good friends of ours. he had a briefcase of real badges from different states. he was very particular bill we let see those badges. >> he carried them? >> always. >> and that is on display among his awards a graceland. >> the wall of gold. .

it's got lots of the pictures you've seen tonight and some more you haven't seen. you might want to take this one, it's one of the most requested photographs. >> but you sell them, right? much better quality, yeah. what can i say. >> of course we all hear about the white house tapes. is there a tape of this visit and has it been released? >> no, because the taping system didn't start until february of 1971. we wish there were a tape. this would be a wonderful, this

would be the most requested white house tape. >> the video clip with the president he said he only knew about elvis what he had read. i had heard he really didn't know much about him at all. can you comment on that? >> i think, you know, he was very much in tune with, i think, america, americana, what was going on. he certainly knew who elvis presley was. i don't know whether he followed the career completely, but he understood his place in american culture. his importance. i think halederman understood that. obviously dwight chaffin who continued this whole thing, this would not have happened without dwight's foresight and vision. i think the president was aware of it. he didn't play the tunes at night. >> a question for jerry, i wanted to know if you had

insight or details of the logistics of elvis leaving memphis, his first trip to washington, as far as, you know, it's mind-boggling to think that elvis gets on a plane in in memphis, comes to washington, if i was walking through the airport, i'd probably be standing there, staring, waiting for elvis to do or say smog, as far as him arriving in washington and checking into the hotel, did he tell you anything, anything happening, taxi ride, do you have any details? >> there was a couple of details. one was, you know, what ementioned earlier about the flight coming back to meet me and the gun situation. but there was, to tell you what a great actor elvis was, there was a situation where on that first trip, as the car was taking him to the hotel he stopped at a doughnut shop.

elvis, he didn't care where things were. it wasn't in a really good neighborhood, and was predominantly a pretty rough place, as i found out later, he was telling me, stop at this doughnut shp, he had the jewelry on, the rings and everything, so he's kind of -- these kind of superfly guys were going, hey, man, that's some really nice jewelry. elvis goes to his boot and pulls out a snub nosed gun and said, yeah, and i aim to keep it. they just laughed. how good an actor he was, there's an author, the best music author he did "last train to memphis," as i did 11 years

of interviews with him for these two books, he kept calling me back and saying, how could you let -- how were you at the doughnut shop when this happened? i kept telling him, i don't know. elvis had told that story so much, this was before he came and got me, i thought i was there. i had to rescind my thought about being there. >> this question is for jerry. was the soldier that you guys gave the money to on the plane, was he white or black? >> gosh, you know, we didn't really think in those terms that much, actually. >> i had hear both. >> you know, i don't really remember. i don't know. it wouldn't have made any

difference. >> the house that elvis met you at, was that a gift to you from elvis? >> no, this was his house on hill crest. worth a few million dollars. he bought me my home, a 1974, in west hollywood hills, nobody knew it except the inner circle and elvis had known i had lost my mother when i was like a little over a year old and just out of the blue he said, you know, you never really had a home, i want to be the one to give one to you. i still live there. that's the type of person he was. >> mr. schilling, mr. crowe, i'd like to thank you for coming to washington to tell this story. you talked about in this meeting, we saw the human side of both president nixon and

elvis presley. i don't mean this to be a hostile question but more of a sympathetic one. wasn't richard nixon a bit of a hypocrite to rail against drug abuse when it is alleged that early in his presidency, he was taking anti-convulsive medication to relieve stress? and i believe it's been well documented that he was abusing alcohol as the watergate scandal began to unravel? >> well, i would have to take issue, i think, with the premise of the question. i don't think, at least to my knowledge, that there was any history of abuse of alcohol at all. in terms of the drug he is used, i think they were all prescribed drugs. i did work on the markets programs for richard nickson for four years. he focused very specifically on what he thought were the most dangerous drugs, heroin in particular, and he shifted the national policy from a primarily law enforcement policy to treatment, rah he --

rehabilitation, research, and ex-, because he saw that was where we could get the greatest value. he felt that would have the greatest effect and reduce crime. i don't see that there was real hypocrisy. i didn't think it was an attack sort of question, i think that was a good question. >> i just read in a newspaper a few days ago of a woman who was working at the white house and apparently she claims that elvis was having an affair with her for three year, that's why he came to d.c.. >> we'd have to ask jack anderson. >> i have no knowledge of that. >> i don't know what happened before he came to l.a. to meet me. i don't know what his intentions were coming here. originally. i don't know. but we did have a friend in

washington that we had met in vegas, two sisters, and that's probably where that came from because she had worked with the government as well. >> it never got to my office. >> he never mentioned that to me. i spent three days with him hsm ehe -- he told me everything that had happened, you know what, i don't remember him mentioning that at all. >> this question is for jerry. i understand that 10 days after his white house visit, elvis was in washington and toured the f.b.i. headquarters and wanted to meet j. edgar hoover who was on vacation at the time. did you know anything about this? did he stay in washington the whole time? did he fly back to memphis and ply back -- fly back again? >> after we left he personally,

in the car, dropped me off at the airport where i could get back to my job and then he and sonny took a commercial -- another commercial flight back to memphis. i think in his excitement about the visit, and we had a good friend, bill morris, who was the mayor back there, he was the one that got elvis as one of the 10 outstanding young americans which elvis mentioned to the president, who was one of those as well. then elvis, and i'm back in l.a., but he did make another trip and brought bill and a couple of people and he did not meet hoover. it was a lot harder to meet with j. edgar hoover than with the president. i can vouch for that. >> thank you. >> i'm just wondering, did you get to keep your job in l.a.? and how did the explanation go?

>> very good one. great question. >> i did keep my job in l.a. there was no way i was going to tell them the truth. they would have never believed me. they would have fired me. so i just reported, i meant to call, i was sick, and i worked there for another few months and then elvis, he liked the way i'd set up with -- set things up with you and everybody, bud, and he told me on the way to the airport that he wanted me to come back to work with him. then i get in the mail, a business card, jerry schilling, personal public relations, el vits presley. i thought if he wants me to come

back this bad, i did love working for him. a few months later, i quit and went back to work for elvis. >> are there other questions? >> the story probably doesn't have many redeeming, scholarly, literary, historical importance, but it's pure americana, that these two people could come together and given dwight's vision and the fact that i was a crazy fan of elvis, you were terrific to talk to on the phone, these are just a bunch of guys trying to make something happen and not knowing at the time that it was really significant. that was just, wow, look at these two people together and then watch them, as jerry said, relate to each other, person to person, and like each other. in the book, you know we tried to show some of the parallels. they came from absolutely dire poverty and rose to the pinnacle in their particular professions. what does it take to do that, the drive and talent elvis had,

and the voice, and nixon's drive and there's a lot of similarities in the way they lived. their mansions and their gestures, elvis with the guitar and, you know, and it was just a beautiful thing to watch. ewe don't want to overstate its significant but it's part of our country that you could have somebody like elvis come in and meet the president, have them relate to each other in a very positive way and be kind oteach -- to each other and what a followup. i love the story as you can probably see. >> jerry? >> well, gosh, there's so many thoughts that go in my mind. i guess to sum it up, to be able to have a friend like elvis presley, i could have never dreamed of as a young child. and to live in a country that

something like this could happen , i've been very fortunate and very proud to be here at the national archives and it's a wonderful feeling, it's almost intimidating. and i don't think an experience in life, these experiences that i got to have because of my friend and certainly this historical one, life doesn't get much better. thank you guys for being here too. >> i want to thank tom for organizing this and jeffrey jackson, who is back there, he was the wizard with all these wonderful images and of course bud and jerry, this has been a superb evening and as i said, weren't they wonderful ran contours. -- raconteurs.

[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> you're watching public affairs programming on c-span. created by america's cable tv companies, offered as a public service. in a few moments, senator chris dodd announces that he will not run for re-election. in about 15 minutes, admiral mike mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff on the role of the military. after that, u.s. troops working with local farmers in afghanistan to help bring them closer to the government. later, secretary of state

clinton on how u.s. foreign policy will include expanded use of development and foreign aid. >> american icons, three original documentaries from c-span. now available on d.v.d. a unique journey through iconic homes of the three branches of american government. see the exquisite detail of the supreme court. go beyond the velvet ropes of public tours of the white house, america's most famous home, and explore the history, art, and architecture of the capitol. american icons a three-disk d.v.d. set, $24.95 plus shipping and handling. one of the many items available at c-span.org/store. >> connecticut senator chris dodd will not run for re-election, he's been in office since 1981 and has had a major

role in the health care debate. he spoke in his home state a little less than 10 minutes. >> ruining the neighborhood here with all these people gathered around. happy new year and good morning to everyone. over the six years over the past three decades, i've invited you to join me at our home to share in my decision to seek election and re-election to the united states senate. on each of these occasions, i have begun my remarks by observing that every important jour nee -- journey in life begins and ends at home. today is no exception. what is different about today, however is not to announce the beginning of yet another campaign, for the united states senate, but rather to announce that after 35 years of representing the people of connecticut in the united states congress, i will not be a candidate for re-election this november. i want to begin these very brief remarks by expressing my deepest gratitude to the wonderful

people of connecticut for the remarkable privilege of being elected eight times over the past four decades to our national assembly. you've honored me beyond words with your confidence. let me quickly add that there have been times when my positions and actions have caused some of you to question that confidence. i regret that. it's equally important that you know that i have never waivered in my determination to do the best job for our state and our nation. i love my job as your senator. i always have. still do. however this past year has raised some challenges that insisted i take stock of my life. other the past 12 months, i've managed four major piece of legislation through the united states congress, served as chair and acting chair of two major senate committees, placing me at the center of the two most important issues of our time, health care and reform of financial services.

i lost a beloved sister in july, and in august, ted kennedy. i battled cancer over the summer and in the midst of all of this, found myself in the toughest political shape of my career. let me be clear. i'm very aware of my present political standing here at home in connecticut. but it's equally clear that any certain prediction about an election victory or defeat nearly a year from now would be observed. strange as it may sound, i'm not confident that i would be standing here today making this announcement, if these situations had not occurred. none of these events or circumstances, either individually or collectively, is the cause for my decision not to seek re-election. yet together these challenges have given me pause, to take stock and to ask questions that too few of us in elected public life ever do. why am i running?

on a cold morning, two weeks ago tomorrow, i asked myself that very question. in the early frigid dawn of december 24, christmas eve, with snow piled high along the streets of our nation's capital, i cast one of the most important if not the most important, votes of my years in the united states senate. a bill to fundamentally reform the health care system of our nation. and hour later, i was standing on the virginia hillsideed a arlington cemetery, where ted kennedy rests, along with his brothers in eternity, as he is in history, wishing that i could have seen the look in teddy's eyes as the united states senate took that historic step an hour before. i thought about the dozens of fine public servants, democrats and republicans, who have joined me in serving connecticut over the course of my career at the

local, state, and national level. i thought about the countless connecticut families, ordinary people with extraordinary courage and spirit whose lives have touched me over the years and whose stories have profoundly affected my decisions in the united states senate. i thought about the dozens of patriotic senators with whom i had the privilege of serving in an institution i dearly love. i have been a connecticut senator for 30 years. very proud of the job i've done and the results delivered. but none of us is irreplaceable. none of us are indy spenceable. those who think otherwise are dangerous. the work -- we work to make our nation a more perfect union began long before i was elected to the senate and will go on long after i am gone. our country is a work in progress and i am confident it always will be. that's why i thought about -- what's what i thought about as i stood on the highlightside in

arlington on christmas eve morning. that's what i falked about with jackie over this holiday sb and that's how i came to the conclusion that in the long sweep of american history, there are moments for each elected public official to step aside and let someone else step up. this is my moment to step aside. there'll be time to reflect in more detail on the years i've spent in public service. there'll be time to celebrate victories and mourn setbacks and share laughs and memory and to thank profusely the talented, tireless, and numerous staffers, many of whom are here today, who have made my senate work possible. but that time is not now. my service isn't over. i still have one year left on my contract to the people of connecticut. one year from this week, our state will have a new united states senator. in the meantime, we have important work to do. so a few closing thoughts.

