we have, on the civilian side, china has been offered incentives on the economic side in pakistan. right now, they have come in not strongly, but they have come in in the telecommunications sector. they have come in and the development which has been a joint project. there has been infrastructure projects and some mining and other projects. the civil government and the military both have been pushing for greater collaboration from china. . bring china more and more into the economic field. we haven't really had a problem with china, and minor issues lately, eti m. operating

somewhere in the areas was taken very seriously and settled with bilaterally between china and pakistan. pakistan. in fact, i saw it's coming to capacity on the counterterrorism front in pakistan. so it's a good relationship that we have with china. >> if i may, ask a question, general. you talk about the fact that pakistan has the capacity, you said the government and the military has the capacity to deal with insurgency. brother obviously gaps in the equipment. and could you talk a bit about what pakistan needs and what is the prospect of getting the tools are that it needed from the united states? and if not from the united states, from some other sources. what are the possibilities?

>> yes. the operations have been very hard on aviation, particularly helicopters. we did not and do not have a large fleet of helicopters which can operate in those areas. and we have had to diverged aviation of other areas that we needed like operations of high-altitude and so on. also, with some of the helicopters, i won't mention the name or make, we have problem of the operation, certain time, conditions in that particular area. so the wrist, that's one feel we need support from the u.s. and i think there's agreement between the u.s. and pakistan that the mic of a team has performed

particularly well and we should perhaps be in the market for that. helicopter. we haven't already. we are operating them. the other are minor items like night vision capabilities, which are not enough. there is not enough to go around and troops have been exposed from that point of view. there is communication equipment, of course, on the other side because of the drug money available. the weapons they are using is the highest as a rocket nettled rené. and on our side of course we had the full great a weapons available, jets, f-16, whatever you want is available. but there are little gaps which need to be filled up and we are in constant communications with the united states to fill in those gaps.

and there are democratic procedures you have to fight through, and in the procurement difficulties and so on. everybody is working through that. and some requirements have been met. some perhaps still need to be met. >> thank you. a question in front. >> thank you for the presentation. i'm here from the rand corporation. my question, sir, you essentially have been a very competent at snapshot of pakistan, which it getting some insight of the economic situation and the military affairs and everything. one thing which constantly comes in the news and i just want to get your feedback, was about the water issues between india and pakistan, and in general south asia. if you can comment on that. >> it's a big issue, and it's an issue which is going to come up more and more. we've tried very hard to harness

water resources within the country. there have been political difficulties in doing that because provinces have not always agreed to what the federation has proposed in terms of major dam construction. at one particular dam which is going through feasibility, which seems the best thing to do, is not being approved across-the-board, politically, and so there is a problem which if not tackled now are in fact, it should have been tackled yesterday. but if not tackled now can create a problem for the country. the other is the water problem within india. there is a treaty, water bank, which exist, from time to time whenever there has been a violation in our perception of our relation with india.

and the methodology has worked well in the sense that the world bank appoints new technical expert and a mediator who goes and inspects the site, tells everybody yes, you're right where you're wrong. and other corrective action is taken or so on. the last such thing was i think this year or last year when they had, india had the dam project in kashmir. our objection was it was too much and needs to be reduced. i think the world bank agreed in the design has been modified to accommodate that. but that's one issue which has been result. or are going to be other issues with india. that's why i said that every time running to the world bank and going through this whole process of experts coming in examining, there needs to be bilateral dialogue with india and pakistan, which has been a difficult process, not only a bilateral dialogue, the

composite dialogue that we had, but maybe a bad channel dialogue also have sometimes helped very much in resolving these issues coming to terms. so you're right, it's going to be an issue in the future. >> we have experienced from across the border in india that counterinsurgency operations could last a long time. particularly when they are internal to a quiet country and you have 10 to 15 years sometimes, ap up to 25 years. is there a possibility that india and pakistani armies could begin talking to each other to learn from each other's experience? >> we are a long way from that yet. i think it's going to take a very long time, and the resolution of issues before we start in that kind of conversation. but you're right, india has

insurgency problems in its northeast which have been there for years. at a particularly bad right now in two or three states. and that's living with those problems and constantly fighting the situation there with resources, military, police and so on. that's why i said that the political and the military and the operations here should not be too into the taliban or finish it. that would be very ambitious. nobody has been able to do that and insurgent situations for a very long time. we still have to see what happens later, what happens. already you have long blast coming up. what happens in the settlement where it goes from there, reverts to civil war or what because there is an alienated population in afghanistan.

