other parts of the middle east and the new reports that isil has begun to infiltrate taliban? >> the taliban and isil are like this. they have different ideologies. they want to fight oach other. you do have some taliban that feel disenfranchised from the taliban potentially. they see this isis as another way to gain resources, as another way to gain media attention. so you do have some of the taliban breaking off and claiming allegiance toward isis. part of that is happening in different parts of afghanistan. a lot of we get is through our afghan partners as they see that probably before we do. we have seen some of the recruiting we have seen some talk of it at some of the universities. it is a concern to the afghan president. therefore a concern to me. but we continue to work that with our afghan partners to make sure that we understand where this is going inside of afghanistan.

and pakistan. >> do we have any sense how the public and afghanistan and pakistan views isil? >> i think it depends on where they are and how much they read or hear about it. if you're inside of kabul and you have access to the communications and newspapers, radios a tv, they're starting to get that media blast of that . in some areas they may not know that's going on. but, again, it has come up quite a bit here in the last 45 to 60 days. president beganny has talked to the afghan people about it. he's talked to the afghan security forces about it. i've made it what i so-called a p.r.i., party information requirement, for my forces, so we'll continue to work hard with our afghan partners here to make sure we understand this network. >> a final question. most of the discussion has been

about how the national security forces are doing. but can you comment on what's happening with local police efforts and to what extent they are professionalizing their operations? >> yes. i can talk more about kabul and the police there, about 14,000 police inside of kabul. i see them on a day to day basis. theyen to to work hard on the traininging, they continue to work hard on tryinging to do more community policing. these high profile attacks inside of kabul, what you did hear about in late december time frame, is an uptick. it is very very tough to have -- to stop one or two people from taking a magnetic i.d. and sticking it on a bus. to take two or three people and stop them from having a suicide vest and attacking an n.g.o. in a city of 3.5 million, again , very, very tough. but what you don't hear about

are all the number of attacks, all the number of cachets, all the number of people who have been arrested by the afghan police inside of kabul, that didn't result in an h.p.a. that number, compared to the number of h.p.a.'s is quite high. i think one of the things that we can probably work better with afghan is -- afghanistan is make sure they publicize it as well. but the police do quite well, because of their ability to work with the afghan people and their human networks, to get after these threats. i think they continue to progress. not only the afghan police inside of the city but some of the specialties in the forensics that visit -- forensics, i visited one of their labs where they do fingerprints, where they do explosives, where they take a look at rifle rounds that have gone off, to bring that together. they've gotten quite good at their technology on the forensics and we'll continue to work with them. >> thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you for being here today. i know i don't need to say

anything to boost your self-esteem or ego but i want you to know how widely respected you are amongst the men and women that have served under your leadership. we greatly appreciate that and thank you very much for your service to our nation. alls us here on the panel appreciate you being here and you are have a very difficult position at a very tentative time, as we move forward in this transition. >> one of the things that's been a great concern to me is ensuringing that while our united states services are moving or transitioning, i don't want to say withdrawing, but as they are transition out of the more leadership-type positions, that we do have the afghan capability to back it up. logistics is always of great -- is always a great concern of mine. i did ask the panel yesterday some thoughts on logistics and a great comment that came from admiral olson was that, as it applies to the afghan security forces, is that great shooters

do not make a great army. there is a total army that needs to be out there and so i would like to know that we do have plans in place or that the afghans are training to be logistical supporters as well. whether it's the medical community, transportation making sure that we have the maintainers for their equipment and their weapons, do they have those capabilities without that united states support? >> thank you for your service as well. we do. we continue to work the logistical piece. we consider this a gap we have to work on. in the u.s. army we continue to have contractors c.l.s., in many places, a lot of that in the aviation realm, so we do have that in afghanistan. we continue to work very hard to build the mechanics to build the right level of personnel to take care of the

afghan equipment and so that is moving along. but that will continue to take time and we have to continue to build that capacity for the afghans. i think they'll continue to have a small portion that will need contractors to work some of the very, very tough pieces of equipment in the aviation realm. for the most part, i do think they continue to grow that capacity. again, i said i went and saw some training in the maintenance area, went into one of their maintenance bays. they had probably eight humvees are up. they had several mechanics working. these are all afghan army men working on these vehicles. they were doing quite well. their issue quite frankly was parts, not getting the right parts. so as we did the deep dive on that one back to kabul and looked at the warehouses, the parts are there. the issue is how they distribute the parts from the warehouses, get them down to the cores, down to theberry grades who are working that very, very hard. i went into eight warehouses inside kabul. it was like a super home depot.

they had all the things they needed in there and so i told president ghani, we have to get the core commanders in there to take a look at. this once they got them in there, they talked to the senior people. they have to move this stuff. honestly, the culture inside of afghanistan is to hoard. sooned they get this in there, they hold onto it, they don't want to get that out. but now they've worked it very hard and they understand the impact it's going to have on the fight and so i think the senior leadership has moved that quite well during the recent weeks and are using the wintertime frame right now to make sure that all classes of supply continue to move out to the -- to where the units need it. >> thank you. just the contracting piece, also. any engagement. we see that the afghans are picking up more of the maintenance. i'm pleased to hear that. i have been just very concerned about that particular piece of it. will we see a transition then away from american contractors

more towards more national-type contractors, within that region? one thing that president ghani had made clear in his meeting with us this last weekend was that if there were not united states troops there, he would like to see more u.s. contractors. do you have a feel for if it would be our contractors serving in nation or would it be more of a local force? >> to give you rough figures, if we have 30,000, probably 34,000 contractors out of that 24,000 are probably a combination of u.s. and third country nationals and the other 10,000 are probably afghan contractors. we continue to work that number. that number will go down quite significantly this year and we'll continue to try to make sure that we have afghans tied into all these so they build that, not only for jobs in afghanistan, but also to make sure they can sustain that over time. >> great. thank you very much, general. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you mr. chairman.

thank you, general for your great service. we enjoyed being with you in afghanistan in october and learned a good deal. i'm incredibly heartened by the progress. we have to tell this story. this is something that americans should be proud of. we should thank those who served in afghanistan over and over, because this progress has been a hard one and at great cost. two items. the increase in life expectancy of 21 years over the course of the last 14 years is just virtually unheard of. you can look across human history, nation to nation, you will not see a life expectancy increase of that kind in such a short period of time. the second thing i'm interested in is, women in the parliament, from zero to 28% in 14 years. our first woman came to congress 99 years ago. we've gone from zero to 28% in -- zero to 20% in 100 years. they've gone from zero to 28% in 15 years. that's pretty impressive.

i agree with i think a bipartisan consensus on this panel. we've got to maintain this progress. everything we do should be conditions-based, not calendar-based. i think it's ok to have a plan. but then you need to adjust it, based on the reality. i know you encouraged the white house to make some adjustments in terms of the authorities granted, u.s. troops during calendar year 2015. after consideration, they did grant some changes in the authorities. so that's good. we have to have a conditions-based approach. personally i think this is important for afghanistan, it's important because of the investment we've made, it's also important because i think there's a powerful narrative about the success in afghanistan that we can apply around the globe. i view it as sort of a contrasting narrative, iraq and afghanistan. iraq didn't want us to stay. we're not occupiers. so we didn't stay. they then ran a government of national disunity where the shi'as kicked around the kurds and the sunnis. the situation in iraq went to hell in a hand basket. and the u.s. and others are

playing a leadership role and now trying to rescue it. afghans want us to stay. 77% of the afghan population, according to your statistics, think the coalition staying and helping is a good thing. these are people who chased the soviet union out of that country. battled them until the death, to chase them out. they want the united states to stay. they want the coalition to stay. afghanistan success creates a powerful argument that the u.s. is the partner of choice in the world. we are the partner of choice. and we're actually seeing that in some interesting places in the world today. india, which has had a tradition of nonalignment or even tilting toward russia, now does more military exercises with the united states than with any other nation. they are seeinging us, whether it's joint exercises or training or purchase of military platforms, as a partner of choice. i was on the phone with admiral gordon at northcom yesterday. mexico has had a military tradition of leaning a little bit toward russia. but they are now viewing the

