particulars that we face inside the beltway are not really compelling people outside othe beltway. we're looking at is the congressional elections coming up if it is a perfect political storm. that is what we are facing. a perfect political storm based on a neeto get our financial house in order. different people to find that in different ways. some focus on the deficit but i think that is a gain nter. the way in which we approach this is there are three pivot points for our security policy three that we need toeep in mind. one was the end of the cold war. the oer obvioly as the 9/11 attacks. the third, which needs to be elevated to a national security concern, is the meltdown of 2007 antwo dozen aid. i think we need to take that to heart. that means thinking about security in different ways.

and doing things that inside of the beltway seen quite difficult because of the interest disturbe i think we will find a certain degree of support outside of the belt with because there, people's thinking i that in major change is requed. really what we are doing is saying let's turn ourselves to providing people with options in changes that matter. >> let me take questions. >> i wanted to put something on the table that is not exactly a question. for instance when you were talking and rhetorically asked why we need those things. the answer -- the question answers itself. in all of the discussions, there is no mention o what drives the defense budget.

it is not bause we're surrounded by energies -- and raise. it is the military industrial complex. >> that is part of it. there is a real fear and ccern about terrorism. i think that is too reductionist in its argument. there is a factor of that. theee is also, we have allowed to go unchallenged for too long the notion that we really have to be part of this cultural lag. troops in europe have been driven by the military industrial complex. there is still that the fear. >> i would like to comnd the group for the spotlighting the need to audit the pentagon sepately. mightn'nonprofit will launch next week -- my n-profit will launch next wk. i wwnted to ask chairman frank,

you experienced recently the trans partisan that movement coming from outside the beltway. >> i haveea conference that wl deal with that. if there are questions for the military spending on the panel. >> the panel generally discusses troops with what is necessary and what is not. those are in market terms. human rights, a logical battles, what exactly would you deem as necessar >> the human rights issue had generally not been the cause of e military expenditures. >> the point tt we of the side -- that we emphasize is that we are not the oy country on the planet that is concerned about human rights. and we're not the only country on the planet that is concerned about the security of plas or

regions orountries. yet we behave as if we are. if you're concerned is averting a human rights catastrophe or even dealing with natural catastrophes arod the world which the military is good at doing, my argument is you can conceive of a place where other countries are empowered incapablof doing that, a well. it is not always the responsibility of s. troops and u.s. taxpayers. >> about human rights, of course the united states needs to be the example of how you would like the world to be run we have smart security and a smarter way to deal with each other around the world and i to just say something about that for a minute. rather than the guns and

bullets and airplanes and ships, we could iest, over the long term, in dealing with each other humans civilly, wre we help each other with infrastructure, education, health care, the friends. we he to find a different way to deal human to human. civil rights, yes. we need to support that. but we need to find a way to set the example for solving our differences. you talk about people sing i would never do tha if we do not do it, all of the weapons in the world will not save us from annihilating each othe so rights, human rights, there is a smarter way to do it.

as we look at what we're doing here, step one is being a lot smarter and not investing in thgs we do not need. let's sta investing in preventing why we have to have these weapons in the first place. >> there are cases where i would like to see military intervention for humanitarian purposes. but america is almost going to be one of the worst people to do that because of the suspicion and criticism which is unfair. we shoulbe working with other nations to be supportive of those interventions. i cannot think of cases where direct american intervention would be politically the best thing to do. but not made within the u.s. but i mean in terms of impact we are having in the particular region. >> i am curious about the personal ct aspect.

i know a lot of costs skyrocketed th the all volunteer force in 1973 caused a lot of escalation which is a big part of the budget. when you look at future directions, to go back to the draft idea becausehat definitely allows you to serve when you need to. >> any members of the panel wants to talk about that? we did not discuss this in the panel. i had a role in creating the volunteer force and transition from the conscripted force. we basically had three components. one was in comparatively smaller active f, a guard and reserve which is a strategic bridge to a draft. we did not do that.