i believe in bipartisan solutions, but i also believe you can only achieve those results with vibrant, robust, and civil partisan debate. i'm a democrat and very, very proud of my party's contributions to the vitality and strength of america. i would never have had the opportunity to serve in the congress had i not had the support and backing of my political party in connecticut over these years. i appreciate the passionate party activists who have never, ever faltered in their support of my efforts. i want to say thank you to my family for their tolerance of yet another generation of our family in the political arena. i'm especially indebted to jackie for her fierce loyalty, unyielding commitment to fairness and her unlimited capacity of empathy to the needs of others. she has truly been my anchor in these stormy political waters. there's nothing more pathetic in

my view who announces they're only leaving public life to spend more time with their family. the result of this announcement today i hope will create that opportunity. but it's not the reason for my decision. i'm a very late arrival to fatherhood as many of you know, and i'm told repeatedly by some of you here today that these young children of miney grole -- will grow up very fast system of while these young ladies are not the reason for my decision, they'll be an incredible benefit to the choice i make today. on this the sixth of january, the epiff phi -- epiphany, 2010, i'm driven by the same passions that motivated me to try my hand at politics so many years ago and just as i've encouraged the people of connecticut, i'm looking to the future with a spirit of optimism and confidence and finding once again that those of you gathered here today and to the people across this great state of ours, i thank you immensely for the opportunity you've given me to

serve. i thank you all very, very much. [applause] 66 >> two more senators have announced they'll not seek re-election this year. david hawkings joins us to talk about the announcements by chris dodd and byron dor gum. why did he say he'll be retiring from the senate? >> what he said is less important than what is true about his political future, which is that it was fading fast. he's had one of the most

remarkable declines in popularity of any senior democrat in modern american history. he'd gone from a virtual institution in connecticut to probably the most, absolute i this -- absolutely the most endangered democrat on the ballot among those seeking re-election this year. he'd had a remarkable decline that paradoxcally began when he decided to run for president in 2008 and actually thought he was politically safe in moving his family from connecticut to iowa that started the voters of connecticut getting a little bit annoyed with him. his sticking up for the insurance industry as chairman of the banking committee is being perceived, fairly or unfairly, as sticking up for big corporate bonuses for some of the companies that received federal bailout money. all these things combined to really put his career very much on the line. >> how does that change the face of the senate race in 2010 in connecticut? who are the likely democratic and republican candidates? >> well the democratic candidate

seems at this hour almost certain to be richard blumen that will, who has been a rising star in the connecticut democratic party for 30 years. he's somebody who's seen as an obvious statewide candidate, he's the state attorney general, he's never before actually run for statewide office, always thought this was not the right time. now it's the right time, connecticut is a democratic state a viable democrat should ve, not no trouble, then a viable time holding the seat than dodd would. the republicans have two viable candidates planning to run against chris dodd, one is rod simmons, a former congressman who lost a few years ago, the other is linda mcmahon, an executive of the world wrestling federation. she is willing to spend $30 million of her own money on the race. there's also an opening -- open

governor's race in connecticut so one of those might decide to run for governor. >> to north dakota, byron dorgen said he'll step down, what were his reasons? >> his was more surprising. he was giving every indication that he wanted to run again for a fourth term. we had a profile of him in our magazine a few weeks ago in which he expressed, however, some frustration with the way things were going in washington, not only partisanship and the combative nature of things but also he was somewhat of a critic of the obama administration and said the focus on health care and climate change was misplaced and they should be focused on jobs. he's a young enough man he can retire from the senate and have another career. he's written some book, he likes

to lecture, he would be well courted for lobby, he has a lot of options in front of him. >> is north dakota a possible republican pickup in the senate? >> it absolutely is. in a sense, the two that we're talking today, one has gone from leans republican to likely democrat and this other one from heavily favored democrat to, in north dakota to probably republican. the very, very popular governor of north dakota, like richard blumen that'll we were talking about, he's been talked about as a senatorall candidate for many year he won his third term as governor with 75% of the vote. he with the seat open, he'll probably be talked into doing it. >> are you expect manager surprise announcements? >> i am in the, but i guess that's what makes them surprises. it's late in the calendar for senators to pull these surprises. it doesn't do your own party any

favors if they have to start recruiting candidates and raising money at this relatively late stage. >> and how do 60 votes for the democrats shape up? >> it's a safe bet that harry reid or his successor as own race, will not have 60 votes to work with. it seems a good prediction that republicans will pick up at least a couple of seat this is fall. >> david hawkings, managing editor of "c.q. weekly." >> now joint chiefs of staff chairman admiral mike mullen at the washington center for interns he spoke about the role of the military and answered questions about the military life and the fight against terrorism. this is a littleless than an hour.

>> our program continues with a distinguished visitor, admiral mike mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, principal military advisor to the president of the united states. admiral mullen has a long and distinguished career, he served in a capacity of great responsibility at the naval academy, he had operational experience with nato, but the thing that actually struck me most about his resume was the fact that he was the skipper of three u.s. navy warships. you think to yourself, now, what's the connection between being on the bridge of a fleet oiler or cruiser or a destroyer and being the principal military advisor to the president of the united states? i think it's this. that if you're on the bridge of a u.s. navy warship, you're a person in whom reposes ultimate

responsibility and accountability. if you have a cross-eyed steersman who puts your ship into another vessel, if you run up on a sand bar, it's all your responsibility, you're held accountable for it. this high level of accountability and responsibility is the kind of virtue that someone like admiral mullen brings to this incredibly important office. the responsibilities are closal. i'm sure there are -- are colossal. i'm sure there are time when he thought to himself, i'm not sure i signed up for this cruise. he has been unique among recent chairmen of the joint chief of staff as being remarkably accessible to the public. we're thrilled to have him here and i'd like you to welcome admiral mike mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff.

[applause] >> if you don't mind, i'll try to work it from here. just doing a little preplation and -- preparation and listening to the president talk about who you are and what you're rooking at over the course of a few week, it's an exciting curriculum. i'll talk about a few things for maybe 15 minutes, 15 to 20 minutes and then open it up to questions. i'm particularly excited and delighted to be able to talk to so many of you who are so young. there isn't a day that gos by in what i do that i don't think about the challenges that we have just now, but the challenges that are out there for you as you become leaders in

our country and i applaud your being here, i applaud the fact that you are participating, and debating and discussing difficult issues. i understand this week it's the presidency and congress and next week it's the presidency and the media. and that encompasses a whole lot of things. what i'll try to do in the next few minutes is tell you where the military fits into all of that. just because you are at the age you are, i'll tell you a little bit about my background. i want to encourage you to keep doing what you're doing in the first place, secondly, keep your options open, because you never know what life is going to bring you. i was -- there's -- isn't there a group from san diego here? that wasn't a very big round of applause. and i know the weather here is not what it was in stage.

i grew up in los angeles. actually grew up in the movie business, having nothing to do with the military. i was the oldest of five kids, my dad told me, you want to get an education, go someplace that is going to pay for it system of i had a sponsor that kind of headed me toward annapolis and i got on a plane in june of 1964 and went to the naval academy, basically without a clue. we didn't travel back then to do either advance trips or look at a dozen colleges before you go to college. so it was the first time i'd actually been across the country. i tell the story, this is a california story, showing up at the end of june, it's 90 degrees, 90% humidity, i was scratching my head wondering how people could live in that kind of humidity. because in california, humidity

is not in the dictionary in california. so met that day and it's still very much in my mind, met tremendous people, my classmates from all over the country and i hadn't been broadly exposed to that point, great people and from that moment on, which was a long time ago, i've never looked back. certainly with expectations to be able to contribute to this profession and to contribute to the world and they grew over time. but again, i had no expectations that i would certainly be -- ever be in a job like this. that was a time, tough time for us as a country. it was vietnam. a lot of social turmoil, growing up in those times was both very educational and instructive, very instructive, to me because in particular in this job, senior jobs recently, this job i

had right now, we're in two wars that you very much are aware of, and that time back then, in my own experience in vietnam, the first war i was in, impacted me and influences how i think about things today. the specifics of that are, that was a war where the american people evolved to a point where they didn't support our men and women in uniform. when these wars started, one of the first things i alerted on was the need and to try to have an understanding for the american people supporting men and women in uniform and their families. and in fact, the american people across the full spectrum support our men and women in uniform. and that has been incredibly important and also satisfying to me. because the military really does carry out the will of people from the standpoint of what we do. we certainly get our directions from the president.

and if we don't have the support of the people, which we didn't back then, and i remember that as if it were yesterday, it makes it almost impossible. so there are many lessons like that that come from my youth when i was about your age, a little older, maybe, in terms of how it impacts on me today. got to see the world, it wasn't as global as we are now. we certainly weren't connected, i spent my time in countries all over the world, learned a lot, grew, was given responsibility, and continued to evolve over time into jobs of increasing responsibility, again with no expectation. in fact, i was going to leave at 20 years, and then decided to stay on a couple of mores, then i was going to leave at 25, 30, 35, here i am. you don't know what's going to happen. doing as much preparation as you're doing now for life as it comes at you, not burning

bridges, keeping your options open is vital. i applaud what you're doing and what you're tried -- tied into here trying to understand. our government in particular in these enormously challenging times. we are much more global, much more connected, much closer to the students your age around the world. not that they would even just necessarily come here, because they do that, but also because of the ties that we have through communications and the internet and where we're focused now, where we haven't been in the past. so you live an enormous -- you live in enormously challenging times and one of the reasons i focus on you is buzz you will lead this effort in the near future in way ts that i think many of you don't know. how does the military fit in all this? i came to this job two years ago

and laid out three big priority, we were in the middle of two wars, when i took over it was the height of the surge in iraq, very difficult decisions, very difficult times, and have moved forward from that time to where we are right now, where we really shifted our main eeffort from iraq to afghanistan. i looked at sort of three big pieces, the first piece was the broader middle east. heavily focused on iraq, afghanistan, what was, what became, because it was part of my education, the focus on afghanistan could not be limited to just afghanistan. it had to include pakistan. i think i've been to pakistan -- i've been to pakistan one time before i took this job over and i've just made my 14th trip over the last couple of years, to just give you an indication of the need to understand, my view is thed any to understand, the need to be there and try to see

challenges through other people's eyes. and not just take the american view, from here in washington or quite frankly in iowa city, iowa, or wherever you might live and to try to understand these problems looking at it from another country's perspective. and a critical country in a critical part of the world. certainly the focus on the broader mideast included the focus on the gulf area, iran, and the challenges that i describe to sort of go from tai run to beirut. it includes south asia. i've learned a lot, i think we all have, very instructive to me, has been this -- the policy debate that we had late last year for almost three months about the strategy for afghanistan and pakistan. the president made his decision and spoke in early december last year and now we're in the execution phase of that. that's not because that was an

easy decision, in fact i felt it was a courageous decision and i'm very supportive of it and we have the resources we need now to turn it around in afghanistan. come -- when we got to last summer, frankly, it was my view, not a lot of people in america really had focus on afghanistan, knew much about afghanistan, because we've been so heavily focused on iraq since 2003. and i encourage the debate and i think we should always have a debate on issues of this magnitude in this country. we did, the president made his decision as i indicated, so now, certainly over the next couple of years, we're into executing that strategy. it's been -- spending an awful lot of time on that. i put my best people in positions to lead in that, general mcchrystal will be the cig ha in ature individual -- the signature individual there, but there will be many others he has put in place to -- for this

strategy. putting my best people on my number one priority is an absolute requirement. in the end, so much of what we do is going to boil down -- it boils down to leadership and it boils down to how leaders lead, how they lead in times of changing, and you are going to grow up learning leadership as things change. when i grew up, we sought a status quo, not a status quo but a steady state. we wanted to get to a point where it ran by itself. those days are far behind us. you're going to grow up, you're growing up learning leadership in a time of change, constant change, across every spectrum, whether it's education, the cyberworld, the cultural world, the language world, and i would encourage every one of you to figure out how to speak a second

language. how many of you do? what languages? >> italian and spanish. >> did you learn all of those in america? i would just encourage that. it's not just the language skills. it's the cultural understanding that comes along with it. there's going to be more and more of that requirement. one of the things i learned very early in my career, that people all over the world appreciate us as americans, actually, anybody, but in my case, obviously, as an american, taking the time to learn a little bit about their language and trying to speak a little bit of their language, even if it's just yes, no, thank you, nice to see you, good day, good night they really do appreciate that. because they actually move from that to a level of, they

believe, respect that you have for them because you've taken the time to do that for them, working to understand them from their perspective. i would just encourage that. so we continue back to sort of where we fit in right now, a big part of the next couple of years, obviously, is the execution of this afghanistan and pakistan strategy. this is not just focused on afghanistan, even though that's where we have the majority of our troops. and we're not there alone, there are 4 other countries that have combat troops in afghanistan. nato, which is the -- the alliance which makes up most of those 42 other countries, added another 7,000 troops in proportion to what they have there right now. there's a big international and diplomatic and political and developmental and economic plan that's associated with executing this strategy over the next couple of years.