u.s. military as their partner of choice. i think success in afghanistan we have to make it conditions based. we have to stay and harvest the value of success because we are showing that the united states is the partner of choice. a couple concerns, i was in afghanistan in 2006, my guard men and women who were there from virginia, and then ambassador newman said you've let iraq take your eye off the balance in afghanistan. iraq pulls our attention away. when we were in afghanistan in 2001, by 2002 we were in iraq, too, and that pulled some attention away. and at that point in time, in 2006, he was worried about the same thing happening. i have been calling on congress since june, we need to be in this battle against isil. and we need to be strong in it. i'm going to support strong military action against isil. but i am nervous and i think we do need to use history as our

guide and not let the battle against isil deflect any attention away from the situation in afghanistan and our continued need to harvest and accelerate the gains that we've made there. so that's just an editorial comment. as we get into the discussion about isil i'm going to try to make sure that we're not takinging our eye off the balance in afghanistan and the great work you're doing. you indicated, i think it was interesting, that you don't think the taliban is now an exissstention threat to the nation. we had testimony last year i think from your predecessor, that corruption could be an exissstention threat to the nation. it weakens people's belief in effectiveness of government and can exacerbate sectarian divisions of people -- if people think one group of people is getting more than another. talk about the efforts of the new administration attack on corruption. >> thank you for your question. i do agree that corruption is -- and president ghani agrees too, that it could change the entire dynamic for him. so he ran on the idea that we

would have to get after corruption. they would have to get after corruption, one of the first things he did was reopen the kabul bank case and really held people accountable there. he's taken a hard look at how they assign senior leadership in all of the ministries and he's taken corruption into that. so i think he and the doctor and everything they do, that's foremost in their mind as they select new leadership, as they engage with new companies. on and on they take corruption on and understand how bad it's been and how that impacts donor nations, that they need so much for the next several years, as he continues to work on his economy. he's told me in private that he's worked 20% security, 20% on the -- i'm sorry, 40% on security 40% on the economy. and i know as part of that, the corruption piece comes on both sides. he worked very hard to make sure that he picked ministers that were not corrupt, didn't have that influence. and the doctor did the same

thing. i think they'll continue to work that very hard. it is of concern to all of the army and the police and senior leadership i talk to, they absolutely want to remain a political. they want to make sure they can get anybody who is corrupt out of their leadership. so even at that level they continue to express their concerns and work hard to make sure they can do everything they can to get rid of corruption. >> thank you so much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> general campbell, first, thank you for your years of distinguished service and brave service to our country. i am the people -- i and the people i represent are all very grateful for all that you've done. you have a little over 10,000 troops left in afghanistan right now. is that correct? >> that is correct. i have -- the sworn statement requirements for the nato mission is about 1,900. >> and most american -- 12,900.

>> and most americans who didn't serve in the military, see it and experience it through movies television, so forth, if you look at the recent popular movie "american sniper," where the character is giving watch to marines, going door to door in anbar province, that's what they have in mind when they think about our operations both in iraq and afghanistan. do you have many or any men or discounted men conducting those kind of operations in afghanistan today? >> i have men and women that continue to be able to provide for their own force protection, we do not do -- we do not plan offensive combat operations at all. but i have to make sure that the men and women on the combat outpost, that they have the ability to provide for their own force protection. we do that mostly by with and through our afghan partners. but they do have to have the ability to continue to patrol what we call a g.d.a. or ground defense area outside of those areas. it's for force protection.

>> is it fair to say that you have more troops providing things like aerial support, intelligence surveillance, reconnaissance support, brigade, division, corps-level play planning support, things like that? >> as opposed to -- >> as opposed to going out and conducting dismounted or mounted combat patrols? >> i don't know the percentage-wise but i'm comfortable us providing protection and provide the requisite expertise to do the i.s.r. mission, that kind of thing. it ties hand in hand with force protection. i.s.r. is a great force protection enabler. >> i raise the distinction between those kind of frontline infantrymen who are doing the mission you see in hollywood movies, because i think it's important for the american people to know, whether it's from people like us here or from yourself, that a lot of the missions that our troops are doing in afghanistan right now truly are supporting the

afghan security forces. that helps build public support for our continued mission in afghanistan. that this is not the kind of war that we're fighting in afghanistan and iraq a decade ago. so that's something of which we should all be mindful as we're trying to marshall more public support for this continued campaign. related point. if you could speak roughly, when would you say the 2015 fighting season would end in afghanistan? when do the conditions in most of the country become too harsh for our adversaries to keep fighting? >> i think it depends on the season. this past year the winter season has been very mild. so we haven't had a lot of snow, the passes haven't closed down between afghanistan and pakistan. and i think there's many people that would say today, in fact, it's kind of a continuous season and we wouldn't look at it as fighting season, the fighting season, but the afghans continue talking in those kind of terms. fighting season is really tied around the weather.

so from about the april time frame to the end of september time frame are the traditional months i think we've seen an increase in en-- an increase in enemy activity and operations. >> how does that impact the timing of your decision point for whether you would recommend that we keep the current troop levels or we are able to reduce troop levels further? is there a point on the calendar at which you can no longer wait to make a decision? >> as i talked about earlier there is a point in physics when i have to start descoping and retrograding equipment, downsizing facilities, to be able to get to a number at a certain point in time. we would call those decision points, we've got those laid out. i feel comfortable where we are right now that i have flexibility in that plan, as we move forward on this winter review. but there will come a point in time that i'll say, hey, here's a decision point we have to make a decision by x. >> i encourage you, as i encouraged the secretary of

defense nominee, to speak out using your best professional military judgment. i think you'll find there's a lot of members of this institution, the senate and the house of representatives, who would support you and support the decision of the president to keep at least 10,000 troops in afghanistan until 2017 because it's in our vital national security interests. i know you know the risks that we face from leaving afghanistan too early. this is not your first rodeo there or anywhere else. i would say the risks are embodied in those pictures that you have over there of the electricity in kabul late at night. those are great gains. we should be proud of that. we should be proud of all the efforts that our troops have put into it. but what i worry about is an american city that looks like that going dark because of a terrorist attack that is once again launched from afghanistan. which is the land from which al qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and it is the singular achievement in the war on terror that we have expelled al qaeda from that safe haven and they have not returned and it is critical to make sure they don't. i appreciate all of your efforts to make sure that

doesn't happen. >> thank you mr. chairman. i want to join my colleagues in thanking you, general cam bem for -- campbell, for your extraordinary service to our nation over the many years and your dedicated and diligent work in afghanistan over a number of tures and -- tours and following the very worthwhile work done by your predecessors there. i want to cover some of the points that you and i discussed a little bit yesterday when you were kind enough to visit my office. first of all on the relationship with afghanistan, they've been a source of the improvised explosive devices i.e.d.'s that so ravaged our troops in such large numbers. and yesterday in the hearing that we had with ambassador cunningham and former ambassador crocker they

indicated that, i should say more precisely ambassador cunningham indicated that i.e.d.'s continue to be a problem in afghanistan. in your view do you agree with his assessment that they are a continuing military threat to the afghanistan forces as well as our own? >> sir, thank you for the question. i would tell you that i think i.e.d.'s have become the weapon of choice not only in afghanistan but throughout any insurgency or terrorist attack. that's something that started years ago. it's been picked up, continues to move and it's not only in afghanistan, but will continue to be a threat to both the coalition forces and the afghan security forces. we do, however, continue to work very hard at the counter-i.e.d. capability of our afghan forces. i don't -- i can get you the statistics but the number of i.e.d.'s found versus the number that went off on our

afghan forces continues to get better and better. the human and the afghan that's been trained to be able to detect those gets better and better. that's really noteworthy as we've gone through the last couple of years here. >> would you agree that the primary source of those ingredients continues to be pakistan and that they have done less than they could and should to stop the flow of those bomb-making agreement ingredients across the border? >> there's ample material inside of afghanistan to build i.e.d.'s. there's reports of portions of what it takes to make an i.e.d. that have come in from pakistan. i know that i've talked to a general about that as well. they continue to work that very hard. they have also been impacted by this threat of i.e.d.'s on their own forces and civilians. so they understand they have to go after that as well. but afghanistan members i think would tell that you some of the parts, some of the materials that come up, they believe they have come in from pakistan