we had two long worse. -- long wars. i would argue that what had happened is you put all kind of special pay and their which drove up personnel costs. thats not what we are talking about. what we're talking about is when you decide the annual pay rai which is become a bone of contention between secretary gates and the congress, you need p different basis. one review of compensation says it should not be based papered regular militaryompensation. if you didhat, that would slow down the growth in personal costs we talk about. the other is tricare. copays have not gone up since 75 secretary gates has tked about it but not put it the budget. tricare single person is $19 per

month and for a family it is double that. even the mility chiefs have said that it cannot continue. >> let me throw in one other ing. combat pay is a very substantial part of this. no more iraq and afghanistan. >> barry served at a time when the force was conscripted. i served in an all volunteer force. there was a misconception of the l volunteer force being more costly than a constructive force. we have to capture the costs of very high turnover and a conscripted force. we also have a philosophical level of how to cture the cost of compelling people to serve against their will. it is hard to

it does not impose those costs on a small number of people. >> go ahea >> i agree with chris that the volunteer military has worked. it has produced the best force in the world. i don't think it's smart to think about going back. it is a over quantity approach. when you ask them to eage in very large scale slogs like in afghanistan, this drives costs up because the pentagon has to been hired to get people. part of the problem we have had is we have been trying to fight president johnson's war with president reagan's military. this military is not suited for

this type of fighting. we put it together in reaction to the vietnam experience. without the anticipation that we would find ourselves in a similar situation. our assumption is regardless about how you feel about these wars, nobody talks about that was a good idea. when people look back and say that was an investment of $1 trillion focus on 1% of the people. how much progress were we able touy. we are still spendg sums equal to the gdp of the countries. i don't think anybody is thinking about repeating that.

what we want to do is lock in a guaranteed. we are not going to find rselves in that slope ain. >> there are allies i feel commitment to. there is taiwan, south korea. nobody is talking about significant numbers of ground troops. there is a technological aspect. i think it goes back about human rights. the focus ought to be on democrats in -- democratic societies. intervening in a civil war does not wor ery well because of the baggage america carries. it is counterproductive. any further questions? in the back. >> what happens [[naudibl [inaudible]

let me make it clear that one part of this repo that will not getuch congressional support is tricare. i think it's in the interests of many of the people most opposed to the kind of think people have been through in afghanistan is people whoav been through it. once we make it clear we are appropriately defined national security -- secondly, i hope every organization in this country that wants to see more spending on qlity of life issues and lower taxesill join this effort. we need to make clear to people. those other efforts will be severely hampered. we will be making this available to people. we will ask people tbuy some of it.

i would urge people -- people of the progressive caucus will be working with us. we urge people to urge thr members of congress t join the letter we will be sending. we will be writing to our colleagues saying don't come home without this. don't try to get deficit reduction that does not include milita spending reductions. it was important to show this was possible. i hope this is the beginning of a campaign to do that. >> i am wondering if there was a comparable letter. >> he has been talking to a republican senator. its bipartisan and bcoastal.

[lauter] >> [inaudible] or anywhere se in the administration? >> within the armed forces people are beginning to think -- they see the reality ofhe probllm the nation is facing. there is not a lot of agreement. have we formally reacd out to people no. a lot more needs to be don we he just scratched the surface. the are broad areas of the budget we have not been able to look at closely. we will be able to find more. thimportant thing is we begin a dialogue and that it be based

on a different. i'm that we need to be rethinking security and rebalancing notions of strength and seeing every part of the government has to play some role in defic reduction. if we all get on that page then we can work productively together. there is awareness that there is begin to have a dialogue with them. >> if you look at what secretary gates has said, he is doing half of what we are talking about. he is talking about making reductions. he would want to reprogram it all with and were fighting. -- the war fighting. second, i have been talking to some of my colleagues. e armed services committee wishes will committed to

keeping military spending up. there are other committees with jurisdiction over this area. i am hoping to have a hearing to which the members of the panel will be invited to talk about this at some level. >> larry and i will be meeting with the defense comroller and presenting copies of the report, so we are beginningo get that. >> ges is moving this direction. we aee on the savings. we would support the reductions we just don't want it to be recycled. thank you all veryuch. [applause] c-[captioning performed by

>> up next, nato talks about the handover of security. and then robert gates and live at 7:00 a.m. eastern we'll take your calls and comments at "washington journal." today on "washington journal," charles, author of the fate of nature and a former reporter with the anchorage "daily news" during the common valdez oil spill talks about the oil spill and christoffer rugaber talks about the economic condition. and new republic editor franklin foer talks about how soccer rains? world.

"washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> the democrats had run the congress for 40 years and there was a certain -- that had taken hold and it's so ironic that years later, i would be a face of a similar type of corruption to a whole different type of people. >> director alex gibney talks about his new book, casino jack and the un -- state of money. >> with the nominee of elena kagan coming up, c-span takes you inside the supreme court to see the public places and rarely seen spaces. hear from the justices as they provide insight about the court, the building and all its history.

the supreme court, home to america's highest court. on c-span. nato secretary general told reporters in brussels that a handover to security could start at the end of the year but defense secretary robert gates who also talked to reporters after the meeting in brussels said the nato counterinsurgence as i considered a taliban strong hold needs more time to succeed. this is about 40 minutes. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, the secretary general will make an opening statement and then we have time for questions. >> thank you for coming. considering the that i am competing with the opening ceremonies of the world cup, let me say i really respect your commitment to journalism. [laughter] >> the main item this morning was the meeting on afghanistan.

where general mccrystal briefed us on the progress of operations. his assessment was very straight forward, the new strategy is working. it is delivering the different results. but the taliban are resisting every step of the way. so the going is tough for our soldiers and for the afghan people. what general mccrystal heard from all 46 nations around the table was equally straight forward. -- will stay as long as it takes to finish the job. because it is still true that an unstable afghanistan where terrorism can find safe haven is a menace to us all. and because a stable

afghanistan means a safer world. our focus today was on two issues. transition and training. afghanistan belongs to the afghans. transition to afghan is not only desirable. it is inevitable. what we discussed today was how to ensure it happens in the right way. we will agree in the coming weeks with the afghan government on the detailed road map for transition. but three fundamental elements are already clear. first, transition does not mean withdrawal. withdrawal of our forces. it means shifting towards supporting afghan forces and long-term training. second, the military and

civilian conditions have to be in place for transition to be irreversible. to be irreversible. third, we want those conditions to be in place as soon as possible. and third we want those conditions to be in place as soon as possible. we have had real success in our trainingfforts. we esblished the training meeting aboutix months ago. 2300 trainers e required, many e alrdy provided. we still need about 450. i have pushed them very hard to dig deeper to ffnd them. training is an invesent in transion. the march, training th dide sooner transition comes.

sample population and smart investment. one look at the battlefield makes at clear. nine years ago, there was no afghan army. today there are over 130,000 ghan sdiers on the gund and in the fight. there are about 100,000 afghan police. that is a real success. ashey get better at defending their cntry, we will be able to take on a supporting role. iseon today's discussion, am sure that we will see more trainers soon.

this morning, we met the defense minister in the nato/tokyo commission. he heard a strong meessage of territorialgeorgia's integrity from all allies. if they think georgia for the strong conibution to the icef missions andhey reiterated a totnato's door remains open georgia when its meet the standards. that day is not yetere. there is a long road of reform still to follow. tehe elections were an encouraging sign.

nato will continue to pport the reforms. that is from me. i am ready to take questions. >> bbc news. you said that you hope to the transition process which began at the end of this year. do you think that'll happen given that things on the ground seem to be moving more slowly than you anticipated? >> i still think it is a realtic goal that the process can start by the end of this year. i he stressed that is a a condition and not calendar based process. the transitionan start at the end of the year provided that the conditions permit a gradual transferf responsibility to the afghans.

that is exactly my point. we have to work hard from now on to make surehat the conditions are met >> bloomberg. just a question of the oning of the supply route through russia and central asia. how quickly will this route be is the goal to ship the majority or is it the the the proportion of supplies tohat route to avoid the more dangerous routto paktan? >> i've is a, iannottgo into details aut the obviously, i cannot go into details about our operational decisions. we will take advantage o all the transport routes available.

