i appreciate the european union, particularly leaders who have been engaging to find out some more structured framework to address this issue. there is some very serious individuals among the countries of concern. that is why i believe that it has become a global issue and that's why the united nations should address this issue in close consultation with the member state. this year in september, september 30th, i convened a high-level meeting here, but i have proposed to the member states of the u.n. that i'm going to convene a summit meeting just one day before the general debates. that will be september 19th.

3kujut) support my initiative, my proposal. there i would like to discuss with the world leaders and summit level conference on syria, particularly to address

the refugee issues and terror support. of course, we can discuss some other issues too, including migration. this conference is co-sponsored by united kingdom, kuwait, and germany and united nations. we have already extended invitations cosigned by the leaders of these four countries and myself. in march in switzerland i have asked the high commissioner for refuge refugees, the dually appointed high commissioner, to convene a high-level meeting to discuss resettlement process. in may, we have world issue humanitarian summit meeting in

istanbul and turkey. i think we can also discuss this as a part of this humanitarian support. then in september we are going to have this summit meeting on migration issues. i understand that president of general assembly also has an idea of convening his initiative sometime in july a high-level meeting on migration issues. so there will be a continuing commitment and continuing consultation in the international community to address this issue at the global level. >> thank you. james? >> you used the word as soon as possible a short time ago about the cease-fire and the face to face talks. the stated communique said

january. does that seem a bit too ambitious? going forward on the time frame, how long do you think transition should be and if there is a need for elections at the end of the transition, would the u.n. organize them? >> vienna two conference has issued their own agreement saying that we will try to have in nationwide cease-fire in january. we have an 18-month timeline to have political transition. some people may think that this may be too ambitious, but one needs to be ambitious. we do not have much time to lose, to waste even a single minute. therefore it is absolutely necessary that we have the highest level possible ambition,

and i think we have do all what we can. >> since you are entering your final year as secretary general and there's already a race to inherit your position, will you address first of all rumors or reports that you plan to run for president of south korea? >> speak a little louder. >> will you address reports that you're planning to run for president of south korea and also will you pledge for planning purposes for those who would be your successor that you will serve out the remainder of your term? >> i think you are not the first one to have asked that question. i have been repeatedly stating during last couple of years as

secretary general of the united nations i have a full agenda. i remain for full term. until the very last day of next year, i will focus all my time and energy to my job as secretary general. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> if you could speak a little louder. >> yes. thank you, secretary general. >> yesterday the president of the general assembly and president of the security council have sent letter to the member state to present the candidate for the next -- for your successor, for the next secretary general. can you tell us your thought on

the unprecedented procedure? could you tell us your thought on this unprecedented procedure to choose the next secretary general and also if you have any message to the candidates? >> i have seen that letter, and it has -- it was expected in there because member state have been actively discussing this issue, how to make selection process of my successor more transparent, more transparent. i think it is good initiative as far as i believe. and i think there is widely shared consensus that this is a good initiative. i'd like to see with this letter

i hope member state will expedite the process to select the next secretary general as soon as possible on a very transparent manner. that's my wish, my wish. >> carol? >> mr. secretary general, tomorrow the u.n. is going to be releasing the report that you asked concerning allegations of sexual abuse in central african republic and you've spoken very forcefully about the need to clean up peacekeeping and misconduct by peacekeepers. i'm just wondering if you feel over the months that you've made progress following your repeated appeals for changes on this. >> i'm looking forward to me

meeting the judge who will hand over her findings as a chair of this panel of inquiry commission. after having received it, i'll take necessary action, including making it public, but more importantly we will review the contents of this report and take necessary action to make it much more clear lly committed that a the u.n. staff, whether in the headquarters or in the field, must be much more committed to protect and respect the human rights, including preventing

sexual violence. >> thank you. mr. secretary general, i want to raise afghanistan an issue that was missing on your opening statement. you have been a strong advocate and supporter of a peace reconciliation process, but this process made a promising beginning this july, but has collapsed and situation in afghanistan has sharply deteriora deteriorated. on top of this, the united states has resumed fighting the taliban according to "the new york times." in this situation, what are your thoughts how this process can be resolved and how can you help? >> the people in afghanistan have suffered too long time, many decades.