yes, sir. >> and that perhaps is an area of focus, where the coalition forces can even impose greater cooperation with pakistan? >> absolutely. i think one of the things that pakistan has done for our afghan forces, i don't think it's scheduled yet but i know it's been offered up counter-i.e.d. training inside of pakistan for the afghan forces. >> you and i spoke yesterday about the possibility of purchasing helicopter parts and components for the mi-17's that afghanistan now has, purchases from the russians that were financed with american taxpayer funds. from other sources. either in europe or elsewhere in the world. is that an effort that you're going to pursue? in other words to stop any further purchases of not only helicopters but also parts and

components of those helicopters for the afghanistan forces? >> as we talked about, the mi-17 is a critical component for the afghanistan security forces, for their air force, for their special mission wing. to be able to continue them flying and in the fight will be a continued piece on their maintenance and spare part piece, we're going to work hard to make sure we do that within the authorities that i have, to make sure that we acquire those parts in the right way. absolutely. >> in the right way means other than the russian export agency that has sold us so many -- not us, but the afghans so many helicopters with our money? >> we're trying to work to have the afghans work through their process to make sure they can get those parts to build a sustainable capability within afghanistan so once we are gone they can do that themselves. we have to start that now, yes, sir. >> one last question before my

time expires. i know that you have focused on the health care needs particularly the mental health care needs of the very brave and dedicated men and women under your command. i want to thank you for that effort. i thank the united states armed forces for their increased focus and attention to that issue. thank you again for your service. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you mr. chairman. general, thank you for your service to our country. we appreciate the comments that you've made so far today. i have just a couple of questions, sir. first of all last year was the deadliest in the war with more than 5,000 afghan soldiers and police being killed. you noted the ansf were going out on four times as many operations last year than previously. so more casualties could be expected. how does the increase in the operation's tempo, up by four times, affect the complexity

involved to train the ansf in the capabilities that still need to be developed? >> thank you, sir. are you referring to the capabilities for the medical piece so we can reduce the number of carblets or -- >> basically, you're losing solders there right now. yet at the same time you're trying to train them up. when you're losing them at this rate how do you bring them in and get them set up and continue the training regimen that's necessary? >> thank you for the question. probably a 5% to 7% increase from 2013 to 2014. most of those the higher percentage was on the afghan local police that are outside in the far places of afghanistan, that are designed to protect their individual villages that are not equipped with the same type of heavy weapons that the regular police have, but the taliban have recognized that they are a threat to them because they're inside the villages and they're against the taliban.

they attack them inside. so they've gone after those key targets, those soft targets. the ability to recruit and train the afghans has not been an issue. they continue to bring in the numbers they need, boat on the army side and on the the police -- both on the army side and the police side. they need to work on the number of females that they continue to bring in. but i think for the most part they don't have issues recruiting them. what we are trying to do is continue to lower the number of died of wounds, that kind of thing has increased. their capability in the medical arena, on their medivac. i've seen great achievements here in the last different operations they've had, where they've been able to provide that service to their men and women that are out there fighting. all of them do some of the same things we do, they have combat lifers, the medics -- life savers, the medics have insignia where they're recognized as medics. they understand this is an issue for morale and also leads

toward readiness, so everybody's working this very hard. i've talked personally to the afghan army surgeon general on a one-on-one session to make sure that we can do everything we can do to help them build that capability and i talked to the chief of their army, he's increased the number of people he sends to school and to make sure they continue to get all the medical training they can. >> is the coordination also there between kabul and the local units of government as well with regard to where the casualties are at? is there a coordination between the central government and those local units of government when it comes to this training? >> i'd have to come back to you on that. i would tell you that, i can talk as far as the military side. i can't talk to you as far as the civilian piece. i have looked at afghan hospitals inside of kabul to make sure they can take some of the military casualties. the military have their own hospitals. we je just finished a brand new one that's quite good.

so i couldn't tell that you kind of coordination between that. i know there are memorandums of understanding between the army, the police to make sure they share those facilities, to bring the military folks in. they do bring in civilian casualties to the military hospitals, as well and initially work them there. so if you're referring to that kind of coordination yes, sir, they do do to that. >> thank you, sir -- they do do that. >> thank you, sir. i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you mr. chairman. general, thank you. i'm so sorry i had another -- i was in other meetings there. i appreciate you being here. we fell backwards. we lost mosul, we lost a lot of our equipment. you'd think all of the money we invested in training and equipping would have been put to better use than what it was.

now we have afghanistan and we hear we're going to be down at the end of the year to 5,500. what do you think it will take us to maintain a presence so that we don't fall backwards in afghanistan and what do you think is going to maintain to get iraq back to where it can sustain itself? >> i think the key really for afghanistan is to continue to build upon the capacity of afghan forces so they have the requisite skill sets to make sure they don't do what the iraqi army did and that's fall apart. they have leadership they have the right equipment, they have the right training. i just don't see that happening in afghanistan. >> it seemed like it takes our presence for that to happen. when our presence was gone, we should have seen maliki falling apart and not having anything as far as a contingency plan, if you will. i'm just saying that back home in west virginia, they want to know, do we have to go back and refight all over?

like we do in iraq? can we prevent that in afghanistan? >> i believe the afghan security forces are not going to let afghanistan go in the way that iraq went. they've told me that. i've seen the senior leadership in the army, the police, they tell me that. they believe that strongly. they have a government now that wants to continue to work with the international forces, wants to continue to provide the requisite resources and authorities for their leadership, not let them go down that route. they went through the election last year. people thought they would fracture among ethnic lines, they did not. they're very proud of that. i just don't see that happening with continued training, they continue to build that up on the afghan forces, both in the army and police. i don't see that happening. >> here's my other concern the economy. i've always believed and i've been there a few times myself, their economy in 2001, when all this began was about $4

billion. that was their economy as far as in afghanistan. that went from $4 billion to $20 billion based on american input of money and the war effort that we put there. so their economy was basically wrapped around us. it continued to grow, it was spiking up to 14.4% growth rate in 2012. then it failed -- fell to 1.5% growth rate as we started retracting. openum cultivation was up by 7% i think last year. but the production increased by 17%. it's very important that opium traffic business makes up 1/5 of the size of the afghan gross domestic product. how about the country ever be able to stand up on its own, and that's the only thing -- when the drug trade is so profitable how can we divert them from the drug trade and, if they don't have the war

effort and the amount of money we're pumping into it, and we try to get them off the drug trade, where can they stabilize that economy? >> leadership's going to make a disms -- difference. i think with president ghani there, understanding issues with narcotics and drug smuggling, going after, that providing the right leadership and resources to go after, that will continue to help. he's going after this entire piece on the economy. i said earlier he spends 40% of his time just on the economy from a regional perspective. he knows he can't do it just within afghanistan. although years and years down the road, with the minerals they have, the mines they have, with the agricultural base that they have, they're going to get much better. but he knows it's going to take years and years. he's going to be dependent upon donor nations for the next several years. he's reached out to the entire region to help him on the economic realm. when he first visited pakistan, he talked again about security. he talked about economics, he talked about sharing of

intelligence, he talked about people to people. that is foremost on his mind. as you know, he's got a background from the world bank. if there's anybody that can turn afghanistan around and their economy around, it's going to be president ghani. but it's going to take considerable time. >> my time's just about up. i would say, i'd like to talk to you more about that as far as on the precious metals, extraction of precious metals. what part of the world is getting those contracts? china has been a big player in copper. as you know. i don't think we have a united states corporation that has been a player over there, even though we're giving them the support and protection in order to harvest that. my time is up. but i'd like to talk to you more in detail about that. thank you, general. >> senator tillis. >> thank you, mr. chair. general campbell, thank you for your distinguished service. i wanted to go back, to me, the humanitarian positive humanitarian impact that we've seen in afghanistan since 2001, i hope that the media and the american people understand the miraculous turnaround of this

country. just to go back and to note, the life expectancy you're talking about, from 43 years old to 64 years old, schools where you had fewer than 900,000 students, virtually none of them women, now we have eight million, with 36% of them females. the numbers here are startling. and to a certain extent, we all know that what we first and foremost have to do is implement a strategy in afghanistan that prevents terrorists from preparing themselves to launch attacks like they did on september 11. that's very important. it should be the first priority. but i also think that those who seem to want to have a precipitous withdrawal from afghanistan, forget the tragic humanitarian crisis that would be created if we did that. and i hope that we start weaving into the narrative -- this is not only about our national security, but this is about a city that went from a city of ruin to a city of lights.