i really believe we can turn the insurgency around, it starts with security. another universal standard for me, i traveled in countries over many, many decades now throughout the world, parents want to raise their kids to a higher standard of living and they'd like to do it in a secure environment. the basis for all this, quite frankly is economics. and that is global economics, you know where we are right now, coming out of very, very difficult financial crisis, not just in our own country but globally as well. that impacted all of us, including those of us in the military. broadly, the first big priority when i took this job, the broader mideast, and almost 2 1/2 years later it continues to be at the top of the list. the second is, that we have deployed our forces in ways that

we never imagined we could, quite frankly in 2000. our army in particular, up to that point, was a garrison force they lived on bases. they only went overseas or were deployed in a time of war. our army is becoming like our navy and marine corps we deploy them, bring them back and deploy them again. almost like a ship or a group of ships, which we've done in the navy and marine corps forever. that's the evolution of change in our army. our air force has become much the same. we're a much different force than we were eight different years ago. back to this change and what does it mean? our major units, our brigade combat teams, which are roughly 3,500, 4,000 soldiers, those teams have -- are now the ones

who went out first in 2003, they're about to start the fifth the employment. those deemployments are six months, eight months, 12 month, 15 months, on that order. one of the ways i tell story and the challenges that are associated with this is, if i were a 10-year-old and my dad was a soldier in 2001, he has gone to war several times, been gone an extraordinary amount of time over those -- over the time when i was between 10 and 18 and i just went to college. the question is, how well do i know my dad? or how el well does my dad -- or mom, because women have deployed at a very, very high pace as well. that speaks to the challenges that face us in terms of the overall health of the force. multiple deployments, stress on individuals, stress on families, dramatically increased suicide

rates across all the services, not just our ground force, the ma reap corps and army who bear the brunt of these conflict, and we've taken significant steps to address those issues. and where families certainly have been apriority for us, as long as i've been in the military, they have taken on a unique, a new and unique and much more fully integrated part of us as a military. we cannot, we would not be able to be where we are, it's the best military i've seen in the 40-plus years i've been serving, and we could not succeed without unbelievable family support. even given the strains, they have been extraordinary. we have taken significant steps in our organizations to make sure we have better programs, better support, better medical care, increased benefit, education benefits for example. those kind of things.

i think that will have to continue. as we look forward, after these wars, i think the family piece of this will become more and more important over time. an awful lot of focus in this for my time, in this secondary. we have put our people through such incredible challenges and yet they are resilient, i told you they're the best i've ever seen. they are resilient, as military members and the families have shown an incredible resilience as well. the third thing that i laid out a couple of years ago and still focus on is the rest of the world. the wars certainly focus in iraq and afghanistan and pakistan and that part of the world. but there are challenges we face globally, economically as well as security wise. whether it's the entire pacific basin, which i think is, you know, going to be a sustaining economic engine for the globe,

it's the emergence of challenges in africa and africa as a continent with great riches, great people, and enormous challenges. whether it's famine or disease, or incredible poverty. and those are not problemmers in united states to solve. i think these are problems for the world community to focus on. even, and i mention i'm from southern california, i was raised at a time where essentially i was trained to look east an west. even being from southern california, i have not been heavily engaged with mexico, or with latin america, quite frankly. that's another part of the world, i think in our own -- in our own hemisphere, you will that we as americans are going to have to focus more and more on as partners. there's another, particularly with brazil, that's another economic engine, for not just

our hemisphere, but frankly for the globe. so there are, and i -- there are other places in the world that i think we are all going to have to continue to focus on as well. so -- one of the big questions for me right now, that i'm starting to ask, is what's going to happen after these wars? when the operational tempo slows down, what is our mill -- what does our military look like? what will our challenges be for the future? part of our charter is to look out 10 or 20 years to see what we need to do. the first priority being the missions i've got. the second priority making sure we take care of the people the third really is to look to the future in terms of how does it look and knowing in the incredibly challenging times in which we exist, that the military will be a big part of this. the last thing i say about this, i think it's really important, since you're studying the congress and the presidency, is the military needs, is, and needs to, sustain its position

as an apolitical organization. i've been chairman at a time when we changed administrations. we went from a republican administration to a democratic administration. in that regard, as far as the military is concerned, it didn't make a difference. i knew that going in. when i took this job, worked very hard to support a smooth transition, and it was and it was led by then-president bush and now-president obama, who set the tone as leaders are supposed to do for a smooth transition. which we needed in this incredibly difficult time. so -- i'll end where i said i would, on leadership. of all the things you're going to learn, and where i would encourage you to go is take some risks, put yourselfs in positions of responsibility, learn how to lead with people, learn how to lead others who will follow you, and to sustain

those very high standards that are so important as we look at teams, challenges, and the need to idress these challenges. none of us can do it alone. not individually, not one country. how are you going to grow up to be a leader in this marvelously complex world, which i know is challenging, but at the same tame creates huge opportunities for all of us. more than anything else, to try to make it better for those parents, that they can raise their kids in peace and security and to a higher standard of living. those are some additional thoughts. i'd be happy to take your questions. [applause]

>> thank you, sir. i'm part of the rotc, i want to know what steps is the military taking to ensure that information is communicated between the various government agencies, as well as terrorist activities? >> i have seen, since 9/11, an extraordinary change in how we do that. and there have been an inordinate number of people and systems which have evolved, in some cases been put in place, but also evolved to share information much more rapidly. and much manufacturer transparently than we have in the past. we're living in a world, and i think this will -- this is the change i talked about which i think we're going to need to be more transparent, going to need to be more collaborative, not just our government, but across

the board, and in that regard, we've made an awful lot of progress to focus on these terrorists and yet we have -- we certainly have the incident on the 25th of december, which has been front and center, you heard think president speak to that yesterday, specifically, in terms of the mistakesthat were made where we had the data, had the information, the intelligence, we just didn't get it shared. it's not a perfect system. we endepever, there are an awful lot of tremendous people who work to make it perfect, but there's a human factor here that is in play in all these systems and we know, based on this incident and certainly the direction we all received from the president, we have to learn these lessons and make it better. compared to where we were in 2001, to where we are now, we may leap -- we've made leaps in terms of sharing information and

we'll continue to do that. >> hi, thank you for being here. this morning, we just heard from juan zarotti who made comments about the interconnectedness of our world. do you have an opinion on how we can harness the grassroots effort in an effect i have way to fight radical ideology? >> when you say that, my first reaction is, and this will be much more evident in -- as you grow up in terms of your leadership in our country, is the whole world is cyber. what does that mean? the -- it's without boundaries and limits and rules. there's great potential. there's great upside potential for cyberand great downside potential. we have invested a lot of resources, money, and people to get our arms around that.

and so when you talk about clearly how the terrorists use these -- this medium, and they do, we have to actually get ahead of them. a few years ago, we were behind them. they were much more effective. i talked in terms of execution and our ability to react, we were sort of in the reaction mode from a war fighting standpoint, we improved dramatically in terms of our, what i call speed of war. to equal them and in some cases get ahead of them, which is where you want to have the enemy be. you want the enemy behind you. we pursue that and have improved dramatically. they are cunning, capable, agile, flexible, in terms of their capabilities, we know that. we have to continue to improve. we cannot rest on our laurels. clearly this incident on december 25 was a wakeup call as

many people have said. at the same time, there have been a large number of incidents that have been prevented, based on the actions and the systems and the humans who have been involved in preventing another catastrophic attack after 9/11. again, not perfect, but more than anything else, when you ask that, i think about cyber and we -- this gos back to, this is something we can't do alone, we have to do it with other countries. there are very significant cyber threats out there that need to be addressed. >> thank you. >> good morning. in december, obama announced he'd be sending 30,000 more troops to afghanistan and he mentioned a withdrawal time of 18 months. do you think the taliban can be defeated in that time and what would be the main strategy to accomplish this? >> the key in the next 18 months

is to reverse the momentum of the insurgency. the insurgency has dramatically increased in its abilities over the last three years, 2006 to 2009. that's why those troops are so important, because of where the insurgency is, to create security in key population centers, which in the end will allow us to develop, create job, and in fact in the long run have the insurgency virtually eliminated in that country, and it's a huge challenge. the president didn't set a time line for withdrawal. what he did was say, we'll start to transition responsibility for security to the afghan security forces, in particularring their army and police, starting in july of 2011. and focusing on that date, and we will clearly do that, and i believe we can do that, but it

is based -- it is based on conditions at the time, so where, how much, what the pace is, that will be determined by the conditions at the time, we're very focused on that. right now, in the course of the next year, it is to get our troops into place as rapidly as we can. .