and the thrust is lower than southern afghanistan so you have to see what the impact is. but he is right that these things take a long time to resolve, even after the military operations are over and you have examples of malaya insurgency going for 15 years. and others which have gone for 10 or 12 years. but we already in the 60 year, so finish it. >> any other questions from the group? there's a follow-up. >> i should have asked three. i can ask at least two. can you just pinpoint or list us like three main cbs, like constant building measures from india and pakistan which we can take up to improve the relationship, the mistrusts which we have, you just mentioned, we can learn from each other militarily or

economically is between the governments, what we can do. only three major cbm's. >> i think one good one would be to demilitarize in the kashmir area. they are the two areas where the military's are actually deployed and in a state of readiness for actual conflict on the line of control and the light of contract. not only will that ease the situation there, bring in a factor of longer response times and getting to a conflict situation. i think that's one that should happen. the second one, again, could be a restraint regime which started building trust and reassurance between the two and perhaps the spirit of creating no diplomatic

zones closer to the border. other things like that, which could be worked out and perhaps extending into the nuclear field, other fields. and the third, i think, a good thing would be sort of political interaction between the two countries. it has not been there to the extent that it should be there. when you have visiting and so on, proper political interaction between the two countries, we could learn from india. they have more experience of coalition politics. we are just entering that phase. and it will build up trust. >> i think that would be a good, hopeful point at which for me to thank general karamat. and as i promised you at the beginning of today's gathering, with a guest like him who easily

moves between military and political and economic and social coventry, and now of course is part of the think tank community, i didn't think we expected anything less than what we got today. so on behalf of the atlantic council, i would like to thank all of you for coming, and especially thank general karamat for a very exciting and stimulating discussion today. thank you. [applause] thank you. [applause] [inaudible c [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009]

>> tonight we will show president obama's national discussion on health care in its entirety. that is at 8:00 p.m. eastern time. this holiday weekend, we will hear from domestic policy advisers who have worked with president from nixon to george w. bush. they will discuss relationships with chief executives on friday at 8:00 p.m. friday eastern. then the policy agenda is, that saturday morning at 10:00

eastern. then a wrap up with lessons they learned from serving under chief executives. >> this holiday weekend, discover an unfamiliar sight of our nation's first president as we are live from mount vernon estate. they will talk about the ascent of george washington. join our 3 our conversation, sunday. it is part of our 3 day holiday weekend, starting friday morning. >> topics at today's white house briefings include efforts to gain support for the president's health-care proposal. this took place just before the president held a town hall meeting on the issue in northern virginia. it is about 45 minutes.

>> it got really quiet. we will start. here comes talk. fix your caller. -- fix your collar. >> are we on the cusp of the honduras information? >> i think it is best for me to characterize what actions have happened here. two full met yesterday. they met with the president of honduras. you have seen some actions

taken in it did mind. -- in its deadlines for restoration of president zelaya. that is where we are. >> how far reaching are the military operations? >> we continue to monitor the situation and will respond accordingly as events transpire, but as i said, we are watching closely. >> another meltdown. this one is in california. they have failed to agree on the balance a budget plan. they are on the verge of issuing ious to creditors. how concerned is the administration about the development? what will the federal government

do to help them out? >> i think the big step the federal government can do -- we have it done as related to the recovery plan. about $144 billion in the amount of money in the recovery plan for states. many of them struggle with the downturn in the economy and how it affects each of their state budgets. as you mentioned, a number of states that find themselves at the end of the fiscal year and require -- are required to pass budgets, we are watching. in california, they had sought a designation t tarp -- designations of tarp, which a the secretary of treasury said was not possible based on the law. based on the contribution from the federal government, it has been an increase in medicaid and

education money to go to helping some of this fiscal gaps. >> that is only been a drop in the bucket. is the stimulus plan -- has it really given them enough to make ends meet? >> i forget the exact number of a budgetary shortfalls. it represents a pretty large chunk of civil and state budget shortfalls. it is not the whole thing up, but i think it is an important step that we took, understanding that an economic recovery had to include individual state governments. we have taken important steps to cushion as much as possible that

a blow. >> does it concern the administration that the larger state is about to start issuing ious and what kind of message that sends to international parties? >> we continue to watch the situation and we will see it as it develops. >> i know you do not like polls. any negative polls are typically dismissed. we actually like those. they are quite credible. it shows that there is some resistance among the public for the president's plan. the health care costs will go up under the president's plan. any concern at all that there is some resistance among the public to the president? >> you might have listed a