fastest growing city in the world. there's a lot of hope there and i think that the afghani people are looking to the united states to let them continue to make the progress that we think they're in a position to make. my question relates to chairman mccain, he mentioned that some of our members met with president ghani and he talked about flexibility. you talked about some changes that you've recommended to your leadership. are the changes that you've recommended substantially aligned with what president ghani is wanting in terms of the current strategy for withdrawal and reduction of troops? >> i'm not specifically -- i've not specifically talked to president ghani about the options but i've been with him several times a week. we've talked about what it would take to continue to provide flexibility for me as a ground commander. so he knows where i stand on that. but i think he would support the options i presented.

>> how do you feel about how those options have been received by your leadership or the administration? in other words, to what extent do you think that they'll be acted on and then you'll be given authority to act on the options that you've recommended? >> we're in discussions right now. there's a process we go through, just like we did back in october, november december, when we work the enablers and authorities and the bridging strategy that the president allowed, the thousand bridge strategy he gave me to continue with the resident support mission. we're talking those now and i feel very good about where we're at. >> would you characterize those changes or those additional options as minor course corrections or some fundamental shifts in certain areas based on the current strategy? >> i characterize it as i said, when i got on the ground i'd make continual assessments.

i've made those assessments, where the forces are, where the afghan forces are, where the threat is, what has changed in afghanistan, as i outlined in my oral statement, and based on that, provided this flexibility that i think both president ghani has asked for and that will stay within where we need to be to reach our strategic objectives inside of afghanistan. >> the trajectories that you would create by looking at the taliban in 2001 in afghanistan and the current situation, do you believe if we stay on the current course, that we could expect these very positive trends to continue at their same pace? or will their progress going forward be impeded? >> i think in some areas we'll continue to have same pace. in some areas it may go lower. >> any particular areas you

think are at risk? of those areas, are there any that you're in a position to say are at clear risk current strategy? >> sir are you talking about -- >> more on the humanitarian side. >> i feel comfortable that the afghans have worked with many of the nations, to include the u.s. embassy, there are many of those areas on the humanitarian side, to build their own capability and capacity. i would leave that to ambassador mckinley and his folks to answer in great detail. but i think they built the capacity in many of those areas and i would feel very comfortable, most of the sectors we showed up here, would continue to stay where they're at or grow. >> i want to thank you and thank the men and women who served over there. thank you for your service. >> thank you. >> the charts that you provided are really just stunning returns on investment. the question for americans

what does it matter that young girls are going to school in afghanistan? it matters a lot because you can't kill all the terrorists, but if you can allow young women and young people to see a better future, they will be more resistant to the taliban. what does it matter that you have access to clean water? it means you have something to live for. not die for. we're trying to build something in afghanistan where people accept the way forward. do you agree with me that most afghans, 90%, probably, have no desire to go back to the taliban days? >> absolutely. >> and the only way they would go back to the taliban days is if they lost their capacity to contain and defeat the taliban? >> i think if the afghan security forces were not able to do that, that would be the only way yes, sir. >> do you support 352 afghan security forces for the foreseeable future? >> i think the number 352,000 plus the 30,000 afghan local

police with their army and the police continues to be the right number, the right distribution throughout the country that we have yes, sir. >> and the cost to us would be what? >> we're working very hard on the cost. it's around $4.1 billion. this year it came a little less. we continue to work very hard to save where we can and i think about $3.8 billion is what i came in with for 2016. >> so you think it's in our national security interest to spend $3.8 billion maintaining this force? >> i think the small investment for the afghan security forces continues to provide them the ability to protect their country, to provide for more stable afghanistan, and as i talked about in the oral statement, they say for -- a safer afghanistan is a safer united states. >> i don't know what $3.8 billion is of the total budget, it's still a lot of money to me. but a return on investment for that amount i think is enormous. it's just as simple as this. we keep their army in tact, they'll do the fighting and we

won't have to. we'll do the supporting. president ghani in munich suggested that when he visited the united states, he would like the opportunity to thank the american people and suggested whether or not a joint session of congress appearance would be possible. do you think that would help the overall relationship? >> president ghani thinks the -- thanks the american people everywhere i've been with him. if he had a chance to do that with the joint session of congress i think that would be very good. >> we'll send a letter. this would be one appearance i think we would all support. i cannot tell you how hopeful i am, under president ghani's leadership, if we're just smart enough to see this through. i think we'll get a good outcome here. i will be sending that letter along with my colleagues. if we go down to 5,500, as planned this year, without some

adjustment, are we out of canned car -- kandahar completely? >> we go to 5,500 we go to kabul-sent rick, yes, sir. >> i want the committee to understand, kandahar's just not a spot on the map. that's the spiritual home of the taliban, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> if we hold kandahar there's no way they come back. that makes sense to you? i say we i mean them. >> yes, sir. >> so if we begin to lose in the south, will it have a splintering effect throughout the country? >> it would provide the taliban some momentum, yes, sir. >> and you believe, with a presence in kandahar relatively small, we can secure the gains that we've had we've achieved, and it would be smart to probably keep that presence at least for a while longer? >> i think we need to continue to provide the afghan security forces some t.a.a., especially on security forces and special operating capability, they have

in kandahar. >> do you agree with me that this part of the world is a dangerous part of the world and counterterrorism platform that we enjoy today in afghanistan is tremendously beneficial to protecting the homeland? >> i concur with that. >> do you agree with me that the afghans want us to stay? >> i concur with that. >> there's a debate about what happened in iraq. there is no debate about afghanistan. the only question is, will we accept the invitation in the right format. so let's end this discussion with the idea that the afghan people, through their government, want us to stay. >> the afghan senior leadership on the military side have told me repeatedly that they appreciate our sacrifice and they would want to us stay, yes. >> that's true of their political leadership also? >> yes, sir. >> and it's in our national security interest to stay

wisely. >> a safer securer afghanistan provides for safety for our homeland. we have not had another 9/11 since we've been forward deployed. and the pressure that brave men and women continue to apply to the terrorist networks inside of afghanistan have prevented them from being able to come to the united states. i do believe that. >> thank you very much, general campbell, for being here. thanks for all you do to protect our country and keep us safe. the mission in afghanistan that we have, i stated in the 2001 authorization for the use of military force there, was of course to use force against all nations, organizations and individuals deemed to have been involved in the planning authorization and commission of the attacks of september 11, in

order to perpetrate them or harbor those who did. so our goal was basically to punish those who perpetrated the attacks and to prevent future attacks against u.s. citizens. today what can you tell us about what the capacity is of terrorist groups that may be operating in afghanistan and in pakistan, to launch attacks against the united states and how have the capabilities and the ambitions of those groups trended over the last five years? how does it look today as compared to five years ago? >> i'll give you a very general answer on that. i would prefer to go into a classified session if you want to go into more detail on that. my read would be that based on, again, our presence inside of afghanistan, with a great counterterrorism capability, we've been able to continue to

keep pressure on insurgents that would want to do harm to both afghanistan and other nations, that include europe and the united states. i think over the last several years, we've been able to keep that pressure down or keep that pressure on them and that has led to our ability to plan attacks against our homeland. >> you feel good about the improvement that has been made over the last five years on that front? >> sir i do. if i could rephrase that. i feel very good about the last six months, of what i've seen on the ground in afghanistan on that. >> ok, so more -- you've seen more progress in the last six months than perhaps -- >> i've been over there six months so i can talk from perspective of seeing that myself. i can't talk about before that. >> understood. thank you. where are the insurgent groups fighting against the afghan government and coalition

forces, where and how are they generating their funding their weapons and their recruits and what are we as the united states, what are the u.s. armed forces doing to disrupt those networks of funding and the supply chains for their arms and so forth? >> i'd rather give you a broad general answer and discuss a little bit more in detail in a classified hearing. but as we mentioned before, some of the funding comes from the drug trade some of the funding comes from minerals, some of the funding is just from other gulf nations, some of it is from weapons smuggling. so there's a long list of things that provide insurgency funding inside of afghanistan and i think that both the president ghani understands that the doctor, the security forces understand that. and they continue to work very hard on attacking the sources of that funding, to limit what the insurgents can actually do. >> what's your assess.