>> the other reason than july, 2011 was so important and it was the date i strongly supported is we will know how this is going. we will have our marines, in particular, down sell for three fighting seasons. they went in and summer of 29 -- 2009. 2010, 2011. we will know if this is working or not. if this is working, as i think it will be, we will press forward. if it is not working by then, we will have to significantly change our strategy. >> thank you. >> first of all, thank you for coming and good morning to you and good morning to everybody out there watching across the country. my question is this. yemen has obviously land itself and the news over the past two. five weeks. what is the battle plan for yemen?

is it air strikes and that kind of thing? is it moves on the ground, is a diplomatic? what is the battle plan for them? >> i have had a concern about yemen for well over the last year or so. the policy debate that we had with respect to afghanistan and pakistan is focus on eliminating the safe havens which are now in pakistan. originally they were in afghanistan. and making sure afghanistan is not in a position where they can host those safe havens in the future. so in that regard, it is very focused on those safe havens. i have had said that begins concerns -- civic and concerns about the growing threat in yemen -- to begin concerns about the growing threat in yemen, as well as somalia and other areas of the world i would call potential failed states. we have been focused on this for a significant period of time.

we have worked on the military side in particular to support a growing temeyemeni armed forces capability. it has been focused very much and the last two. five weeks, we've been focused on it for a considerable period of time. a sovereign country. we all recognize that. so we are going to continue to support their government. in it -- in the execution of their strategy to eliminate terrorists. which is where we are right now. >> thank you very much. >> good morning, admiral. i would like to ask -- >> who won last night? >> i will one. -- iowa won. with the health -- health care bill on the verge of passing, what is the department of veterans affairs to do to make

sure that the military personnel are in the forefront of getting medical care? and as a side note, how military personnel -- our military personnel are struggling to receive their g.i. bills on time. here it seems, with the job market the way it is, a lot more military personnel, after retiring or getting out of the service, are trying to make their way to get their degrees to find a job. they are not being taken care of the way they should be. >> when the health care debate started in the united states, the health care plan for the military and for veterans was taken off the table. so it is not part of the current health care debate. that said, part of my life in recent years has also been in budgeting. and our health care costs inside the military have also sky

rocketed. we are going to have to figure out how to get control of that. otherwise, we will go broke. and there are a lot of people working to do just that. that said, i have seen the military health care program in the last dozen years grow to a point, mature to a point where it is the gold standard. and i talked to an awful lot of our young military members and their families about this, because this benefit is phased huge benefit for all of us. -- is a huge benefit for all of us. we work much more closely with the veterans affairs administration that we have and the past. because these are the same pressure as people who served on active fleet -- active duty, then leave and move over to the v.a. we have a system which historical 8 -- the pentagon

handles certain things and then we turned over to the v.a., and then we forget about you and then the v.a. turned over to the rest of america. we are not seamlessly organized. in particular, for me, as a priority, i am focused on those who have been wounded -- families of fallen, the visible and invisible woolens of these wars, -- wounds of these wars. the mental health issues which are said to begin. i have a great deal of equity, because these are my people. we are working hard to make all of that work better to your second point -- to your second point about that yet built. it is a great bill. -- the g.i. bill. it is a dramatic increase from the bill we had up until that point.

since 1968, i have had sailors, soldiers, coastguardsman, they come into the military for lots of reasons. one is typically training and two is to look to the future with a better education. so i applaud this bill. it is one that that is an investment in america, not just in those who serve, because i think the payback for that will be many, many fall. i think what you are seeing in terms of the newness of it is the v.a. struggling with the number of applicants, having systems in place they can execute those applications and get those benefits out as rapidly as possible. i do not know all the details. but i know that secretary shinseki is focused on this. he understands the value that the virginia is working hard to eliminate that bad -- -- that the v.a. is working hard to

eliminate that backlog. >> thank you. >> good morning. looking for to say the next half century, there has been talking of a merchant models of warfare -- asymmetric versus symmetric, and on stage, versus state. in what -- in what way are those two models different? how do we strike a balance between them? >> one of my senior military friends at my level talks about this in terms of warfare is warfare. there are different kinds of warfare, different aspects, but we should never underestimate that we are or potentially could be at war in these areas. so there are principles which are the same, but there are also emerging requirements and capabilities that i think we have got to further put into

better balance inside the pentagon specifically. i would highlight one. an area we call a regular warfare versus conventional warfare. -- irregular warfare versus conventional warfare. secretary gates has invested a lot to our resources to improve our capacity in irregular were fair. we were not a counterinsurgency force before 2006. we have become the best in the world. that takes different capabilities, and we will have to sustain that capability. and yet, i worry about, when i talk about the future, that you have many times occurred people fought -- talk about fighting the last war. at some point, this is going to be the last war. is that the right word to prepare for for the future? to some degree, that capability will have to exist, but we will

have to continue to evolve. i would describe the characteristics of what we have to have in the military in the future over the next 20, 30, 40 years as adaptable, flexible, legal, precise, mental footprint, minimal collateral damage -- middle footprint, broadly engage in terms of prevented. i would much rather prevent a war that fight a war. that it is represents an opportunity to have relationships which hopefully it would cumulatively at up to a point where leaders would make the decision to not go to war as opposed to go to war. right now, heavy focus on the ir regular side, a few years ago it was at symmetric and asymmetry. there were always the symmetries. i am always looking for symmetry's i can take advantage

of with respect to the enemy. we have done that and we have got some. that goes back to what i said earlier about just the change that is occurring, from where we were just a few years ago to where we are right now. >> thank you, sir. >> i just wanted to note with incidents like what to place on december 25, of much impact would it have on u.s. strategies in iraq, afghanistan and other terrorist hotbeds'? >> it is probably too soon to tell with respect to that. certainly, there is the concern that this would bring more, and generate more support from young males who might be on that -- on the fence about what they might do with their lives. in the long run, to get at this terrorist challenge is going to be about how we influence those decisions. if i am a male, a muslim male of

that age if you will, and i do not have the job, and i have not had an education, what do i decide to do with my life? that is the long-term aspect of this. i think that can only be fixed through improved economic conditions in certain parts of the world, governments would provide opportunities as opposed to situations that become fertile ground. that is why i talk about the failed stapes before, which is fertile ground for these kinds of individuals. it is too soon to tell, to understand the impact. we have a lot of work to do in our own government award from the mistakes that we made with respect to that incident, but i think it is too soon to tell the impact it will have on the enemy. >> thank you. >> good morning.

my question for you is, recently the obama administration came under some fire for their insistence that the guantanamo detainees be tried in new york. given your 42 years of military experience, do you proceerceive that military tribunals of perhaps a better equipped to handle these sorts of trials? -- rather than civilian courts? >> i think what you have seen in the debates about that decision and other decisions of the administration -- they announced yesterday were not going to send any more detainees back to yemen in the immediate future. i have for years believed, and i

do to this day, that we need to close guantanamo. but you can see in the totality of what detention is, and this is but one more example, the complexity of the issues. i am actually not involved in those decisions. it is back to what the military does. this is a justice department p urview, and it was the decision made by our attorney general. i leave it that. there are views on both sides of that decision and i understand that. more important, it speaks to the difficulty of dealing with the kind of war that we are in with respect to these individuals. it goes back to what i said earlier -- they have no boundaries, they have no rules, right up through killing as many innocent people as possible.

what is the right way to deal with them, both in the near term as well as in the long term? >> thank you. >> thank you for speaking with us. in your initial presentation, you talked about one of the préval principles of your leadership style is to -- of her leadership style is to look ahead. yesterday you had a meeting with president obama about national security. as chairman of the joint chiefs, what did you take from that meeting and how does that play out to looking forward as we move into afghanistan, possibly looking at yemen and other national security issues? >> i think this summary of it was very well laid out by the president, is said, we have made a mistake. we have the intelligence. we did not connect the dots, and we need to make sure that does not happen again.

and i normally do not get into any kind of details. in fact, that aspect of it, and it goes back to the information- sharing question that was asked earlier, we have systems which are much better, but we also have a massive amount of data. massive amount of information. so how do you create systems and how to inject the human factor where it pulls up that critical information? i believe that in the future, i can talk about afghanistan and pakistan and iraq, but beyond that, we are living in a world where we need to understand, completely understand our environment, and then look for anomalies. look for change. and focus on the change. and that is a whole different way of thinking about how, in my world, how warfare is both

prevented and executed in terms of what those requirements are. at the heart of this, is the rig -- the need for different agencies. this issue, in particular, different agencies in our government to exchange information on a timely basis to surface this kind of problem ahead of time so that we make sure it does not happen. >> thank you very much. >> good morning. given the events of december 25, there has been talk of increasing security measures nationally. and that has raised concerns of personal privacy. so how do we plan to balance these ted -- two interest? >> i think that is the challenge that any leader has and certainly the challenge this administration as well as our congress has with respect to the laws and regulations we have as a country. we as a country value our

privacy. and it is a very critical part of who we are as a country, we have been into we are. and i think we will be in the future. at the same time, the president's for rest responsibility is to make sure -- foremost responsibility is the security of the american people. every president has said that. we have to look at the times to see what actions need to be taken and even what changes need to be taken with respect to these kinds of laws and regulations. and that is a healthy debate to have. it is a healthy debate for the country, quite frankly. and it is ongoing right now. i would not be able to tell you how that is going to turn out. but i think the tension between these two boro-- i think it is t

just real, it is important in that we have that debate to determine what the right level is in terms of the kinds of roles you were talking about and whether we should change them or not. >> thank you. >> good morning. in the past two weeks, we witnessed breaches of security in detroit and at newark airport. this continues to point out to expose u.s. weaknesses in our defense. what actions are we taking to test our defense systems as opposed to only finding out on an exception or failure basis? >> iowa spoken to that to some extent already. there -- i have spoken to that to some extent already. there have been an unbelievable amount of action since 911 that have put people and systems in

place to address that. if i was to speak -- if i were to speak but to the five americans picked up in pakistan the other day as visible examples of that effort, and there have been many more that we do not know about, quite frankly. and i applaud that effort and i applaud the outcomes. i think, if you or i on the 12th of september, 2001, would say it would be 90 years before we would have anything like this or we would go that long without another major incident, at least from my perspective, i would have had doubt that he could have done that. there has been a great deal that has been achieved. i talked earlier about the lessons. i think we have got to learn these. it does have to do with sharing information and with a huge bureaucracies, and we collect an

extraordinary amount of data. and how we do that in share that and how quickly can we turn that actionable intelligence or information into that kind of action that would be prevented ative? >>s so we are learning a great deal as a result of this and we will make changes accordingly. the president is not patient about this at all. these changes need to be made immediately. >> thank you. >> good morning. you mentioned that there are programs in place for military families that are facing deployment, and two briefly mentioned education. as a feature educator and somebody who hails from fort bragg and is seen the stress of these families, what specifically is being done for

these families facing deployment as it pertains to education? >> part of, talk about a couple things, part of the gi bill, and this was initiated out of the pentagon and supported by the president, is to put in legislation the ability to transfer of benefits that are of the gi bill to spouses and dependent children. that is the first time that had ever been done. that is a significant step. several organizations, including the pentagon, that work to make it easier for dependents who move from one state to another to transfer into those school systems without going through a horrendous amount of work and red tape in order to get in. thirdly, states which give, and there have been many of them in recent years, that give in state tuition to individuals who get

transferred, members to get transferred, to focus on that aspect of education. there are programs focused on specification. that each service has. how can we emphasize that and improve that? it goes back to what i said earlier. the foundation for a bright future is most often in education. so we realize this. i want to reemphasize what i said earlier. i have not figured out all the ways. i just know it is dramatically different than it was 10 years ago, the criticality of including, throughout our discussions, including the family and where they fit it is a readiness issue. -- it is a readiness issue. we need to be ready with our airplanes, our ships and our tanks. we need to be at a certain level

of training and readiness in the world that we are in right now in our units as well. a healthy family unit is a readiness issues. and one that is not, it degrades our readiness. we have changed how we look at families in that regard to include many programs, leader- focused on family needs in ways that we had not thought of 10 years ago. and we will have to continue to do that as a priority for the future. >> thank you. >> ever muladmiral mullen, thanu very much. [applause]

zulu bravo, thank you for a job well done. >> good luck. >> afghanistan's logar province is an agricultural region of located south of the city of kabul. david axe was imbedded with the u.s. army in october-november. he followed u.s. troops as they worked to extend its services to the farmers of the area and connect them with the afghan government. >> it is a district, which means a subdivision of the province. there are about 100,000 people in the province. it is a farming community, so 80% of the folks there grow wheat or corn or raise animals, goats and sheep and cows. traditionally, they grow much of the food that people in kabul

eat. and that is connected to kabul by all road, about a 50-mile, two-hour drive. the troops there represent reinforcements, because a year ago, there were 100 americans in all love our province. now there are 1003. 0. -- in logar. no local development work. no training up the afghans. now they have enough troops to do some work. the colonel in the province from the 10th mountain division decided he was going to identify the population centers in the province that are most amenable to working with the coalition, to take advantage of that favorable attitude and get in there and do development work and cement that positive attitude. he put most of his troops there in the most friendly population

center. the idea is you wants to do good work there so that word spreads to some of the less-friendly communities that, if you look -- if you get along with the coalition, you get stuff. he calls it his extreme makeover afghanistan addition program. >> which the villages are the ones that need the power for the generator? [speaking foreign language] >> part of the extreme makeover is trying to improve the everyday way of life. and some of the civilians that live in this process, we have been able to do this because we established a security bubble. this is a location where we have had a very good response from the local population. in receiving us and receiving the a and p, the army and police forces within afghanistan, as

well as a general good-natured towards the government. within this security bubble, we are providing basic services, just a small, like a micro-grant of money. through the cerp program we take that little bit of money, we ask them what they need the most and they tried to identify what their basic needs are. it could be as simple as painting of building. getting a generator. it is something very small and extremely effective. and the province, being this fertile crescent, this fertile area of agriculture, it is perfect for this kind of work. >> now you are in the process of expanding your security bubble and trying to reach into communities where you do not have a large presence. what is your vehicle for doing that? >> it is military patrolling. it is envy.