the peace and stability have been always instable, and many countries have involved and tried to support stability and peace in afghanistan. with dual leadership and the president, i have been taking note he's been engaging with the leaders in the region, particularly with pakistan. i sense your hope the whole international community support and commitment to support afghanistan, the people and the government, so they're able to maintain peace and stability through their own domestic reconciliation and plans. and also there's many international conferences that

have been held, for example compact, which have been providing international and social support. at this time, it is important to have good cooperation with the neighboring countries, particularly in addressing this terrorism and extremist attacks against afghanistan. at the united nations, it will continue to play an important role. >> mr. secretary general, thank you. on syria, the issue of terrorism has been on the agenda of pretty much every country dealing with syria. for example, some countries deal with moderates claiming they're terrorists, but there's the threat of isis.

have you spoken to the sides, the russians and americans, about choosing the terrorists instead of opposition and uniting their forces in the fight against terrorism? have you spoken to them? what do you recommend to them? thank you. >> countering terrorism and extremism has surfaced and emerged as one of the top serious, most serious, issues of which we have to deal with. i really appreciate many countries participating in coalitions. their role is very important. at the same time, i have been asking them to observe strictly the international humanitarian and international human rights laws to protect, not to harm civilian casualties.

in other aspects we have to also address the root causes enhancing, improving good governance of the leaders of the concerned countries and listen very seriously to the voices and aspirations of their own people through inclusive dialogue. there are some countries who are electing such capacities. therefore united nations through this counterterrorism center is really trying to provide capacity building support as much as we can, and that is why i'm trying to present as soon as possible during the month of january a comprehensive plan of action to countering extremism and terrorism. when it comes to in syria, there

are many armed groups. there are many armed groups. i understand that through this process of vienna they're trying to define exactly -- find out who are the terrorist groups, who are the armed groups. i understand that jordanian government has been mandated to take this mission. this issue will be a continuing subject now, and i also appreciate that saudi arabia has convened a meeting last week among syrian armed groups. i sincerely hope there will be some unity among the parties concerned so that we can more

effectively address this challenge of countering terrorism. >> thank you. thank you, mr. secretary general. you mentioned about the middle east and saudi arabia. just two days ago, there was an alliance formed between 34 countries between the arab and islamic world in saudi arabia. what's your view of this new coalition forming and how effective is it going to be in addressing holistically the causes and the counterterrorism measures that need to be implemented on the ground and do you see it as duplication for existing coalitions led by the united states or can it be merged together at one point? >> i read that report that saudi arabia has initiated to form a

muslim country-led coalition. as you know, this coalition led by western countries, including russia, they have been operating -- the military operations to fight against this terrorism. i sense your hope that when there is a coalition formed, i think they should very closely coordinate with other countries who are already participating in the coalition. as i again said, it is very important when they stage military operations. there should be extreme care and efforts not to harm any civilian population and civilian

facilities, and this is a fundamental principle of international rights and humanitarian law. >> thank you, mr. secretary general. i was wondering why in your introductory remarks you did not mention palestine and the conflict there. an average of two palestinians are killed a day. today the israeli government announced building 800 new settlement units and gaza is under siege for the last eight years. gaza is a humanitarian catastrophe, and yet you didn't find the time in your introductory remarks to mention what's going on there. why is that? thank you. >> i'm very concerned that we have not seen much progress, even deterioration of the situation in the middle east.

as you may remember, i was in the region during october to discuss this matter with israeli and palestinian leaders. it's important that even though this situation might be very much challenging, the leaders should show their high level of commitment and ambition, political ambition, to address all these pending issues. i think a six, seven-decade long issues to bring at least a small sense of hope to people who have been suffering. when it comes to a settlement, i have been repeatedly consistently made united nations position that it is illegal in

acco accordance with international law. >> thank you, secretary general. on the fight against isis, there was some hope that this common enemy could unite the countries. also provide some grounds for progress in syria, but now there seems to be some disagreements, some more disagreements between turkey on one side, russia and iraq on the other side. how could you personally push for these countries to unite and for more coordination between the states fighting isis? thank you. >> again, i have been urging the parties concerned, countries concerned involved in this process to first of all coordinate among themselves and try to respect the human rights and humanitarian law.