of the new afghan government's attempts to inform -- form an inclusive government and the relationship between the civilian leadership in kabul on the one hand and the afghan national security forces on the other hand? they've worked very hard to maintain a national unity government, to form this national unity government. i've been with both of them several times. they both have given up a little bit to move afghanistan forward as they went through this election. i think they compliment each other. i think president ghani has taken on the role of commander in chief. we hadn't seen that before. he's told all of the afghan police and the army that their welfare is his welfare. he's personally involved in every facet of their leadership , of how they get resources. he continually goes out to different sites to show the afghan army and the police that he is their commander in chief. he's gainfully employed to show

that he cares for them and everything about them which i had never seen before underneath president karzai. >> is the afghanistan government in your opinion, on track to increase their level of burden sharing in supporting the ansf and becoming self-sustaining and self-governing? >> they're working it this year, i think they showed us that they could provide the requisite amount that we asked them to do. but it's going to taken ited time on their -- taken ited time on their entire approach -- take continued time on their entire approach. the president has take an hard look at how he can attack this problem, by talking about different agreements that he's making with other countries around to provide railroads provide ways to transport agriculture outside of afghanistan, to take a look at the mining industry on and on. so he's engaged in this every single day.

>> thank you very much. >> thank you mr. chairman. and, general thanks again for your service. all your staff for your service. and your opening comments. i think service and sacrifice and importantly success are very powerful and i think they're important for the american people to know. i also appreciate your emphasis on military families and their sacrifice. many ways the unsung heroes of the last several years. but i think one of the general themes here is that you're seeing people applauding the success, we had general madison here last week talking about how it's clear that the successes that we've seen in a whole host of areas you listed

can be reversed they're fragile in many ways. the broader issue that i think most of us are concerned about is a replay of what's happened or what happened in iraq. as a military leader, you know, the senator spoke eloquently about this a couple minutes ago. do you think it's important to have condition-based withdrawal dates or transition dates based on success, that you've been talking about, versus a calendar-based withdrawal? >> thanks for the question. i think it's important that the military commander on the ground be able to provide his best military advice to a senior leadership, as he takes a look at a whole bunch of different variables on the ground. the enemy, the situation of the afghan security forces, those type of things. i've continued to do that for the last six months. again i have provided options

in this winter review process to my leadership that i believe allows us the flexibility that both president ghani and the afghan people, that will continue to keep us on a road like this to be successful. >> your approach is definitely conditions-based versus a date on a calendar that says we're leaving? >> i think there's a lot of different conditions that go into the recommendations that i provide. time is one of those yes, sir. >> i think the other thing that i think is a big responsibility for all of us, for you, for us and the congress for the executive branch is when we're looking at our challenges, and there are many national security challenges, that we level with the american people, they want to know what those challenges are they want to know we have a strategy. i appreciate your candor today. you're epitomizing that kind of straightforward leveling with the people that i think is so important, as we address these challenges. the president has already declared that the u.s. combat mission in afghanistan has

ended and yet a lot of the discussion today, we've been talking about a u.s. counterterrorism mission. so he says combat, the combat mission's over but we've been talking about a cournlt terrorism mission. i think the counterterrorism mission is very important, for obviously its broader strategic implications in terms of protecting the homeland. but isn't the u.s. combat -- isn't the usct mission a combat mission right now? >> there's no doubt that i have with the u.s. forces afghanistan and with nato had different missions. one is assist and one is a counterterrorism mission. there's no issue from the president on down that we have that mission. >> there seems to be a disconnect. again, i know this isn't where your focus is, but there seems to be a disconnect between what the president is telling the american people, we're done with combat operations in afghanistan, and yet we have a robust, it sounds like, an

important c.t. mission that we're still undertaking. again, i think this goes to the leveling with the american people on what we're actually doing. do you have -- in terms of a robust c.t. mission, can that be supported by the current troop levels contemplated by the president? >> i don't think i used the word robust. but i do have enough of the resources for the c.t. mission that i currently have right now. we have downsized our c.t. capability over the last several years. just as we've downsized the other forces out there. i do believe i have the requisite resources to continue with the current c.t. mission that i have. >> would you in 2016, if we were on this trajectory that the president's talked about? >> i would have to go make sure that i have that flexibility within those numbers on the different missions that i would have. i think right now i'd have to go back and make sure that was

within those options that we provided to the senior leadership. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> general we thank you for being here. i enjoyed our conversations and visit at christmastime when i was with new kabul. every witness before this committee and every retired military man or woman believes that we cannot have a calendar-based with dwrall -- withdrawal from afghanistan. we certainly don't want to see what the president described in 2014 a norm allem about asy presence with a security -- normal embassy presence with a security assistance component just as we did in iraq. we don't want to do just as we've done in iraq, obviously. i'm keenly appreciative of your role in the decision making process, as a uniform military

leader. but it's very clear that unless we change what is now the course we're on, then we're going to have enormous difficulties in afghanistan. by the way, i appreciate those pictures. it's also a fact that you can't go downtown kabul, any american can't, without armed escort. you can't drive around kabul unless you're in an armored vehicle. the ring road that we thought was going to connect all of afghanistan is not safe in many parts. the taliban control it. so, yes, there has been a lot of progress. but there's a number of areas including the fact that we still haven't got an handle on this terrible thing where afghans in uniform shoot american military members. so, we've got a long way to go. and you've got to speak truth to power not just because of

the fact that the situation on the ground argues for conditions-based withdrawal, but i think you owe it to the men and women who are still serving over there because if you believe there your assessment -- from your assessment that if we go to a kabul-based situation by the end of -- excuse me, embassy-based situation by the end of 2016, normal embassy presence, then you've got to speak up. because too many young americans have already lost their lives and their limbs in afghanistan. and i and others have been there since the beginning. we can't allow their deaths to be in vein. so i strongly urge you -- vain. so i strongly urge you, when you counsel the president, to do the right thing. and we all know what the right thing is.

and i thank you for being here today. senator reed? this hear something adjourned. thank you, general. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> oregon governor kitzhaber announced he is resigning from office. the web site of the newspaper in portland says his fourth term lasted one month and one day, starting under a cloud of allegations that he and his girlfriend possibly committing crimes and ethics revelations. earlier today the governor issued an audio statement announcing his resignation.