what it is is we showed that -- the villagers to the villages we have been to that have given us a warmer welcome and we are rewarding them for doing a good job. these other villagers which are currently being partially influenced by us and partially influenced by the enemy, so that creates a fence-sitter situation. we want these guys to pick a side. you pick the government of afghanistan or you pick the tell them. -- the taliban,. . >> everybody in the province is a farmer or if they are not forming themselves, they work for a farmer, they work on farm tools. in one way or another, everybody in the province is associated with agriculture. it is one of the breadbasket provinces of afghanistan. if you are going to reach out to afghans in logar, you have got

to speak farmer. what the u.s. army has done is turned the company-sized army outpost into this sort of odd, agricultural commune dressed in military fatigues. the local captain hosts the these meetings of the local agricultural associations, trying to get the provinces farmers talking to each other so they can cooperate on things like shipping their goods up to kabul for sale. the troops in this province spent most of their time conducting surveys. they write out in the morning or afternoon. they put up with afghan farmers and they sit there and talk to them and kill all forms. >> does he have a few minutes to talk to us? >> the idea is to find out what afghans in logar really needed

and to provide that. the way it was described to me is that so much reconstruction is in iraq and in afghanistan is providing things that the local populace is not actually need. instead, the coalition provides the things they think people would need. they never bothered to ask. so there is a fallout of school- building going on or rolled building going on. -- a whole lot of school- building or road building going on. in communities that do not need it. one key, and it seems simple is just ask the local populace, what do you really need? what can we as the afghan government and the u.s.-led coalition, what can we give you that you cannot give yourself? and give them that. it turns out it is a farm implements in this province. it is advice on growing winter

crops. it is help with greenhouses. it is agricultural stuff. >> [speaking foreign language] >> we are conducting its agricultural and veterinary services -- surveys for the local village outside of our security bubble in the hopes of enticing some of the farmers to come to the district center in the future. if they do, that will give us the chance to show them these are services can provide for them. hopefully, we can turn these villages into pro-coalition areas. >> what are the service for? >> we are asking them what types of crops they have. what type of bader do they use?

do they vaccinate their animals? -- what types of fodder do they use? to get a better understanding of what services they would benefit from and what types of the services they have currently. we will split up into two sections. we will move up here and question these guys. ok. does he have any of this land that is his own, his own acreage that he is in charge of? >> [speaking foreign language] >> he says i have right here. gue>> does he also have animals that he cares for? >> animals?

[speaking foreign language] yes. >> can he tell me how many donkeys, chickens, sheep? >> he says we have nine sheep. >> any donkeys or chickens? >> [speaking foreign language] just sheep. >> ok. i would like to ask him some questions for a survey we are going for the district center. i but like to bring him back to our track so we can conduct the survey. tomorrow or the next day he could come to the district center and we will be running agriculture and veterinary services by the end of the month. i would like to invite him and his friends in the area.

>> [speaking foreign language] >> 5.1. we got one. >> let's go. >> we have a farmer. he will complete the survey. does he rent any of the tools he uses? for farming, does he read any? -- rent any? >> [speaking foreign language] >> what's that? you know what brand means? does he borrow it from someone else to use it? -- you know what rent means? >> [speaking foreign language]

my brother. >> he borrows from his brother. >> while i was in that province, the afghan government opened a new district center. the idea is to concentrate on the afghan police, the afghan army, the u.s.-led coalition, and also the district, local government all in this same compound, just so they can talk to each other and for securities said. it is easy for afghans to know where to go when they have a problem or if they want to seek out the services that local government should provide. the subgovernor a range of big ceremony and invited a bunch of foreign dignitaries and afghan dignitaries to fly down to the province to inaugurate this thing. there was a bunch of

speechifying and a big feast. the u.s. army provided and some czech soldiers provided security. everything went off without a hitch. there is a week tradition of local governments. the more pomp and ceremony you have, the more attention you draw to this thing, it is not like afghans -- they do not take local government for granted. they do not think about it at all. it is a nonentity. their attention needs to be drawn to the fact, you do have a local government. they have this facility. you have a district subgovernor. very important for local government. the whole idea is to create security, to prime local afghans for a better relationship with their government and then to kick that government into gear and have it do things. frankly, it needs a building in

order to do that kind of stuff. >> [speaking foreign language] >> the district subgovernor, ludin, an appointed official, she is the mayor of the district -- he is the mayor. he is supposed to be the go to guy for local government issues. local government does not always work very well. this is not a country -- this country has a lot of governance issues. it is not just corruption at the upper levels of government in kabul. so the army works with him to get him acting like a real mirror, finding out what his people need and doing his best to find the resources and connect the people with the resources -- as mayor. the resources are mostly coming from the u.s. army, but you can put an afghan face on that by

putting him out front. the pentagon partnered with the state department. they send in district support teams, which are roughly a dozen guys, most of them foreign service officers. they are experts in government. the head of the district's support group is a guy named ron barkley. he chases down this of governor -- -- the subgovernor. they are inseparable. wherever the army goes, they go with them. as the army interact with local afghans, ludin is there putting an afghan face sending. iran barkley is there to babysit ludin and encourage him to ask like the mayor. >> the village eldger is going to collect the names of people who still need power. they need to take that list of names to the subgovernor when

they pick up the generator tomorrow. >> it is time that we basically start from the bottom up, the village level, and work up towards government. we have been doing top-down from the central government down to the province. debt is working, but it is slow and there are a lot of hindrances at the provincial level to be able to get the money and the project down to the district. so this whole idea with the district support team is new. state department partners with company commanders, troop level commanders at the district. and we work hand in hand with those guys. they give us the opportunity to be here and we shake hands with the subgovernors and the local village leaders and go from there on the governance and development side. >> you are trying to help local government figure out how to govern. >> that is exactly right. they have great concepts, but it is so limited right now.

we tried to say, what you are doing is good at that level, but let's expand from the village of to the district. let's take the district of to the province. that is where we make our money. that is where people will see is evident that the government of afghanistan is doing something correctly. that there is something happening in their village and their district and it is being done by the government of afghanistan. >> what is your typical day look like? >> it varioes. i try to get out with these guys every day i missed -- missions they have pared debt is the fun part of this. you are not sitting at a computer every day. our district governor comes in on mondays and stays through friday, so we have limited amounts of time. he loves the evenings. we have a meal with him at pretty much every evening. when you are sitting around the sharing of mail, as we are able

to really make inroads as far as understanding what they are trying to accomplish and helping them understand what we are trying to accomplish to build a better afghanistan. >> what are the biggest challenges in your job? >> it is slow, because you realize that if we just tried to do a project on our own, we are limited. we can go out and we can throw -- and do something and have a quick impact, but there is not -- it is not to multiplied. it is like a concentric circle. it stays in one level area. what we are trying to do is take that concentric circle with the subgovernor and expand out into the villages. there are tons of villages in the baraki barak district. you cannot do that without the leaders and the people that he knows. what i have seen just this week is that we have gone from

throwing a project out with limited -- we get it done, but it is limited. this week, i have been able to see that there have been a village elders and leaders that have come in -- 28 to 25 per day that i agree with everything being said, but they are nodding. they realize the government is involved in their lives. they are head of household. they represent another 25 people that word gets out quickly, and i think that is how it is to operate. >> [speaking foreign language] >> corruption is a problem in afghanistan. everybody is correct. not everybody agrees on the definition of corrupt. the subgovernor is a pretty good guy by afghan standards. he is working with americans, talking to his contest --

constituents. if you ask and to react to the idea of corruption in afghanistan, and he will rail and complain and use coliform metaphors and balding fruit and nuts. there are no good all lines in the bunch, he will say. he will cite corruption as the biggest problem in afghanistan. as it turns out, he is getting a cut -- and local company provides gravel, and he arranged that contract and he got $20,000 under the table. he says that is not corruption. that is the way we do business. and i need that money. so, everyone is corrupt. not everyone agrees on what that means. [dog barking] >> who is the mullah? >> my father is.

>> that is why you know so much about it. >> your father needs to work with hakim, so he works with him, and they nominate the project at the district center. >> ok. >> the u.s. army in logar province does a lot of survey work. they not only go out and conduct surveys of farmers, but they also go out and meet up with local clan leaders and with the imams and mullahs at the mosques. just like with farmers, you have to speak a language of the local people. faith his very important to afghans, especially in the countryside. you have to meet them on those terms. the u.s. army is getting out

what they call mosque kits. packages of paint and loudspeakers and carpets, things that afghans could years to refurbish their mosques. what happens is the army will say, we have these kids to offer and we will give you a kit if you agree to certain things. point out to our the local television. aliban. here is my phone number and you can call me anytime. once you have got the local leaders agreeing to certain terms, the army will give them this kit. they ask the afghans to come to the army outpost and pick up the kick themselt. just in terms of reaching out to their own government. they pick it up and take it back. the army waits a few days or a couple weeks and then goes to

see if it has an installed. one thing i found on some of my patrols out to the mosques is that many afghans, these communities are scared to install these, because they believed it will mark them as collaborating with the coalition. so they sit on them. and make a lot of excuses when the army rolls in and says, we would like to see your refurbished mosque. >> we are visiting a blood at the mosqmullah. we gave him every first and hit earlier this mon-- a kit earlie. how are you? we are here to check on the refurbishment kit we provided? >> [speaking foreign language]

>> you give it to the people? which specific person did he give it to? >> [speaking foreign language] >> and is he available to speak with today? ok. and it has he said anything to him regarding when he planned and start to meet -- starting to make improvements to the mosque de? >> [speaking foreign language] he says -- [unintelligible]

[inaudible] >> he will speak to the elders and the people when he decides to start. let him know that as soon as they do start working on the mosque and we see improvements, that is when he has allowed to come to the district center and the stars to receive a monthly payment of 2000 afghani and he can continue to improve it and use it for other things. what are we doing? are we going to visit? tell them we are going to go in. >> separately, we went inside one mosque and sat down. there was some talk of an ied exploding outside of the mosque.

the imam blamed that on the tel then. aliban. that is hard to say. when locals describe them, it could also be a local criminal that wornetowrkwork or al qaeda. >> it does me no good to fix this door or have these windows? if the bomb blows up. if you are looking to the window that is broken at the place where they put the bomb, you should understand that when you see them put in the bomb, you should tell somebody. >> [speaking foreign language] >> at this mosque, the army decided that they were not going to help this mosque until the elders at that mosque turned in the local bad guys. which is sort of the whole point

of providing these kits. it is a character you entice the afghans with this gift but there is a condition. you have got to be on our side. -- it is a carrot. you can see the elders of mulling over that decision. it is not a small thing to turn in a taliban team. these are scary guys. >> i am sure they have a valid point. there moss was damage. but it is a trade. they have to trade us information about what happens on the roads in front of their mosques, otherwise it will be pointless for us to fix it if it is going to get blown up again. they have to take responsibility. if they know who to go to, like going to be subgovernor and express their needs, then that is good. and then they can come to us and express their security needs. and then we can trade off. -- trade it off.