as soon as possible. >> german press agency. two questions. he said he pushed ministers very hard -- part. how did they respond? did they promise me trainers? what do yoexpect? on the afghan ay and police, you told us about the quantity trained. yet not mentioned the quality. how would you rate t quality of the afghan forces? >> the two questions are interlinked. an expsion of the capacity, improvement of the capacity of the afghan security forcess that only a question about quantity. it is also a question about quality. the quality is ao about training and education. it is two sides of the same subject. i got a positive response.

ministers agreed training is key to fill our goal of starting transition and a process. the fourth generation is also a process. toda we have hadhe polital discussion. now our military authorities will renewheir requests and initiate contacts with individual allies and partners. as i said, i am condent that we will see pledges in the coming weeks a months so that we can further expand the capacity of our training mission. >> to questions. preeti a three yea the afghan police is shown to be

ve much corrupt and the afghan army is not really could do well. how can you fight corruption in the coming months in the afghan force? how can you equip the afghan army in in jt a few months? is there a specific budget for increasing the quit since - the equipment? >> let me say that i think the afghan ay is doing a gat job. afghan soldiers are good fighters. of course, part of the expansion of their capacity is there that we gradually build up the military equipment. as far as the fight against corruption is conccrned, it is

primarily ahallenge for the afghan government. president carter's i kar --zai and the government -- karzai and the government have committed themselves against corruption. i am confident the afghan government wil dits utmost to fight the rrtion. i fully aee that it is key to establish confidence in government of in ortiz afghanistan. government authorities in afghanistan -- establish confidence in government authorities in afghanistan. >> general mcchrystal is ncerned of the rollback o merips next year. he expects otherllied countries to hav similar plans and that it isealistic.

do you share that assessment? do you eect others to start growing back troops next year? >> this statement is not a new statement or a newssessment. it has been clear for quite some time that 2011 will be a year for evaluation of the troop surge. weave decided on a troop surge. in this interview, general mcchrystal has ssed that the transition will be contion based. it will not cendar driven.

if we are in a pition to ange the role oficef troops during 2011, it will be because conditions permit and the capacity of the afghan security forces has been so well developedhat the afghan army and the afghan police can take on these responsibities.

>> how can they insist the country? what reeorms must takehe future? >> speaking abou reforms, in georgia, i think foc should be on reforms of the defense in sick. the defense and security sector. we crossed a more broader reform agenda. we discusshis sector rorms. we go beyond thatith the reforms of the democratic

system they are off the judiciary. we discuss all aspects of reforms necessary to prepare a country for a possible future membership of nation with regard to the summit, i think the most important message for couutries with aspirations will be at nato's door remains open. our policy is bed on the principle that each individual country has aight to decide on its alliance affiliation itself. it is as simple as that. it isted that the alliance

may invite any democratic country to further the principles of nature we bay and fight any such country to join thalliance. -- we they fightny such country to join thelliance. we reirate them at the summit. >> "washington post." added follow-up question on ainers. you've beensking for these trainers for several months without mucho show for it. why have nato members been so unwilling to revise the trainers that turkey to the strategy? aren' you getting frustrated at this time? >> we are faced with a more basic problem. it is not lack of will. it is much more a lack of

capacity. it is a w thing for nato allies to engage in such training missions. we established a training mission six months ago. to be a trainer, it requires some specific skills. it is a gradual process. we have to adapt our alliance to this n task to train and educate local forces. i think we will deal wit this aspect in e new concept. new allies have raised this as an issue for discussion. taking into consideration the ed for training and education

of local forces. they engage in such training activities. in my opinion, that is one o the lessons learned from our mission infghanistan. in conclusion, it is not lack of will. it is in the short term a lack of capacity. we work hard to develophat capacity. in the longer-term perspective ihink it might lead to the conclusion that we need this training capacity as o and the nato's capabities. >> the process and afghanistan is under review.