>> i'm announcing today i will resign as governor of the governor of oregon. it is the stand and fight for the cause. i apologize to all those people who gave of their face, time, energy and resources to elect me to a fourth term last year and supported me over the past three decades. i will continue to pursue our common cause. it is deeply troubling to me to realize that we have come to a place in the history of this great state of ours where a person can be charged, tried, convicted and accepted by the media with no due process and no independent verification of the allegations involved. even more troubling and on a very personal level who has given 35 years, so many of my former allies have been willing to accept this judgment at its face value. it is something for me to comprehend.

something we might expect in washington, d.c. but surely not in oregon. i do not know what it means for our future, but i do know it undermines the state. nonetheless, i understand that i have become a liability to the very institutions and policies. as a former presiding officer, i understand the reasons which i have been asked to resign. i wish all on both sides of the aisle success in this legislative session and beyond and i hope they are committed to carrying the forward of bipartisanship and cooperation that has marked the last four years in oregon. in 1968, i was inspired to commit my life to public service. 41 years ago i started work as an emergency room doctor with a goal to make life better. ever since then, i kept that

focus by trying to make things better for the people and the communities in this state that i love. i have had the extraordinary privilege of pursuing that work as a state representative, state senator and as your governor. over those years, i had the honor of being part of those remarkable achievements. we rebuilt an oregon economy in every region of our state. unlike many parts of our nation we did it with cooperation and respect for oregon and for each other. we successfully defended oregon's national heritage of clean water, clean air. and created watersheds in 90 watershed councils and supported our world communities and create jobs while enhancing the environment. we stood up for the principle

that every one deserves respect and rights including the right to choose and marry the person we love. we have stood by our working men and women. we have transformed our health care system while lowering costs. 9 % of the people of oregon will go to bed knowing they have health insurance coverage. three-day special session, we reformed our public pension system provideded tax relief and raced for public health and education. we have pursued the goal of equity and opportunity especially for those who have been left behind. communities of color english-language learners and those in poverty and those that are very young and very old. we have laid the groundwork in

ensuring 90% of our children could be reading at level in five years and poised to reach agreements that will resolve the crisis in the klamath basin. as important as what we have accomplished it, how we have accomplished it is very more important. we have overcome partisan differences. that has faltered. we have rebuilt a function political center reaching across party lines to do important things by rebuilding communities to help right the ship and chart a better course for the future. i ran as a fourth term to continue that progress but the questions have been raised about my administration, specifically allegations against me concerning the work down by my fee answer ayaan the media frens

y. i'm confident that i have not broken any laws or taken any actions that were dishonest. that is why i ask both the ethics commission and the attorney general to take a look at my actions and i will continue to fully cooperate with those ongoing efforts. once they have been concluded, you will see i have never put anything before my love for and commitment to oregon and faithfully fulfilling the responsibilities of the public offices i have had the honor to hold. this process will take months. i have always had the deepest respect for the remarkable institution and for the office of the governor and i cannot in good conscience continue to be the element that undermines it. i have always tried to do the right thing and now the right thing to do is to step aside. one thing i hope people know about me is i love this state and its people, its rivers and

mountains and landscapes in my every fiber of my being. i tender my resignation at 10:00 a.m., february 18, 2015. the secretary of state will take the oath of office as oregon's governor. oregon will be in good hands and i wish her well. thank you for allowing me to serve you and our state. it has been the honor of my life and i believe i can say looking back over of those years we have left it better than we found it. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> oregon's secretary of state will become governor. she said i am ready and my staff will be ready for her to become governor. the newspaper also reports that brown began publicly identifying herself as by sexual in the 1990's and has been married for

15 years to dan lit will, with whom she has two children. if you would like to read the resignation letter or listen to the audio version, both are available on our web site at cspan.org. >> the political landscape has changed with the 114th congress, 43 new republicans and 15 new democrats in the house, there is also 108 women in congress, including the first african-american republican in the house. keep track of the members of congress using congressional chronicle. the page has lots of useful information including statistics about each session of congress, new congress, best access on c-span c-span 2 c-span radio and span.org.

>> three potential republican candidates for president at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> here's some of our featured programs for the president's day weekend. saturday morning at 9:00, savannah book festival on topics like the disappearance of michael rockefeller, and four women spice during the civil war and sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern former senior adviser david axelrod and american history tv, saturday morning beginning at 8:30 100th anniversary release

of the film birth of a nation. the showing of the 1915 film followed by a call-in program. and sunday at 8:00 on the presidency george washington portraits focusing on how they captured the spirit of the first president. find our schedule at cspan.org. >> house speaker john boehner senate majority leader mitch mcconnell held a ceremony to send to the white house legislation authorizing the keystone k.l. oil pipeline. president obama said he will veto the bill.

the ceremony was about 10 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. in a few minutes i will sign senate bill 1, bipartisan legislation approving the keystone x.l. pipeline. i thank my colleagues for being here and thank the president of north america's building trades union for being here as well. this really is pretty simple. it is a good idea for our economy and good idea for our country. members of both parties know it and have put politics aside and passed this very important bill. the president's own state department says this project will create up to 4 ,000 direct jobs.

labor unions know it. they say keystone, this isn't a pipeline but a lifeline for america's construction workers and the overwhelming majority of the american people know it as well. so, to the president, i would just say this, do the right thing. sign this bill and help us create more jobs in america and create a healthier economy. with that, let me turn it over to sean. >> thank you mr. speaker, majority leader, on behalf of the three million people i represent, i want to thank you for your tenacity on not giving up on this middle-class-producing project. we are excited to be at this point and excited with the ceremony and urge the president of the united states to put our men and women back to work across the length of this pipeline as soon as possible. we urge the president to sign the bill.

thank you. >> the new majority is getting congress back to work for the american people. passing a bipartisan jobs and infrastructure bill like keystone represents another step along that path. i would like to recognize a few members who made that possible. first is the bill's namesake. john has been a warrior on this issue. he fought hard for years. he joined alliances across the aisle and no matter how long it took the senator never ever gave up. he never doubted that common sense would prevail in the senate and senator my culls ki. she worked hard to have competing priorities and no matter how they voted they owe her a debt of gratitude that a functioning senate was possible.

a new majority is grateful for her work and many democrats are as well. one of them, senator cantwell deserves a mention. even though she didn't vote for keystone, but worked with us to process amendments. we are grateful to her as well. and where we are as others have indicated, we are hoping common sense will prevail here and the president will sign this extraordinary jobs bill. >> when the president spoke during the state of the union address, he said the united states must aim higher than a single pipeline and i agree with him this is a great place to start. under his policies, domestic production has shut down on federal lands and increased everywhere else by 35%. and they have benefited by having more energy supply. it would go through western

south and for those counties it would be a good shot in the arm. the property taxes the pipeline would bring in would fund schools and roads and bridges and give them the opportunity to transport the energy supplies they need in a safer manner and take care better. if the president says no to this bill what he is saying no to safety, no to the environment, no to funding schools and no to safer roads and bridges and i'm determined to all i can to get this bill signed into law so with can build this pipeline. >> i want to start out by thanking the house by passing the bill and the bill can go to the president. this is about energy. it's about jobs. about economic growth. it's about national security for our country through energy security and everyone's on board.

except for the president. for starters, you have both houses of congress overwhelming majority, 270 votes in the house. 62 votes in the senate. bipartisan majorities in the congress. the states are on board. all six states on the route have approved this project. as i've said before, given they had six years to do it that's not a real high bar. but the american people are on board. overwhelmingly. last three years, poll after poll, showed between 65% and 70% of the american people support this project. you have the congress on board and bipartisan majorities and states on board and the people of this country on board. mr. president, you need to join us and approve this project. make no mistake we are in a global battle to determine who is going to supply energy.

is it going to be opec, russia? countries like iran and venezuela or are we going to work with our closest friend and ally canada, to produce our energy here at home. look what it means to our consumers. a year ago, the price at the pump for a gallon of gasoline was a dollar higher. if it were a tax cut, the drop in gas prices at the gas pump would be a $100 billion tax cut in the consumers' pockets. where do you want the energy produced, who do you want to be the energy leader in the world, the answer is pretty clear? . they want to work with canada. when the president says no. no tom investment and producing more energy in this country, no to the very nurk we need to move that energy around our country

safely and remember it is oil produced in my home state in north dakota and montana, domestic oil we are moving to refineries. when the president says no, that is music to opec's ears because it puts them right back in the saddle doesn't it? when our energy is declining because that very investment is blocked, opec will raise those prices right back up and consumers will pay more at the pump and will have less energy security. when you look at what is going on in the middle east and with isis, do we want to rely on opec for our energy? the congress and states and american are on board, mr. president we need you to join us and sign this legislation. >> thank you senator, for being the warrior on this. i believe america's national

security and america's economic security are tied directly to america's energy security and it was easy to recommend to the leadership that we accept the senate amendments and senate one rather than go to a conference committee. i think the amendments, while not universally loved strengthen the bill, which i think is an important point. so far too long we have seen gridlock grab this town and we have demonstrated in this bill a functioning congress and the best of us is illustrated in this bill and it would be a tragic shame if the president didn't stand with us as we are willing to stand with him, willing to help him do the thing that he could have do unilaterally with the stroke of his pen by signing the presidential permit. when i was on the public service commission in north dakota and