mayor? i am sure that there is definitely a link between that and the police department or they would be taking care of that. it is something to figure out. let's see if the governor was to bring it up with the chief of police heard >> is it legal? >> yes. no. it would be up to those guys to arrest them. we have tried that. it does not work. [chicken clucking]

>> one of the days i was in that province, the u.s. troops and a czech reconstruction team held a veterinary event at the district center. this was an event organized by the americans in collaboration with the subgovernor and with the cooperation of local vets. the army carved out this big space in this compound by the district center. and they set up little lanes and fences and tents. and put out the word to the afghans in surrounding communities that free veterinary services were available. >> basically, we're providing minerals or vitamins for the healthy animals. we are inviting people to bring in their sick animals to provide

basic medicines like deworming. in preparation for winter, they will continue to bring their animals inside their homes for warmth. we want to make sure those animals are healthy through the winter and they do not pass along any diseases to the families. >> how does this fit into your strategy of separating the population from the insurgents? >> it provides another incidents where the government and the government of afghanistan is working to help the people of baraki barak. this brings them into the district center. it is a place for them to receive help. >> we want to help you, but we can get your animals here and we can i give you the medicine to take. you have to bring your animals here. >> [speaking foreign language] >> the gates open at 8:00 in the morning on that day, and it was slow going for the first few hours. just a couple kids showed up or

people showed up without their animals. just not really willing to commit. this was an event the army had hinged their plans on. this is a major are rich program for convincing local afghans that their government can work-- an outreach program. this was a big thing, but it all depended on afghans showing up with their animals and talking to their neighbors and spreading the good word. what happened that we learned later is that, on his own initiative, all local afghan got on local radio and said, vet event, everybody, out right now. i do not know who that man was or in what capacity he was acting, but it was a brave thing to do. he called his name on this and said, everybody get out here. and hundreds of them came. by afternoon, the afternoon had the opposite problem that they had in the morning. instead of nobody being there, everybody was there. families with all of their

animals. the trains of cows and goats and sheep. it got overwhelming. the army had to push everybody back and set up a new check. so they could feed people and their animals in it in his local trickle so it did not overwhelm the veterinarians. that event was a smashing success, mostly due to that one afghan who got on the radio and made an appeal. >> this is a connection between the local people, what we have tried all along is to get governments down at to the lowest level possible. so, this is what these people do. 80% of the population works in agriculture. so that we can show that the government is involved at that level, that they care, and you can see that they are doing that. it was slow at first. once word of mouth gets around the district center is providing

vaccines. the thing about it is is not just an american face. the prt is involved and the local veterinarians are involved. they understand, this is a local. i see this guy in my town and he takes care of my animals. it shows that the governments at its lowest level is working and there is a caring face to it. >> what does it take to get folks involved? it takes convincing. >> it takes a lot of convincing we are lucky to have the radio. safety is always a concern. you cannot advertise weeks in advance. it is just a couple of days. you get key leaders involved so they know. you are talking about a day or two before you let the local population no. know. >> i have one, two -- four. i need one over here.

i want to bring more in, ok? what the long-term effects of this will be is hard to say. it is hard to have metrics for judging the success of this kind of outreach. a lot of animals got treated, but does that mean that 10% more people in baraki barak are now inside of the local government? you cannot count that -- you can count the number of attacks on the coalition. you can count returning refugees, which is an indication of improving perceptions of security. by those metrics, things are getting better. whether you can draw a direct line between of bands like this and the apparently improving security in the province, it is hard to say. but something is working at least temporarily and at least locally on a small scale. >> freelance video journalists

david axe was embedded with the u.s. army in october and november. this was his second trip to afghanistan. to watch more video and interviews, visit c-span.org. in the search box, type a-x-e. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> in a few moments, secretary of state clinton on how u.s. foreign policy will include expanded use of development and foreign aid. in more than an hour, state of the state addresses fight new york governor and governor arnold schwarzenegger of california. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, bob cuscacack looks at the retirements of members of

congress. we will discuss disparities of income is from the american enterprise institute. . . >> i am nancy birdsall, the

president for the center of global development. and we are absolutely delighted to host secretary of state hillary rodham clinton here at the center. we are eager to hear what she will say about the administration's ongoing effort to strengthen u.s. global development policy and programs. it is really great to see this crowd. this is the day of development. i am particularly pleased to have with me here today might to co-founders of the center -- my two co-founders of the center, the light just had the honor of introducing to the secretary. as many of you know, the center is all about improving the policies and practices of the

rich world toward the world of the poor. in the rich world, no country matters more and has more on realize potential to make a difference than our own usa. and doing this well is certainly in our own interest. with my colleagues, i set up this argument last year in a book that i had the pleasure of giving to the secretary, "the white house and the world -- the global development agenda for the next u.s. president." the book includes essays from in-house >> on a wide range of issues, education, climate, huge backpack -- potential for technology to make a difference in the world, global health, trade, migration, and how and why for the reform of the

assistance programs. i am pleased to hear that it has been a much read document at all levels in the u.s. administration and on the hill, and don't mind my recommendations are reflected here today directly or indirectly. the administration has launched a few major initiatives, the first-ever quadrennial develop made diplomacy you review. it will have the potential to shape developing policy in this country for years to come. i am very pleased at these efforts of the administration reflecting the growing understanding of the wishes we have made it the center about our policy, whether trade, migration, or climate change, and about how all of these

policies affect people and poor countries and in turn affect our own security, our economy, our image in the world as we have no doubt realized once again in the last couple of weeks. but before go any biography of our speaker. that would be silly. instead, from one girl to another, i do want it correctly applaud you, secretary clinton, as the world's most powerful diplomat for using all the tools in your tool box to put women and girls at the center of u.s. foreign relations. [applause] using your bully pulpit to speak out for women's rights and women's key role in development, meeting with female symbols

about -- civil society leaders everywhere that you go, giving voice to the most vulnerable women in the congo and others by calling to an end for sexual violence and mass rape. i remember with great pride when you spoke in 2005 alongside chuck hagel to offer bipartisan support for elevating investment and girls education. in particular, that was a great speech. secretary clinton is a key player in this administration in an administration that has pledged to put development alongside defense and diplomacy for a park -- a far more prominent role in u.s. policy. that is why so many of you are here today. i and many of my colleagues here and at the center think that an equivalent role would best advance america's interests. i look forward as i know all of

you do to secretary clinton's remarks. madame secretary. [applause] >> thank you so much. i am absolutely delighted to be here and to see a lot of familiar faces, colleagues and friends, development leaders, and especially to be here with the center for global development. i want to thank nancy for her kind introduction and for everything she has done with this organization and for development overall. i want to thank the peterson institute for international economics, and of course, fred -- i learned that fred was one of the incubators for the center -- and ed scott and others who have really made development and development policy such a central issue in their lives as

well as in our nation's life. i wanted to give this address months ago, but i thought it wise to wait until we actually had an administrator confirmed for usaid. [applause] and we are so pleased that that day has come. dr. raj shah, who if you have not met, i hope that you will. it has been a long wait to find the right person, but raj was worth the months we spent thinking about how to best build and strengthen usaid. he brill's -- he brings vision and passion, commitment and experience to this critical position. he will be at the table as we make decisions about development, and i look forward to a very close working partnership. i also want to recognize, for those of you who have not yet

met the new head of the millennium challenge corporation, daniel yohannes, who is here. we're delightfed that he left a very successful corporate career. he is an ethiopian immigrant to this country who really exemplifies the american dream but wants to get back. and so we are so pleased that daniel has joined this administration as well. i see alonzo fulgham in the audience, who served extraordinarily as our acting administrator of aid during this past year. i'm very grateful to you, alonzo. we have a number of the top team members from the state department as well. this is been a labor of love working to put development front and center for jack lew, our deputy for resources and

management who has taken a particular responsibility for development and foreign aid. 4 and-marie slaughter who heads our policy planning -- anne- marie slaughter who heads our policy planning operation, for maria otero who came from the world of development basiowothjh accion, and for our economic team. i will start today with a story that often goes untold. it is a story of what can happen around the world when american know-how, american >>, and

american values are put to work -- american dollars, an american values are put to work to help change people's lives. like many of you, i have seen the transformative power of development. i have seen the passion and commitment of aid workers to develop their careers -- who devote their careers to this difficult undertaking. i have seen american development at work in a village in indonesia, where new mothers and their infants were receiving nutritional and medical counseling through a family planning program supported by usaid. i have seen it in nicaragua, where poor women started small businesses in their barrio with help from a u.s.-backed microfinance project. i have stated in the west bank, where students are learning english today and learning more about america through a program that we sponsor. i of seated in south africa, where our development assistance, thanks to pepfar, is helping to bring anti- retrovirals to areas ravaged by

hiv and aids and neglect. but i've also traveled our country, and i had been in settings of all kind. i have listened to farmers and factory workers and teachers and nurses and students, hardworking mothers and fathers who wonder why is their government spending taxpayer dollars to improve the lives of people in the developing world when there is so much hardship and unmet needs right here at home. that is a fair question, and it is one i would like to address today. why development in other countries matters to the american people into our nation's security and prosperity. the united states seeks a safer, more prosperous, more democratic and more equitable world. we cannot reach that goal when one-third of humankind live in conditions that offer them little chance of building better lives for themselves or their children. we cannot stop terrorism or

defeat the ideologies of violent extremism when hundreds of millions of young people see a future with their jobs, no hope, and no way ever to catch up to the developed world. we cannot build a stable, global economy with hundreds -- when hundreds of millions of workers and families find themselves on the wrong side of globalization, cut off from markets and out of reach of modern technologies. we cannot rely on regional partners to help us stop conflicts and counter global criminal networks when those countries are struggling to stabilize and secure their own societies. and we cannot advance democracy and human rights when hunger and poverty threaten to undermine the good governance and rule on what needed to make those rights real. we cannot stop global pandemics until billions of people gain access to better healthcare, and

we cannot address climate change or scarcer resources until billions gain access to greener energy and sustainable livelihoods. the development was once the province of humanitarians, charities, and governments looking to gain allies in global struggles. today it is a strategic, economic, and moral imperative -- as central to advancing american interests and solving global problems as diplomacy and defense. because development is indispensible, it does demand a new approach suited for the times in which we find ourselves. for too long our work has been riven by conflict and controversy. differences of opinion over where and how to pursue development have hardened into entrenched, almost theological

positions that hold us back. the standoffs are not fair to the experts who put their lives on the line doing this critical work. they are not fair to the american taxpayers who by and large want to do and do good work in the world, so long as the money is used well. so it is time for a new mindset for a new century. time to retire old debates and replace dogmatic attitudes with clear reasoning and common sense. and time to elevate development as a central pillar of all that we do in our foreign policy. and it is past time to rebuild usaid into the world's premier development agency. [applause] now the challenges we face are numerous, so we do have to be selective and strategic about where and how to get involved.

