented think tank specializing primarily in communications, internet, and high-tech policy issues. i'm always pleased to see so many old friends at our events. today i'm especially pleased to see so many new friends and new faces. i confess we've got a large turnout. there must be several of you or quite a few of you that didn't even sign up, but we welcome you, too. we're glad you're here. and i especially want to extend

a warm welcome to our c-span audience today. and thank c-span for covering this event. we appreciate it. today's program is titled the multistakeholder privatized internet governance model. can it survive threats from the u.n.? now i understand that the potential threats to the internet that we're going to be discussing today are going to arise if at all in the international telecommunications union or itu, but the itu operates under the u.n. usauspis and it's one of the u.n.'s specialized treaty organizations. that's why sometimes today we may be referring to the itu or the u.n., which is apparent body of the itu.