sighted the first pipeline, 600 land owners' lands, i saw every mile of the pipeline. i know it very well. and i met i met the labor force on the site. these are real workers. these are real jobs. this lifts up middle-class america in a big way. but even more than the pipe fitters and the heavy machinery operators and the truck drivers there was the local cafe, the hotels, the retailers, hardware stores and little towns that needed a shot in the arm. and your men and women working on the site gave us that shot in the arm. so i understand we all have political considerations and the president does too, but today

those political considerations, i think are diminished by the fact that the new political consideration is that the people's representatives in perfect concert with the people that we do represent are willing to stand with the president as he stands with them and hopefully signs this bill into law. >> time to sign the bill. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> the house could take up legislation dealing with homeland security spending, current funding for homeland security expires friday, february 27. liberia's assistant minister of health spoke about his country's response to ebola and how to

eradicate the disease. this is an hour and a half. >> good morning everyone. i'm senior vice president here at csis global health programs here and we are joined and very honored today to have with us tolbert nyen somewhat and will say a few words about him. i also want to thank colleagues who helped pull this all together, katie and travis and jessie. so special thanks to them for pulling this together. we were traveling katherine, my

colleague, katherine and i were traveling in january to liberia and sier aver -- sierra leone and met this remarkable person who is an assist ant minister of health, deputy chief medical officer and head of the incident management system in liberia, which is the central and most important institution driving the response and control of ebola in liberia. tom freeden when he has visited liberia has declared this is the most important person in liberia. maybe that is arguable in deference to the president and others but one thing is that tolbert is a leader. he trained as a lawyer at the

university of liberia. he went on to pursue his interests in humanitarian law at johns hopkins at emmery and elsewhere and in 2012-2013 came to bloomberg school to complete a masters in public health and then as he will describe as an official, he became at the center of the response directly empowered by the head of state to really carry forward this. and it became terribly important as the crisis worsened in the august-september time frame, as the mobilization took off in the mid-fall and up to now and as we have entered this new phase. so we are honored toville tolbert with us. i know he is a malaria expert.

he was responsible for drafting the first national plan under the president's malaria initiative the plan for liberia. so he can speak to many different issues in the course of this. what we have asked tolbert to speak for 15, 20 minutes and take us through the story of the outbreak and the response and the different phases. tell us about the way the government organized itself, tell us about the u.s. entry and entry of others. tell us a bit of where we are now in this current phase of attempting to get to zero in monrovia and elsewhere in liberia. we had a chance to go over this when we were together in january, and it was the most louis i had and cogeent and insightful summary of the story.

so when we learned that tolbert would be here in this period, we asked him if he could come and do a public presentation along these lines. there are plenty of seats up front. i welcome the 75 people or so who are online and the audience from c-span. tolbert, we are glad to have you here today. if you could carry us through that and move rapidly to the audience to get comments and questions from all of you. so welcome. we are thrilled to have you here and the floor is yours. >> thank you. thank you for the time. it is my pleasure to be here. at this very, very important institution and pleasure to be in washington, d.c.. i'm honored and privileged to

talk to you all and thanks for coming out. to hear the story about the ebola response in liberia horrible story about what we did as a country, as we came together as a state and pulled assistance together very quickly to respond to one of the major threats, major global public health threat to our existing in mankind. we, as a country recovering from massive civil conflict 14 years

of civil conflict, rebuilding our lives, as a country as a people tuned extraordinary leadership incredible leadership of africa's president first african-american female president, who led the people of liberia, turn around very quickly and brought the situation after the war years, desperation, high hope of our people, we are under trajectory, very good trajectory after the civil conflict, tried to rebuild some -- reconstruct our

infrastructure bridges and roads. and then we got some of the important steps that a government made to the effort of the president was to increase the government overall budgetary support to the health care system. 19% of the budget contributed to the health system. as compared to the 2015 target of 15% the projected budget to the sector of libe liberia has gone 19% before 2015. in africa, it was the number one country that meant before the target dates. the mortality reduction.

liberia met the target in 20126 reduction. and we are making progress. and the mortality reduction has been strengthening and before the g.d.p. growth has reached 8.7% before the ebola ms. rice: in 2014. 2014 has become a difficult year in liberia and the entire region the entire west-african sub-region and my description of that is that ebola was not just something.

ebola can cross the border and possible to enter the united states. no passport to enter european countries. those of us in west africa that are on the front line of fighting disease are sacrificing for the rest of the world. and these are the kind of feelings we got as people as a country, we came together to fight this disease. and so under the leadership of the president, we -- when the disease struck in december, 2013 liberian border -- we were in the proximity of the border.

the pourous nature of the border, we knew that liberia wasn't safe, especially where it became the epicenter in that terrible situation. by march precisely march 22 ebola struck -- we had a case of the disease and imagine the entire region manner where begin's, liberia and sierra leone, we needed to take the specimen across the border to have it tested and know whether or not what we are dealing with ebola disease. and before that, liberia was

also baffling -- >> we had lack of fever. and the sign and symptoms of ebola are related to some of the common diseases we were seeing in our health system, fever headaches, vomitting bleeding from out of the ori fmp aces, eyes nose and eyes. we could not really distinguish from whether or not there was ebola. so the first case was diagnosed. our minister of health said that ebola was in liberia. we went to the world organization that we had a strange disease in the region. it was the first time that ebola

-- ebola has been in the east-african area. we have no knowledge of such disease and this was the first time. so the health system was not that equipped to the extent to deal with the issue of isolation testing of people with the disease and all that. so we had to deal with the situation. and to do that, we are organized as a government in the ministry of health, created the national coordination unit and meeting every day on how to deal with the situation. yet people were getting infected and we had the first wave of the outbreak between march and april. the first wave of the outbreak had only six confirmed cases with six confirmed -- the

mortality rate of the first wave. that was the situation dealt with the first wave and gone at least 60 days without a new case of the disease. but in guinea and sierra leone got hit in may. sierra leone was reporting the virus, so we could not declare the disease was over as a country. we have intermarriages, we have cross-border issues, families. you can walk across the borders close to 100 border points unofficial. so we could not declare we were out of the woods as a country. and had a second wave of the

outbreak in the country. that is a major and terrible fact. there was an epicenter close to the border. we had a number of cases that for the first time, the capital city got hit with the disease. we had a case 14-year-old girl had traveled from sierra leone and settled down with her family in monrovia. 1.5 million people. and people started getting infected from the disease. we had three sections who had become the epicenter. by the time we got to june, july monrovia got infected by june july, august, the situation had gotten under

control. we were reporting like 60-70 confirmed cases a day. in august, it was terrible. finally here, despair frustration, the government had to put in place a system toll deal with the situation. so my role from the very beginning of the outbreak, i was chairing one of the groups, the social mobilization component of the outbreak. my job was to go to all the radio stations in liberia to put in place i would go to the radio station and announce we have a number of cases in the country and number of deaths. so i was giving the daily situation reports on a daily basis and explaining to the population what the ebola was,

the signs and symptoms of ebola, how you can prevent yourself from the disease. it has no cure, no vaccine. campaign i was talking to international press, bbc and cpn and calling the attention of the world. and country offices, our development, usais, these organizations were folk used on -- focused ol development work. to give that emergency support to look at this as a threat to humanity has not come without the international support in may, june, july. so we were calling the world's attention that this was a global public health problem that needed the international community support. by august, the world health

organization director general did announce that ebola in the region was to be elevated to extreme of disease pandemic, global international public health problem. then my very, very good friend tom freeden, the head of the centers for disease control visited liberia in august. sent in very strong doctors and the rest of the c.d.c. folks to central liberia and we sat down and established the incident management system in august which the president of liberia asked me to lead. i chaired the system. put in place -- called the incident management structure.