, but whether it is to improve long-term security in places torn apart by conflict, like afghanistan, or to further progress in countries that are on their way to becoming regional anchors of stability, like tanzania, we pursue development for the same reasons -- to improve lives, fight poverty, expand rights and opportunities, strengthen communities, secure democratic institutions and governance, and in doing so, to a advance global stability, improve our own security, and project our values and leadership in the world. a new mindset means a new commitment to results. development is a long-term endeavor. change seldom happens overnight. to keep moving in the right direction, we must evaluate our progress and have the courage to

rethink our strategies if we fall short. we must not simply tally the >> -- tally the dollars that we spend or the number programs that we run, but measure the lasting changes that these dollars and programs help achieve. and we must share the proof of our progress with the public. the elementary school teacher in detroit trying to send her kids to college or the firefighter in houston working hard to support his family are funding our work. they deserve to know that when we spend their tax dollars, we are getting results. we must also be honest that in some situations we will invest in places that are strategically critical but where we are not guaranteed success. in countries that are incubators of extremism, like yemen, or

ravaged by poverty and natural disasters, like haiti, the odds are long. but the cost of doing nothing is potentially far greater. and we must accept that our development model cannot be formulaic -- that what works in pakistan may not work in peru. so our approach must be case by case, country by country, region by region, and cross countries and regions, to face the transnational threats and problems that we are encountering. we need to analyze needs, assess opportunities, and tailor our investments and our partnerships in ways that maximize the impact of our efforts and resources. two important and closely coordinated reviews of our nation's development policy are now under way. the inaugural quadrennial

diplomacy and development review that i have ordered is led by officials from usaid and the state department. the presidential study directed on u.s. global development policy is led by the white house and includes representatives from more than 15 agencies that contribute to our global development mission. as these reviews are completed and recommendations are sent to the president, new ideas and approaches will be refined. in the meantime, i would like to share a few steps that we are already taking to make sure that development delivers lasting results for people at home and abroad. first, as president obama has said, we are adopting a model of development based on partnership, not patronage. in the past, we have sometimes dictated solutions from afar, often missing our mark on the ground. our new approach is to work in partnership with developing

countries that take the lead in designing and implementing evidence-based strategies with clear goals. development built on consultation rather than decree is more likely to engender the local leadership and ownership necessary to turn good ideas into lasting results. but true partnership is based on shared responsibility. we want partners who had demonstrated a commitment to development by practicing good governance, rooting out corruption, making the wrong financial contributions to their own development. we expect our partners to practice sound economic policies, including levying taxes on those who can afford them, just as we do -- or in countries rich in natural resources, managing those resources sustainably and devoting some of the profits to

people's development. the american taxpayer cannot pick that -- pick up the tab for those who are able but unwilling to help themselves. some might say it is risky to share control with countries that have not had much success developing on their own. but we know that many countries have the will to develop, but not the capacity. and that is something we can help them build. of the millennium challenge corp. focuses on countries that have met rigorous criteria, from upholding political rights and the rule of law to controlling inflation and investing in girls education. we provide funding and technical support and the country provides the plan and leads the way toward achieving it. there is a lot of work ahead, but early indications of mcc programs are promising. we're using our resources to help countries that are committed to building their own futures.

this approach highlights the difference between aid and investment to read through aid, we supply what is needed to the people who need it. be it sacks of rice or cartons of medicines. but through investment, we seek to break the cycle of dependence that aid can create by helping countries build their own institutions and their own capacity to deliver essential services. aid chases need. investment chases opportunity. now that is not to say that the united states is abandoning aid. it is still a vital tool, especially as an emergency response. but for strategic investment -- but through strategic investments, we hope to one day, far from now, to put ourselves out of the aid business except for emergencies. our commitment to partnership

extends not only to countries where we work, but to other countries and organizations working there as well. new countries are emerging as important contributors to global development, including china, brazil, and india -- nations with the opportunity to play a key role, and with the responsibility to support sustainable solutions. long time leaders like norway, sweden, denmark, the netherlands, the u.k., japan, and others continue to reach billions through their longstanding work in dozens of countries. multilateral organizations like the world bank, the imf, the undp, the global fund to fight aids, tuberculosis, and malaria have the reach and resources to do what countries working alone cannot, along with valuable expertise in infrastructure, health, and finance initiatives. nonprofits like the gates foundation, care, the clinton

foundation, oxfam international, networks of ngos like interaction, as well as smaller organizations like a sea on -- accion and transparency international bring their own resources, deep knowledge, and commitment to humanitarian missions that complement our work in critical ways. some foundations are combining philanthropy and capitalism in a very innovative approach, like the acumen fund. universities are engaging in critical research, but the so- called urgent problems like hundred and disease, and to improve the work of development, like the work of the poverty action lab at mit. even private businesses are able to reach large numbers of people away that is economically sustainable, because they bring to bear the power of markets. a company like starbucks, which

is work to create supply chains from coffee-growing companies in the developing world that promote better environmental practices and better prices for farmers, or unilever/hindustan which has created soap and hygiene products that the very poor, long overlooked by private business, can afford. i mention all of these because we wanted to a better job of both highlighting the multitude of partners and better coordinating among them. there should be an opportunity for us to strategically engage in a country with these other partners where we are not redundant or duplicative, but instead we are working together to produce better results. we believe that this will open up new opportunities and create sap -- and increase our impact. second, we are working to elevate diplomacy -- development and integrate it more closely with defense and diplomacy in the field. development must become an equal pillar of our foreign policy, alongside defense and diplomacy,

led by robust and reinvigorated aid. i know that the word in a grayish -- integration sets off alarm bells in some people's head buried there is concern that integrating development means diluting it or politicizing it, giving up our long-term development goals to achieve short-term objectives or handing over more of the work of development to our diplomats or defense experts. that is not what we mean, nor what we will do. what we will do is leverage our expertise on behalf of development, and vice versa. the three d's must be mutually reinforcement.

the experience and technical knowledge that our development experts bring to their work is absolutely irreplaceable. whether trained in agriculture, public health, education, or economics, our experts are the face, brains, heart, and soul of u.s. development worldwide. they are the ones who take our ideas to turn them into real and lasting change in people's lives. some of the most transformative figures in the history of development represent that convergence between development and diplomacy. these development giants combined outstanding technical expertise with a passionate belief in the power of their ideas they did whatever it took to convince at times quite reluctant leaders to join them, and as a result help to build and lead national, regional, and international movements for change. today we have many such development diplomats working at usaid. they embody the integration

between development and diplomacy that when allowed to flourish can amplify both disciplines. for example, a lack of support from government leaders can be stalled or stymie development projects, particularly programs that target marginalized populations like people with hiv, women, or refugees. in these cases, our diplomats working hand-in-hand with our development experts can help make the difference. they have the access and leverage to convince government ministers to offer support. development also furthers a key goal of our diplomatic effort -- to advance democracy and human rights worldwide. i remember vividly visiting some years ago the village of saam and j -- saam njaay in senegal, where a former peace corps volunteer some of you may know,

molly melching, set up a village-based ngo called tostan, supported by usaid. women in the village began to speak out about the health consequences and the pain of female genital mutilation, an accepted practice in their culture. this collective wakening led to a discussion and soon the village voted, democratically voted, to end the practice. then men from that village traveled to other villages to explain what they had learned about why fgm was bad for women and girls, and by extension, their families and communities. and then other villages banned it as well. and a grassroots political movement grew and eventually the government passed a law banning the practice nationwide. now it takes a while for enforcement to catch up with all of their, as well as in our country. but the larger point is that the experience in this village demonstrates how development, democracy, and human rights can

and must be mutually reinforcing. democratic governance reinforces development, and development can help secure democratic gains. so those who care about making human rights a reality know that development is a interpol part of that agenda. development is also critical to our success -- the success of our defense missions, particularly where poverty and failed governments contribute to instability. there are many examples we could point to, but consider the situation in afghanistan. many people ask whether development can succeed there. well, my answer is yes. the united states supports a reconstruction and rural infrastructure initiative run by the world bank called the national solidarity program, which is made progress even in very challenging circumstances. through this program, more than 18,000 community development councils have been elected and more than 15,000 infrastructure

projects have been completed. now progress is difficult. but it is possible. that is why, as we prepare to send 30,000 new american troops along with thousands from our allied forces in nato and the international security force, we are tripling the number of civilians on the ground. they include agricultural experts who will help farmers develop new crops to to -- to replace opium poppies, education experts will -- who will help make schooling more sensible to girls so that they can have a chance that a better future. the work of these development experts helps to make future military action less -- less necessary. it is much cheaper to pay for development up front than to pay for war over the long term. but in afghanistan and elsewhere, u.s. troops are helping to provide the security that allows development to take root. in places torn apart by sectarianism or violent

extremism, long-term development gains are more difficult. no in the past, coordination among the so-called three d's has also been -- has often fallen short, and everyone has borne the consequences. secretary gates, administrator shah, and i are united in our commitment to change that. the united states will achieve our best results when we approach our foreign policy as an integrated whole, rather than just the sum of its parts. third, we are working to improve the coordination of development across washington. in the 21st century, many government agencies have to think and act globally. the treasury department leads and coordinates our nation's engagement with the international financial system. the justice department fights transnational crime. disease kroll -- control is a

global challenge in this interconnected world that includes hhs and cdc in so many other agencies. so is the quality of our air and water ways, something that the epa has expertise in. but as a growing number of agencies broaden their scope internationally and add important expertise and capacity, even working on the same issue from different hegel's -- different angles, coordination has lagged behind. the result is an array of programs that overlap or even contradict. and this is a source of growing frustration and concern. but it is also an opportunity to create more forceful and effective programs. the challenge now facing usaid and that state department is to work with all the other agencies to coordinate, lead, and support effective implementation of the administration's strategy. indeed, this is our core mission. do our permanent worldwide presence, our strategic

mission, and our charge to advance america's interests abroad, we can help align overseas development efforts with our strategic objectives and national interests. this will not be easy, but it will make our government work more effective, efficient, and enduring. we are already emphasizing this kind of coordination with our new food security initiative, which brings together the department of agriculture's expertise on agricultural research, usaid's expertise with extension services, the u.s. trade representative's efforts on agricultural trade, and the contributions of many other agencies. we know that attracting investment and expanding trade are critical development. so we're looking to coordinate the foreign assistance programs at usaid, mcc, and other agencies with the trade and investment initiatives of the ustr, the u.s. export-import bank, and the overseas private investment corporation. and we need to seek to build --

and we seek to build on the success of regional models of coordination like the africa growth and opportunity act. we need to ask hard questions about who should be doing what in the work of the bulk -- the work of development. for too long, we have relied on contractors for core contributions and we of diminished our own professional and institutional capacities. this must change. contractors are there to support, not supplant. usaid and the state department must have the staff, the expertise, and the resources to design, implement, and evaluate our programs. that is why we are increasing the number of foreign service officers at usaid and the state department, and developing a set of guidelines to the qddr for how we work with and oversee contractors come on to make sure we have the right people doing the right jobs under the right conditions. fourth, we are content -- we are concentrating our work in what

development experts call sectors. we have invested many programs across many fields, often spreading ourselves then and reducing our impact. going forward, we will target our -- we will target our investment and develop technical expertise in a few key areas, like health, agricultural, secretary -- security, education, energy, and local governance. rather than helping fewer people one project at time, we can help countries activate broad, sustainable change. to start, we are investing $3.5 billion of the next three years in partner countries where agriculture represents more than 30% of gdp and more than 60% of jobs, and where up to 70% of the families disposable income is spent on food. farming in these places plays such a large role that a weak agricultural sector often means a week after -- a weak country.