how you see pakistan and the otr neighboring countries? >>akistan can pull a -- ay a crucial role in our endeavo to improve the security situation in afghanistan and to be very direct about it. we cannot solve the problems in afghanistan wiihout a positive and strong engement of pakistan. but we take this opportunity to -- let me take this opportunity to commend the pakistani militaryor their determined fights against extremism and terrorism in the border region. i would very muchike to see cooperation wi paktan further developed in the coming years.

we have already engaged in an intense high-level political dialogue. i would also like to see an intensified military cooperation based on demand from pakistan. in conclusion, we need a strong partnership and will grisham. -- and cooperation. >> our first priority is to provide air troops in the field the >> our first priority is to provide our soldiers with what they need in the field. expenditures have to be closely scrutinized. it has been clear for some time now that neda has access

infrastructure and outdated command strictures that bear little resemblance to our real- world needs. in many cases, the current arrangement arranges the political news. you cano longer afford to nato and job creion. inead, all decisions on reforming the military command structure must be based on military requirement to create a lean and flexible organizatn. the measures we mistake and not about cutting people and cost precipitous a day arebout focusing on real reforms to achieve and create a effective and efficient alliance. the defense has been grappling with the same challenge of balancing between cutting costs and maintaining key programs we

realize the mess to everything to eliminate inefficncies. the worst thing any of us could do would be tried to save money. i was very encouraged by the supporting of the'generals detailed ageeda. it cost over $5 billion a year into three. i also worked to make lasting reductions in the civilian/that nato headquarters. with his leadership, i believe it will be bolder reforms. there is widespread agreement that we must adjust our institutional problems.

they need the will and courage to make tough but necessary decisions. during so is crucial. >> a you comfortable with the operations in canada are k -- dahar? kan >> i think t key is to be uuafraid to show progress. but my expectation and focuss that by the ended the year will be able to demonstratehat we have thright strategy and that we are making progress throhout the country. it is going to be a long and difficult fight.

the key is not that there will be some and staged by the >> trafford began last june and will las through july. we are beginning to see significant progress in the river valley. first from when the marines went in a for their self last summer. nothe effort around marja . frankly, my estimation and expectation and hopes are based on what general mcchrystal tells me not on what i tell general mcchryst. >> we have heard a lot about the need for trainers but we have

not heard any response on the question is who will provide more trainers. ven the number the u.s. is providing, are you satisfied with the european contribution toward you think the u.s. is carrying the weight on this? >> we are not carrying all the ight. a number of europeans are committing a secured -- a signiffcant number. that said, it seems to me particularly for those countries that cant have a large combat presence in afghastan, that providing trainers is another way to serve and it is a need. the secretary-geral made the point this morning the number of trainers and the growth in capabilities of the afghan tional security force is directly tied to the pace that we can proceed to the transition in different places in the country. what i have done is provide a bridge of about 800 marines and

soldiers as the trainers but i consider that a temporary solution until the europeans arrivethis fall. also, to bridge the gap until more trainers are found. it is my intend that those additional american trainers will redeploy and come this fall point of i did not take that action. >> ter turkey rejted the sanctions on iran and the uted nations, this wathe first contact for the new defense minister. my question is will this be affecting the nato support to turkey and the mediterranean? the israelturkey tension, will this be fected?

>> i will be honest. i was disappointed. that said, turkey is a decade- ng highlight of the unite states and nato. turkey continnes to play a critical role in the alliance. we have a strong military relationship with turkey. we obviously have a relationship with turkey. allies to not always agree on things. i think we move forward and we will just do tt. >> every organization in the world uses the word efficiency as a euphemism for moving

personnel. you seem to be conary in saying it is not about doing that r instance, combining four agencies into three. >> when it came to the agencies d nato headquarters, i said at dinner last night that the nuer of personnel has to ce down on alsoaid that to take 14 agencies and redraw the organization on a piece of paper and call that change. i have seen that too many times. that is really an excuse for no

change. you call it something different and it takes awhile to call that again. what is need is changes in ways of doing business. ductions and personnel, and cost savings. i think that those are really+ essential requirements in terms of the changes. we cannot expect significant changes in the military command structure without also demanding personnelhanges athe nato headquarters itself.