about the providing some support to different groups, you can find answer from my consistent position that there should be very close coordination and cooperation among the parties concerned. and often, we have seen some conflict unfortunately between and among the countries who are working for the same purpose. there should be unity of purpose and collaboration. if and when there is any division of positions between and among the countries who are engaging in counterterrorism, counterextrem counter-extremism, i think they should show their commitment to

deescalate tensions among themselves and be united. i've also been urging the syrian armed groups throughout many such different armed groups who are working for one purpose, one purpose. when you are divided, when you have division of positions, then it will be more difficult to achieve the cause. >> sorry. in the back. iranian news. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. secretary general. as you mentioned, the world is dealing with several crises at the time. i was wondering if you see any link between all these crises and the entailing consequences such as refugee crisis and

terrorism. and if so, do you think that there is a possibility of finding a solution for one of these crises without regarding the others? thank you. >> i think you have raised a huge, big questions. having served as the secretary general during the last nine years, one lesson or observation which i have drawn is that in this world nothing is operating in isolation. so everything is tightly interconnected, whether it is migration or terrorism or peace and development and human rights. i think they all work very tigh connected. so we can find some causes of

certain issues which are tightly connected. one root cause would be abject poverty, lack of good governa e governance. when there is complete despair among the people, when there is a complete disregard by the leaders on the wishes and aspirations of the people, then people try to find other ways, other ways to address their own difficulties and concerns and sufferings. nobody wants to suffer for any reason, whether it is poverty, disease, or abuse of authorities or abuse of powers. that's why i've been always asking that good governance and

inclusive dialogue and addressing abject poverty, those are the answers. when we can find answe-- we can the answers when we trace back the root causes. one or two three factors have driven them to flee, to migrate, or to become radical or to become very radical forces. therefore, we have to address all this in sink -- sync and coordination. i think the leaders have provided a good sense of promise

and hope. sustainable development goals, 17 goals, and climate change agreement. if we implement these sustainable development goals, including climate change, i think we can expect that most of the people will be able to live in a much better, much more stable situation and much more prosperity. that's what united nations is aiming to achieve, and we have laid good foundations this year. the year 2015, i believe, will be recorded as one of the most important historic years in the history of the united nations where we have laid out all good foundations. >> thank you, mr. secretary

general. tomorrow, the u.n. security council takes up terrorist financing. and the draft resolution, which will have the finance ministers attending, calls on your office, on the secretary general, to provide a report in 30 days. and in particular, to define and report on recruitment of isil and the sources of terrorist financing. how does your office expect to do that, to speak with intelligence agencies? and do you believe that will unite countries in trying to tap down on terrorist financing? thank you. >> i'm very much encouraged by the fact that the security council is going to take landmark decision in preventing financial foes to terrorists and

extremists. this is a very important sign of demonstrating their leadership and unity in addressing terrorists and extremists. unfortunately, they have been receiving a lot of funds without much difficulty, particularly islamic state. they have -- according to reports, they have a lot of money available there and they pay for their own people controlled under their influence. it's very important that we have to do whatever required to cut off this source of financial support to these people. i think that is one way, one of the ways, in effectively addressing and i'm looking forward to my own participation tomorrow.

>> one last brief question from joe. >> yes, thank you. sir, what are your views on iran's testing or ballistic missiles designed to deliver nuclear weapons. and, in particular, do such actions give you concern as to iran's good-faith going forward and come plying with the jcpoa? >> iran has made the very good agreement. and therefore, i would suspect that the iranian government will continue with agreement and in accordance with all relevant resolutions. i think that is the best way for iran, first of all, to they have

a setout. and i'm sure based on this agreement, they're going to get to work the iran yan government. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> the house oversight committee will investigate the screening process for foreign nationals entering the u.s. the complete look at whether the current vetting process is vulnerable to terrorists wanting to enter the country. watch thursday live at 9:00 a.m. eastern. and later in the day, jack lliu will be joined with ambassador

to the u.n., san man that powell. >> the reagan narrative was he was a lightweight, b actor, which is what gerald ford said about him in 1976. he's turning prematurely orange. and even with all the successings of his administration, all the historians have consistently rated reagan low. i believe out of ied logical bias. >> sunday night, historian craig shirley discusses his book, "last act". a look at ronald reagan's life. >> i like to write about ronald reagan because i grew up in the '80s. he was the house in time for us.

but i also write about the facts. we've succeeded in the picture that emerges of a very serious, deep-thinking, krt, solicitous man. >> richard olson testified about u.s.-pakistan relations. >> this hearing will come to order. there is a vote in progress. so my intention here is to begin the hearing. and then we will suspend for the

duration of the votes and allow the other members of the committee to come forward. >> so this committee has repeatedly urged pakistan to take meaningful action against key islamist terrorist groups. unfortunately, pakistan which is now home to the world's fastest-growing nuclear weapons program, has remained a fout of radical islamist fault. it was no surprise that one of the san bernardino attackers studied at a particularly fundamentalist message.