small family farmers stay poor, people go hungry, economies stagnate, and social unrest can ignite, as we've seen with the riots over food in more than 60 countries since 2007. by offering technical support and making strategic investments across the entire food system -- from the seeds that farmers plant to the markets where they sell their crops to the homes where people cook and store their food -- we can help countries create a ripple effect that extends beyond farming and strengthens the security and prosperity of whole regions. we are applying the same approach in the field of health. one of our country's most notable successes in development is pepfar, which is held more than 2.4 million people with hiv and aids receive life-saving antiretroviral medications. to our new global health initiative, we will build on our success with pepfar and other infectious diseases, and we will focus more attention on

maternal, newborn, and child health, where there is still a long way to go. we will invest $63 billion of the next six years to help our partners improve their own health systems, and provide the care that their own people need rather than relying on donors into the far foreseeable future to keep a fraction of their population healthy while the rest go with hardly any care at all. death, we are increasing our nation's investment in innovation. you technologies are allowing billions of people to leapfrog into the 21st century after missing out on the 20th century breakthroughs. farmers armed with cell phones can learn the latest local market prices and know when the advance when a drop -- when a drought or a flood is on the way. mobile banking allows people in remote corners of the world to use their phones to access

savings accounts or send remittances home to their families. activists seeking to hold governments accountable for how they use resources and treat their citizens can use blogs and social networking sites to shine the spotlight of transparency on the scourges of corruption and repression. there is no limit to the potential for technology to overcome obstacles to progress. and the united states has a proud tradition of producing game changers in the struggles of the poor. the green revolution was driven by american agricultural scientists. american medical scientists pioneered immunization techniques. american engineers designed laptop computers that run on solar energy so new technologies do not bypass people living without power. this innovation tradition is even more critical today. and we're pursuing several ways to a advance discovery and make

sure useful innovations reach the people who need them. we are expanding our direct funding of new research, for example, into biofortified sweet potatoes that prevent vitamin a deficiency in children, and african maize that can be drawn in drop -- grown in drought conditions. we are exploring venture funds, credit guarantees, and other tools to encourage private companies to develop and market products and services that improve the lives of the poor. we are seeking more innovative ways to use our considerable buying power, for example, through advanced market commitments to help create markets for these products so entrepreneurs can be sure that breakthroughs made on behalf of the poor will successfully reach them. here again, there is such potential for fruitful partnership between our government and the dozens of american universities, laboratories, private companies, and charitable foundations that chase and fund democracy -- discovery.

for example, with help from the state department u.s. tech companies are working with the mexican government, telecom companies, and ngos to reduce narco violence, so citizens can easily and anonymously report gang activity in their neighborhoods. we brought three tech delegations to iraq, including a recent visit by eric schmidt, the ceo of google, who announced that his company will launch an iraqi government youtube channel to promote transparency and good governance. and we're sending a team of experts to the democratic republic of congo this spring to begin the process of bringing mobile banking technology to that country. in addition is not only the invention of new technologies -- innovation is not only the invention of new technologies. it is also any breakthrough idea that transforms lives and

reshapes our thinking. but one person's belief that poor women armed with credit could become drivers of economic and social progress. homeless women in south africa who refused to be deterred by their circumstances and organized themselves to gain access to loans and materials that enable them to build their own houses and eventually whole communities that they now help lead. or the insight between conditional cash transfer programs, which integrate efforts to fight poverty and promote education and health. these innovations have now traveled the world. new york city launched a conditional cash transfer program modeled after mexico's. grameen bank has opened to bring -- opened a branch in queens. we have got to ensure that extraordinary innovations are on a two-way street that we learn as well as we offer. and we need to discover and disseminate as many of these as possible.

sixth, we're focusing more of our investment on women and girls who are critical to the advancing social, economic, and political progress. women and girls are one of the world's greatest untapped resources. investing in the potential of women to lift and lead their societies is one of the best investments we can make. you all know the studies that have shown that when a woman receives even just one year of schooling, her children are less likely to die in infancy or suffer from illness or hunger, and more likely to go to school themselves. one reason that microfinance is employed around the world is because women have proven to be such a safe and reliable credit risk. the money they borrow is not only invested and reinvested and turned into a profit, it is used to improve conditions for their families. and it is almost always repaid. i have seen for myself what

micro lending in women's lives and their families and communities means from bangladesh to costa rica to south are for it to vietnam and dozens of countries in between. -- to south africa to vietnam and dozens of countries in between three you know the proverb -- give the man a fish and he will leave for a day, but teach a man to fish and he will leave for a lifetime. well, if you teach a woman to fish, she will feed the whole village. the united states is taking steps to put women front and center in our development work. we are beginning to disaggregate by gender the data we collect on our programs, to measure how well our work is helping improve women's health, income, and access to education and food. we're starting to design programs with the needs of women in mind by hiring more women as extension workers to reach women farmers, or women health

educators to improve outreach to women and girls. and we are training more women in our partner countries to carry aboard the work of development themselves -- for example, through scholarships to women agricultural scientists in kenya. this is not only a strategic interest of the united states. it is an issue of great personal meaning and importance to me, and one that i have worked on for almost four decades. i will not accept words without deeds when it comes to women's progress. i will hold our agencies accountable for ensuring that our government and our farm policy support the world's women and a pop -- and a chat -- and achieve lasting, meaningful results on these issues. so as we apply these six approaches, more will follow -- some new, some variations on the past, all reflecting our commitment to find, test, and embrace ideas that work and to learn from our work at every step along the way. a half century ago president

kennedy outlined a new vision for the role of development in promoting american values and advancing global security. he called for a new commitment and a new approach that would match the realities of the post- war world. and his administration created the united states agency for international development to lead that effort and to make the united states the world leader. in the decades since, our nation's development efforts have helped eradicate smallpox and reduce polio and river blindness. we have helped save millions of lives through immunizations and made oral rehydration therapy available globally, greatly reducing infant deaths. we have helped educate millions of young people. we have provided significant support to countries that have flourished in a number of sectors, including economic growth, health, and good governance -- countries like

south korea, thailand, mozambique, botswana, rwanda, and gone up. -- ghana. and we have supplied humanitarian aid to countries on every confidence in the wake of hurricanes, earthquakes, famines, floods, and other disasters. americans can and do take pride in these achievements which have not only helped humanity but also helped our nation project our values and strengthen our leadership in the world. these efforts have not been the work of government alone. most people do not realize that we contribute less than 1% of our budget to foreign assistance. the balance is made up by the generous spirit of americans and is reflected across our nation's landscape, from farms to civic groups to churches to charities. over the years, the american people have opened their hearts

and their wallets to causes ranging from eradicating polio in latin america to saving the people of darfur, to helping people who are poor in asia purchase livestock, to investing in michael enterprise. this private giving exceeds the amount our government spends on foreign assistance. today we call on that same american spirit of giving to meet the challenges of a new secretary -- of a new century -- not only materially, but about giving time and talent. so those of you who care deeply -- who care deeply about development and who care deeply about the future of our country and our world, help us enlist more americans in this effort. help us tap into the talents of the first global generation of americans -- the young men and women graduating from our colleges and universities. encourage them to volunteer, to intern, to work not only for ngos, but to lend their energy and skill to the state

department and particularly to usaid. i promise that with raj's help, we will do more on our end to make sure our doors are open to this emerging pool of thinkers and doers. development work is never easy, but it is essential. it is the work that america is so in tune with. it reflects so clearly our own values, our spirit of cooperation. the tocqueville noted it so many years ago that we join up and we work together to help others as well as ourselves. we have an opportunity now in the 21st century to not only do it, but do it better than it has ever been done before, and to do it for more people in more places, to give it to every child the opportunity to live up to his or her god-given

potential, and to help create a world that is more equitable, democratic, prosperous, and peaceful. we can succeed, and when we do, our children and grandchildren will tell the story that american know-how, american pop -- american dollars, american caring, and american values helped meet the challenges of the 21st century. thank you all very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> madame secretary, that was an extraordinary speech in its ambition and its reach, and i salute you and your colleagues for the many thoughtful ideas. the secretary has agreed to take a limited number of questions. i am not -- i am going to try to insert one that will not count in the -- [laughter] >> it is called the birdsall exception. >> the birdsall exception. with my breath somewhat taken away, you know, so many ideas, so many ambitions, i thought it would be interesting to ask you, what do you see as the key constraints on this administration, this state department, this revitalized usaid meeting those constraints?

are they political, bureaucratic, organizational? are they lack of understanding in the congress? are they issues and problems in place already, constraints because of contracting in the case of foreign assistance? eighth thing you want to say that would give us a sense, if we want to be equally ambitious from outside, in how to help and how to porsche, how to monitor, how to make sure that this long- term development agenda is indeed realized in the way that you expressed it? >> as to the obstacles, i say all of the above and probably some that you did not list. i think that there is a great commitment to development in this administration. the president's budget is extraordinarily supportive of what we are attempting to do,

and we appreciate that. so it will be important for those of you in the larger development community to make sure that foreign aid is a priority when the budget gets to the congress, that we get the resources both in terms of dollars and people that are needed to begin to realize this long-term vision. we have to do our own work inside the government. we have to do a better job of coordinating. we have to try to look at what works and what does not work in our own backyard. there are lots of changes that were done either deliberately or inadvertently in usaid that i think need to be undone, that have really undermined the capacity for the united states government to really drive the development agenda.

we also have to have better coordination on the whole of government front. i had been in countries where i have asked to see everybody doing any development, and the ambassador nicely invites people that run a list given to him or her. he or she has never met the people, has no idea who they are or what they do, and even more, the people themselves have never met each other. you have different programs from usaid or mcc or pepfar, and you have the other agencies who are providing assistance of some sort or another. it is not coordinated at the country level and it is certainly not coordinated at the national level or the international level. so we need your support in making some of the tough decisions internally to try to break through some of the bureaucratic and organizational obstacles that exist. we need to tell a better story on the hill.

there are many people in the congress who care deeply about development, but who rather than supporting this broader vision go for a small piece of the pike, a program that is their earmark or their particular concern, which may or may not contribute to the larger need that we have. we also have to be smarter about the story we tell about america's development effort. it is discouraging to travel around the world and meet people in countries who are very supportive of america's efforts, particularly supportive of our new president, who say the "i did not us know what you spend money on. i never see it. nobody ever tells us." and then i look at the budget and we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars and nobody knows. and then what is deeply discouraging is that they say, we know what the chinese do.

we know what the japanese do. we can point to the buildings they build and the roads that they have laid. i want the world to know what the american people are doing to try to fight poverty and provide education and healthcare. we've got to bring this to scale, which is why i talked about sectors and areas of convergence. so there is a lot of work that raj is going to be facing, that we need the help of the larger community. let me say a word about contractors. some of the best people in development are doing contract work. i know people. people used to be at usaid or somewhere else who are now doing contract worke. it is not financially sustainable. we cannot continue to send so many >> out -- we cannot continue this in so many dollars out the door with no monitoring, no evaluation, no accountability. i want to bring some of those contract employees back inside as full-time american government

development experts. that will be controversial and people will say that we did it for a reason. yes, but i don't think the reasons stand scrutiny. there will always be the need for contract workers. i think it is down to four engineers in all of usaid. that makes sense at all. when you look at the added costs, we just have to break this in order to bring people inside to do the work they love to do and that they are experts in doing, and we will get more results for our investment. there are many problems that we know we are going to confront, but we're willing to take them all on. we're not into business as usual. the situation is too pressing. the problems with people are too visible. we have to do better and we will. >> ok, thank you very much. question. let's take one back there and maybe we have one appeared. let's start with the former ambassador to the oas? >> i think i speak for all of

this audience in saying what a thrill it is to have someone -- to have a secretary who has both the understanding and the commitment to the development agenda, so we are all here. this is a very crowded room for a reason and thank you. my question is a little bit of a narrower one, and you talk a little bit about energy but not much about copenhagen again or climate change and the development agenda with regard to adaptation and mitigation. >> thank you, hattie. has you know, we are very committed to a program of supporting adaptation and mitigation and technology transfer in the developing world. i went to copenhagen and announced that the united states would commit to do our part of $100 billion by 2020. we worked very hard to get the building blocks of an agreement that would enable us to do so.

the accord that we finally hammered out did have requirements for verification and transparency which have to be adhered to in order for us to be able and, frankly, willing to make these investments. but i think that for many of the developing countries, this is a lifeline that they are desperate to have and that they will work with us as we try to sort out how best to deliver on that commitment. this is going to be an ongoing challenge and that is why i mention we have to do a better job of getting some of the other countries that have a role to play more committed and more involved. i mean, china is fast on its way to being the principal manufacturer of solar technology and probably windmill technology as well. how are they going to distribute that, under what conditions, at what price - i