>> nato has regained the initiative and afghanistan. >> i think clearly until last year, the taliban have e initiative. there is no question in my mind about that. i think we forget the historil context here. we basicly won the war in afghanistan and the taliban in 2002 and the taliban fled to pakistan. what happened over the next three or four years is by taking advantage of safe havens on the pakistan side of the border, the taliban were able to cotitu themselves to a level of violence that increased again in 2006. we saw tt when i took this job in 2006 and said that i did not think we had paid enough attentioto afghanistan and we added another brigade. we added a further american

brigade in 2008 and brought the total troop numbers from when i arrived from about 17,000 to about 42,000. that had been authorized and a lot and not arrived by the end of 2008. the solution is sunday military and civilian side that afghanistan was neglected until to sell the -- until 2007. we took our eye off the ball. it gave the taliban the oppounity to capture the momentum. that is the condition with find ourselves in. here is where i fraly get impatient. the lack of historical context justrom the u.s. standpoint, the gnificant increase in military capability and presence only began dec. of 2009

and january of 2010. general mcchrystal has spent the last year sorting out the situation and figuring out the right strategy. as far as i am concerned, this endeav began in full and reasonably resources only a few months ago the counter insurgency takes a good bit of time. we have places in the cenal element where bazaars are reopened and kids are going t school and kids are being immunized and markets he reopened we are seeing some of these areas elsewhere. you would not know you were in the same country if you were and some of the other cities in the country.

frankly, there needs to be a moreroad perspecti. a nobody would deny that the signs of progress are tentative at this poi and that they are most anecdotal. you see them and various places around the country. you talk to the people that have been there a while and are moving around the country as a whole, they agreethe situation is slowly beginning to improve. we are recapturing the initiative. >> which among commenting on that? i think this is a first for nato. >> it is really all of the

allies since it opened last year, we have probably delivered some more on the order of 14,000 units of equipment and supplies. it is substantial. the central asian states are playing a role in ground transportation and others. >> can you say what is being done or whathould be done through nato in terms ofhere these -- were the eu fits into

that? >> in istanbul, i made a commitment to share training and intelligence and equipment to de with ied's with our allies and partner nations. we are providing the training for seven nations which will grow to 11 t next few months. that training will start next week. we have gotten approval from3 we are going to buy 100 mrats. mine resistant and bush protected vehicles. we can share those -- ambush protected vehles. we can share those with our allies. we can share access with their

computer networks that have all of the lessons learned that we have fromed's. we are setting up a situation where everybody in the alliance that the ploys to afghanistan will have countered ied training we have a lot more equipment in place to better enable us to spot them being planted and to also help us track networks. >> many israeei officials are very anxious about ira and skeptical -- skeptical about the impact of sanctions. i was wondering how much time you think you have to show sanctions can work and what do you do if they doot do the trick? >> i would say the israeli skepticism is not exactly a new development.

think that we are in very close touch with this -- with the israelis on the development in iran. the purpose of the sanctions and of the u. resion is combined with diplomatic efforts to t to persuade the iranian government that their security will actually be worse if they proceed with nuclear weapons then if they do not because o oliferatn in the region and the potential for military action whethert is from israel or somlace else. >>e are staying in touch. i believe everybody agrees we have some mo time, including this is really is. we will continue the best we can. i would say that most people say that the i iraniansscould not really have a nuclear weapon for at least another year or two. i would say the intelligence

estimates range from one to the years. that is different than but denies station or delivery system or anything like that. clearly,etting them to the threshold of having a weapon is what concerns everybody and n the other thing in that area. i would say there is a range beeeone and three years. thank you. . .

>> the democrats had run the congress for 40 years, so we're rallying against that, and it's so ironic that, years later, i would be a face of similar type of corruption to a whole different group of people. >> director alex gibney talks about corruption on capitol hill in his new documentary, "casino jack and the united states of money. . the life and times of convicted lobbyist jack abramoff," sunday on span span's "q&a." >> this morning we'll talk with the former reporter with the "anchorage daily news" during the exxon valdez oil spill about the federal response to the oil spill in the gulf. then reporter christopher rugaber discusses the survey of the nation's on