after more than a decade, pakistan was to be a key ally in combatting islamist militancy, becoming a leading recipient of u.s. aid in the nearly 15 years since. its northwestern frontier has maintained a safe hichb supporting what it krsz to be good islamist groups. these kbood groups destabilize afghanistan and threaten neighboring india while the government is simultaneously opposes what it considers the bad islamist groups. teach intolerant, hate-filled

rhetoric that inspires the foot soldiers. i've made three trips to islamabad. pakistan must do the work to register schools and close those creating new generations of radicals. and those are the schools that are being funded with gulf state money. and they need to be closed. meanwhile, pakistan's nuclear arsenal is on a track to be the third largest. it's addition in rekroent years is even more troubling. this is a country that spends a fifth of its budget to long range, f-16s, but under 2 1/2 mnt on education. u.s. policy has essentially stood still. security assistance, cash and arms has continued to flow under the occasional temporary delays.

being held because of inadequate efforts, the state department is currently seeking more arms for islamabad. pakistan itself has been devastated by terrorism with over 2,000 of its soldiers killed, thousands and thousands of its citizens killed in terrorist attacks. today, we recognize the year anniversary of a horrific attack on a school that killed over a hundred children. we want a strong partnership with the country. but a new policy is long overdue. one option as ranking member angle and i proposed earlier this year, would be to target those officials who maintain relationships with designated terrorist groups with travel and financial sanctions. this would make it clear, the u.s. and pakistan cannot have a true strategic partnership until

pakistan security services cuts ties with terrorist organizations. recently senior u.s. officials including national security advisor susan rice and deputy secretary of state tony blinken have traveled to islamabad reportedly to press on the pakistani government. we look forward to hearing from our witnesses today whether there is reason for hope or if our policy is stuck in the same rut. i now will turn to mr. ted poe of texas and then mr. dana rohrabacher of california for their opening statements. mr. poe. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my concern specifically is with our relationship with pakistan. the united states has given pakistan $30 billion since 9/11. i think pakistan is a benedict arnold ally to the united states. even going back to may the 2nd,

2011, when there was the raid on -- in pakistan on osama bin laden, we didn't tell the pakistanis we were coming because, frankly, they would snitch us off and osama bin laden would have left. and the near confrontation that took place between the u.s. and pakistan after the raid, pakistan scrambled two u.s. made f-16s and were headed to the area where the raid took place and a possible confrontation with two u.s. made jets against american helicopters at the raid didn't happen, but it could have happened. pilots that presumably were trained the year before in 2010 in tucson, arizona, and i think we need to be very concerned about providing armaments for pakistan who seems to play all the sides. and i'll yield back, mr.

chairman. >> okay. and i now yield time to mr. dana rohrabacher of california. when i was elected 28 years ago, i think most people considered me pakistan's best friend in the house of representatives. and let me just say that i -- over the years, i have been deeply disappointed that those people who i considered to be my friends were betraying the trust of the united states and were committing acts that were only the acts that an enemy would commit even though we continued to have a facade of friendship. we've given 30 billion, $30 billion since 9/11 to pakistan,

yet we realize that since 9/11 yet we still see -- there's all -- ample evidence that pakistan is still deeply involved with various terrorist networks including supporting the taliban in afghanistan and radicals who kill americans. we've been, frankly, our relationship with pakistan has been a disgrace. we have a government that gave safe haven to osama bin laden, the murderer of 3,000 americans, 3,000 americans slaughtered in front of us. i don't think anybody believes that the high level people of the pakistan government didn't

know about that. they continue to hold a doctor just to rub it in our face that they -- the type of relationship they have with us. and to their own people, they're slaughtering people and others who are being brutally opressed by a click in their government. the click that runs that country is treating us like suckers and they should because we are. we're acting foolish. we are very foolish giving people money who have continually to involve themselves in activity that's harmful to the united states of america is not going to win their friendship. so mr. chairman, i hope that we face facts and if the pakistan government wants to be our friend, they can be our friend, but they have not been. and they need to change that if we are to continue to have -- on the relationship that we've had.

i would like to at this point submit for the record a number of articles showing that again pakistan continues to support various terrorist operations as well as their relationship with china at the expense of their own people, and i submit that for the record at this point. >> without objection. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> we have four votes on the floor so we will recess the hearing and return for witness testimony and questions after those four votes. we appreciate it patience of our witness and those in attendance. and for now, we stand in recess.