no structure existed. the meeting was established, but you had to make it strong with -- combined with international partners and experts. so with that, we -- the incident management system was the tool. because if you look at the centers for disease control if there is an incident, they have the incident management system to support that. so it is like a replica of the c.d.c.'s incident management system that i chair in liberia with about five areas. number one, in august, september, the outbreak was very big. 100 confirmed cases per day. people dying in the streets. no treatment there to put

people. there was fear, desperation and agitation in the community. and so we have to put in place a case management team that's responsible building ebola treatment units. we put in place social mobilization with community engagement in another dramatic area. and put in assistance in another area. and part of the social support. those areas were set up. and what we did under the president, it was like look, this is a liberian problem. we are facing the situation we have to find solution for this. and so the intervention has to be led by liberians. i'm in charge of the commander

in chief as this country. and the incident manager with the area was led by liberians. so i chaired the incident management system. all of the areas were chaired by liberians. what we did was with our international partners, we incorporated them. so each area chaired by a liberian but chaired by an organization led by c.d.c. w.h.o. social organization would be co-chaired by unicef. social support would be chaired by another. we organized this national, multinational response to deal with the outbreak. but before we had all of this sophistication, the liberian people themselves took charge of

the disease and then the social mobilization component and the ownership, people changed their behaviors over time. by september, we started seeing them banding. the projection that at one point, four million people were going to die if nothing was done. c.d.c. came out with a report. 20,000 people would die on a weekly basis. so the liberian people got the message and said look, we have to change our behavior. simple messages were thrown out there. number one, the disease has no cure. the disease has no vaccine. the disease has a very high case of fatality rate of close to 25%

-90 but it is preventable. if somebody is sick don't touch the people. make sure you don't bury the dead. ensure that you wash your hands 24 hours with soap and water, so everywhere you went in monrovia, they are hand washing at shops and marketplaces everywhere there is hand washing. people washing their hands. no touching of dead bodies. so the behavior changed alone played a very, very critical role in combination with the huge huge international support. the international community came very late, but came very weak. and we are grateful when we met in the office that under the

leadership of president obama and the people of the united states of america we saw when president obama announced on the request of my president and president obama announced that this was a serious problem and we started seeing the chinese, the europeans the americans and the entire world came to the aid , by august, september, we started to construct ebola treatment units under the help of the u.s. government, who are working with the u.s. military the department of defense airborne division. the major general and us working together and then the major

general -- we had a trip and flew on the u.s. helicopter many times to go and construct, go and visit -- the country did not have laboratory system. >> you prevent secondary infection. we -- for you to get ahead of the disease, as we did every effective -- infected person has been tracked for 21 days. it is easier to break the back of disease and break the chain

of transmission if all of your contacts are on the contact list and if the person is infected and you can monitor or remove them. the ebola unit and monitor them. so we started to see the trend of the disease calm down between october september, october, and november. and today, the projections, increase number of people who are going to die from ebola. we had about 3,000 confirmed deaths, over 3,000. we have health care workers. the human story to this this disease is associated with affection, caring for your loved ones. so the most affected people were

close family members and health care workers because health care workers are those that give care to patients. so most of them got infected. 300 health care workers and 179 of them died from the virus. so this has struck our human resource development, as a country. and i remember as a person in october, i had to lead a time myself to bury about four human beings, died from ebola, who were looking for a place to bury those people. the community people rejected that ebola people should not be buried in our community. we had to purchase a piece of property from 12:00 in the

afternoon up to 2:00 in the morning were on the field trying to bury these people that were military deployed. the government had to protect the team and myself on the field. we saw stories where a mother died from the virus and the little children would suck on their mother's breast. this happened. we saw stories where relatives would look or and they are placed in body bags and korea mated, burned because we had to make sure that people had dignified burials. this is where we are today in liberia. we have 14 of our 15 counties that are free of ebola for the

pass 21 days. some have gone 42 days. some have gone 60 days. some have gone 90 days. counties have gone more than 95 days without a single ebola case. and this morning i read a report that 14 counties are still free from the ebola virus. we have transmission to deal with on a weekly basis. but what is important is one single case of ebola is an outbreak. so the fact that monrovia is still reporting one or two cases, we are not out of the woods yet. and the fact also that they are still reporting huge cases, we hope that the three countries can get to zero at the same time and celebrate and say ok, ebola

is over. after ebola is the rebuilding of the health care system. why ebola frustrates us. because of a weak health care system. trying to support the health care system. we need to build a health care system not only to free ebola. then we can build a resilient health care system that we can stop not only ebola but other epidemics in the future. this is the role that we play. now we are in section two and it has four strategies. number one strategy is to continue social mobilization cam pain. number two is the rapid

isolation, treatment of ebola. that is the right strategy. and what we do, hot spot and remove the cases and give them care and put that hospital under control. number four is making sure that every single case is 100% are on the contact list, making sure that the contacts are under treatment early and catch the secondary early and number four, to get us to zero, the cross border initiative where we can have our interventions and have the disease under control. but i think to the international world and great help we got from

our international partners under the partnership of the united states government, the major tragedy that will happen in the three countries is for our international partners by this time this thing is over to jump on an airplane and move to the capitals in geneva and washington and new york and help us to build it. that would be it that will make ebola. it's not the only west african problem. it could have an effect on other parts of the world and we should take that very very seriously. as i listen to the news headlines, cnn and bbc, what you hear about these days is syrian war, terrorism and not worried

about ebola like august, september, october and november. and that has an effect because it drives word for international support. so we should maintain our focus in the region and ensure that the great help that we got from the international world to get to zero in these countries and should be maintained so that we help help the national governments through budgetary support, make sure the health care systems, make sure the agricultural sector and our government, major priority, major priorities of the madam president but software company it is agriculture education, health care and better living for the people of liberia.

thank you. [applause] >> this week we had discussed earlier, the president, president obama spoke publicly i believe it was wednesday afternoon, to announce that the u.s. response is entering a new phase, that our military would be taken down to a resideal presence at 100 troops and it was 2,800. but reaffirming a couple of things very strongly by the president directly and the messages were that this was succeeding and we were in this new phase that you were in. that you were in on the long haul, but shifting to a predominantly and overwhelmingly civilian agency, nongovernmental partnerships with your

government in moving ahead and obviously taking a region-wide approach. it's interesting to remind everyone here the u.s. response was driven by the tapping into the disastrous assistance accounts, of which, by the time we got to the end of the year, we expended in the order of $900 million or made that commitment. how much was expended by the end of the year was expended? on the military side there was reprogramming of up to $750 millions. the accounting on those expenditures is still not completed. but you see the vastness of the response. and it was predominantly focused upon liberia. and in december, congress came forward and made an emergency

appropriations of $5.4 billion, which $3.4 billion is outside of our bodders and 60% 70% of those is going into west africa and there is a focus on building capacity and building health capacity helping in the recovery strategy. at least for the next two-year period, there is from the u.s. standpoint there is a.m. will resources. spending those really smartly and wisely in support of good costed plans is going to be one of the challenges, i think, that we face in this period. but we are in a fortunate position here. there's always in these emergencies, the danger of a cliff, of the emergency phase the threat fades and the interest fades and there's not that commitment over the transition period and into the longer term.

in reminding us of this is very important. some of the pathways have been laid down in the appropriations and the ways those are oriented. if you could say a few words specifically about the military engagement and what was the significance in your mind of having the commitment on september 16 by the president up to $3,000 and then having the deployment followed soon you could say a few words about that. >> thank you. i think my reaction to that is i think the military met their goal. they met their goal. the way they partner very well the u.s. military were able to partner very well with our armed forces of liberia. gave them capacity building that

partnership to build more than 17 ebola treatment units in all of our counties. and the military did also help with the laboratory testing that got a very fast turning around time of testing the ebola virus disease in less than four hours, the results are available. and logistics, also moving around with logistics through the peak of the outbreak, and so i think the military met that goal. so scaling down from april i think is a very good timing of time. but we have to. and what i do also know is that even if there is a case, which we don't pray for, to have more opportunities, there is an opportunity to get that kind of support back. but i think the requirement, they met their goal, worked to the very closely, to get ebola treatment units built, get logistics out there. make sure