different answer if the poll was 45-51. >> you are not concerned that the health care costs will go up? >> we have to continue to do the job of telling people what will happen if we change the rate of spending on health care. if we see greater efficiency, seek treatment, not simply -- when we approached people's health care, we seek to treat them not to provide more treatment. that is certainly one of the things that the president has talked about. we want to change the way we spend money on health care. that is extremely important. that is obviously be something the president has dedicated a lot of time to doing. millions of americans right now are paying a premium every day for the millions of people that do not have health insurance,

but they have to seek medical treatment in an emergency. there are tons of hidden costs in our health-care system that have to be addressed through comprehensive health care reform. i think yesterday there were some important developments relating to this. the nation's largest employer, walmart, is supportive of aspects of our health care plan, because they understand as a business they are seeing the crushing effects of skyrocketing health-care costs. families are, just a state governments are, just as federal government is. the president continues to describe the positive aspects and health care reform and the reason why doing nothing just is

not an option. >> it is an issue that he has to better explain himself to the american people? >> i'm just kidding. absolutely. i do not think the president -- one of the reason he is out there today is for people to get a better understanding of what his health care plan will do, how it will help and impact of them, what it will do to change the cost for their family or small business. all of those are aspects of what the president will seek to do, has done, and will do later today. >> does he have to change anything at all? we have been talking about holding town hall meetings and now going on line interactively. does anything have to change to ram it up? -- to ramp it up? there is still some confusion perhaps. >> a lot of this is frequency.

that is why you see as frequently doing it more events on health care. >> what did rahm emanuel say to get them to issue that letter yesterday? >> i think rahm emanuel would appreciate denoting that he might have twisted or broken an arm for that. i do not think that is the case. what happened was, this is something that i think the nation's largest employer, as well as the nation's union -- i think they both understand the same thing. we have skywriting -- we have skyrocketing health-care costs. there was a great quote in the "wall street journal poll will he said that he was surprised that walmart had created an -- in the "wall street journal" he said he was surprised walmart

had abandoned their previous position on employer mandates. it is a ridiculous notion that the business would make a business decision. the business is suffering from the suffering cost of healthcare, which has increased year after year. it might eventually come to the conclusion that the status quo is unacceptable. that is price for what the president has said. -- that is precisely what the president has said. that is why congress is making progress on health care reform. >> walmart said the commitment to healthcare costs must be as strong as possible. they endorsed the idea of a trigger mechanism that would automatically in force reduction in medical expenditures. what is the white house's position on a trader in health care legislation?

>> i do not know what that is explaining. i do not know what that is talking about. there were recommendations that the white house is also endorsing it. you have heard peter and others talk about the notion that -- set up from the balance a budget of 1997 -- there is a board that considers options to reign in unnecessary health-care costs from the government's perspective. every year, these recommendations are gathered and moved aside. obviously, the president believes that this is a key component of health care reform. i want to make sure that these two things are similar. >> there is a bigger approach to this. it may be different.

>> but a check on the differences. -- let me check on the difference. >> he is not in -- i am not in favor of this at all. >> you have heard the president say that -- remember, this is not a bill for bill stake -- this is a reform for reforms say. -- for reform's sake. it has to significantly bring in the cost of health care. if all we do is take what is happening now with the skyrocketing costs and simply adding to that, you are creating a system that cannot sustain itself. we have to change the arch of health care spending. >> what about the smaller businesses? august, wal-mart is the largest

employer in the country. what does an employer mandate really look like? >> there will have to be discussion on this. this is not something that is going to be -- there are certainly going to be exemptions for businesses. there is no doubt about that. >> what size? >> i will leave that out to up to the healthcare negotiators. i think what is important is -- i think this represents a big mind said change. -- mindset change. it is a recommendation of the notion that health care costs are increasing at a rate that cannot be sustained even by the largest employer. you can imagine the crushing

impact that it has on people that are not seeing gross revenues like they are. >> people say this will crush them even more. >> who says this? >> the smallest businesses. >> that is why the smallest business is not going to fall under that scenario. there will be some opt out as it relates to that. >> there was an interview -- would you consider going for a run with the elected government? >> that is an interesting question. jump shot? i guess it depends on where they are going to a run. there is an advantage in a place like alaska. i will ask committee has any free time to do that. >> there are questions coming in

on youtube and twitter. who decides what questions will be answered? >> i think a group over at new media is shuffling through questions. if you go on our web site you will see some of those questions. at the end of the day, i think the questions that will be read to the president -- he will obviously take some from the audience. they will be represented of the issues of this debate. we usually hand out to get on a first-come, first served basis. >> some people were invited by the white house or the university. >> if the university -- >> the concept of a town hall is to have an open public forum. it sounds of a very controlled di