the committee is in order. please hold for an opening statement and then we'll introduce the ambassador and then he'll make a statement. >> i will keep it on the charts for the ambassador. in the region, we look at india, we looked at pakistan, the relationship. it's incredibly important, particularly as the changing mission is rural pakistan and india and stabilized in the regions and conflicts and is important. it's an honor to welcome all of you.

express his sorrow for not being here, mr. ambassador, but he is leading the charge on the house floor on four bills from our committee. that's why he's not here and why mr. engle is not here either. we're now pleased to be joined by ambassador richard olson. ambassador olson is the special representative for afghanistan and pakistan, immediately prior to this appointment, ambassador olson served as the u.s. ambassador to pakistan, but he has served in many capacities all over the world since joining the state department in 1982. ambassador olson has been recognized several times for his

service, including being awarded the presidential distinguished service award. thank you for being with us, mr. ambassador. without objection, the witness's full prepared statement will be made a part of the record, and members will have five calendar days to submit statements, questions, and extraneous material for the record. ambassador olson, please summarize your remarks. >> madam chair, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the current state of the united states' bilateral relationship with pakistan. i'm honored to testify in front of you for the first time in my capacity as u.s. special representative for afghanistan and pakistan. after having served as your ambassador in pakistan and previously at our embassy in

kabul. i'm humbled and privileged to be in this new role at such a critical time for the u.s. relationship with both pakistan and afghanistan. it's clear to me that despite many challenges, pakistan will be continue to be an important partner for the united states for the foreseeable future, particularly in light of our enduring presence in afghanistan. while we do not always see eye to eye on every issue, our relationship with pakistan is vital to the national security of the united states. most importantly, we have the opportunity to continue working with pakistan today on counterterrorism issues along with strategic stability, economic growth, and democratic governance to help shape a future in which pakistan is more stable, increasingly prosperous, and plays a constructive role in

the region. pakistan is a complex place. and it is important not to overlook the significant progress made in the last few years. in 2013, pakistan completed its first democratic transition from one elected civilian government to another. during the past two years, we can point to progress, however imperfect, made across the economic and security sectors. prime minister shareef and his team have restored macroeconomic stability to pakistan and

improved economic growth. representative for afghanistan and pakistan. after having served as your ambassador in pakistan and

pakistanis that these organizations threaten pakistan, the region, and the pan apleaa of our national security interests, and they must be addressed rigorously. we have also asked pakistan to do all that it can to help recover u.s. citizen hostages held on pakistani territory. we continue to press for greater cooperation between afghanistan and pakistan, both to stabilize the common border region and to build a constructive relationship necessary for

regional stability. it's also critical pakistan improve relations with its other neighbor, india. recent high level talks between indian and pakistani officials and the announcement of the resumption of a formal dialogue is welcome. we hope the dialogue will be used to reduce tensions and increase ties between the two nations. naturally, as pakistan seeks to combat violent extremism and pursue counterinsurgency and counterterrorism objections, we continue to encourage and support pakistan to strengthen the rule of law, civil liberties, respect for human rights, accountability, and freedom of speech. which we firmly believe are vital to lasting peace and security. our civilian assistance programs help make progress towards these economic and governance ends and democracy, and it is essentially they are sustained at current levels. with that, i would like to conclude my statement. madam chair, and i'm available for your questions and comments. >> thank you so much, mr. ambassador. last month, i led a congressional delegation trip to afghanistan and was joined by my friend and colleague from this committee, dr. yoho.

while obviously, this hearing is on the future of u.s.-pakistan relations, we all know that we can't really address the future of our bilateral relationship without also discussing afghanistan. when our delegation met with president ghani, he told us he has reached out his hand to pakistan only to be rebuffed. we all know that in order for pakistan, for afghanistan to be stable and secure, pakistan will have to play a key role there. some argue that pakistan's ultimate goal is to use afghanistan as a sort of strategic depth against india, and that pakistan prefers an insecure afghanistan and is using its proxies and ties to insurgent groups to exert control in afghanistan. i wanted to hear your perspective on that. in fact, in its report to congress and the progress towards security and stability

in afghanistan, the dod openly stated that pakistan uses these proxy forces to hedge against the loss of influence in afghanistan and to counter india's superior military. do you know if it's true that ghani is being rebuffed by pakistan? and what is pakistan's strategic objective with regard to afghanistan? and then i wanted to ask about the terrorist safe havens inside pakistan's borders. thank you, mr. ambassador. >> thank you, madam chair. with regard to president ghani, as i mentioned in my opening statement, he did travel to the heart of asia conference last week, and of course, we have applauded president ghani's outreach to pakistan, which has been one of the notable characteristics of his time in office. and we believe that pakistan has been wanting to reciprocate this outreach. pakistan has taken several steps that are important in this

regard. the first is that they hosted the murray talks with the taliban in july between the government of afghanistan and the taliban. the first time that the taliban had sat down with the government of afghanistan. and at the heart of asia conference last week, they reaffirmed, president shareef reaffirmed his support for the sovereignty of afghanistan, the territorial integrity of afghanistan, the legitimacy of its government, and its constitution. all of which were, i think, important points for president ghani. so, we will continue to work with pakistan to encourage them to bring the taliban to the table, to resume a peace and reconciliation process that is led by the afghans and owned by

the afghans. >> so although the countries have had a rocky relationship, you believe that with a new government there will be brighter days ahead and the level of cooperation will be higher, and that there will be more trust and partnerships evolving from this? >> yes, ma'am. we think there are, of course, many challenges in the afghanistan and pakistan relationship. but we think that the interest of a stable and peaceful afghanistan are best served by having a positive relationship with pakistan, which i think is a strategic vision of both president ghani and prime minister shareef. >> thank you, we hope so. what is pakistan doing to help

eliminate the terrorist safe havens inside of its borders? we hear so much about that. and i believe that the u.s. isn't effectively using our leverage in afghanistan to convince the pakistanis to do more with us and our afghan partners on the counterterrorism front, to work with them rather than against the afghan government and against its security forces. we have a pending military package before us on this committee, and i believe we need to use that as leverage. have we made progress in getting buy-in from pakistan on our counterterrorism efforts in afghanistan in eliminating terrorist safe havens inside pakistan? and why should congress approve arms sales to pakistan when our own defense department is telling us that pakistan is openly working against our objectives when it comes to afghanistan safe havens and counterterrorism?

>> thank you, madam chair. with regard to pakistan's own counterterrorism operations, in june of 2014, pakistan launched operations against militant strongholds in north waziristan. tribal agency. this is something that the united states has wanted for a number of years because there were a number of groups located in north waziristan that threatened u.s., afghanistan, as well as others. during the course of this operation, over the course of more than a year and a half, the pakistanis have lost nearly 500 troops, 488, it was just announced. at the same time, they have carried out counterterrorism operations throughout the settled areas of pakistan, that is to say the non-tribal areas, the rest of pakistan. and despite the terrible incident at the army school a year ago, there has been less blow-back than might have been

expected from the terrorists. as i said at the outset in my statement, most of the action has been -- we think there is more that can be done in terms of targeting groups that don't just target the pakistan internally, but are threats to their neighbors. we continue to have an active dialogue with them. i had a very active dialogue during my three years in pakistan on the question of the haqqanis and also the question. although they have taken steps. >> i will leave the other questions to another member. we're going to move on to dr. bera. >> thank you, madam chair. as the indian american and the only indian american member of congress, you know, the stability of the region is incredibly important to me. it's one that we have spent a lot of time thinking about. and very much interconnected when you think about india, you

know, pakistan, and afghanistan. again, it is not easy. on the counterterrorism side, i think post-mumbai in 2008, india demonstrated incredible restraint in its approach to pakistan. pakistan, as ambassador olson, you mentioned, it is the one-year anniversary of the horrific school shooting. the fact that i would have expected pakistan to have a much more robust crackdown on the terrorist threats on the haqqani network and others. from our perspective, from the perspective of the indians, there's almost this side-by-side

relationship in pakistan with some of these terrorist networks that, you know, almost symbiotic. they live side-by-side. from your perspective, what are the steps that pakistan's government, its military, needs to do to reduce the terrorist threats? again, in some ways, it's almost as though they allow these networks to exist in pakistan to destabilize the region or to have this constant threat on india. >> thank you, congressman. i agree with you that there has -- there continues to be challenges in this area. it's important to note that pakistan has really had a shift

over the course of the last year and a half. they have suffered enormously from terrorism, over 2,000 soldiers or service members killed and many thousands of individual pakistani citizens have died as a result of terrorist outrages. and the government has a stated commitment, articulated both by the prime minister and army chief to go after all terrorists without distinction. and we believe there is more that can be done with regard to groups and the taliban, including the haqqani network. that's a very active element of our dialogue. i think it's safe to say we have almost no meeting with the appropriate officials in which those topics are not raised in very, very vigorous, very vigorous terms. i think it is safe to say that the attacks that the clearing of north waziristan has resulted in disruption, if not elimination