general, we've been blessed by a series of great military leaders of our forces and allied forces in afghanistan. and you are a worthy successor to those outstanding leaders, in my view. according to a recent media report, the troop drawdown in afghanistan is now, quote, under white house review. but as the white house deliberates, the current plan is set to reduce the number of u.s. troops in afghanistan to about 5,500, beginning in the middle of this year's fighting season. the plan was first announced by president obama in may of 2014 before it was known that the afghan presidential transition would require almost six months to conclude, before the appearance of isis on the afghan battlefield and before pakistan military operations sent 200,000 refugees from -- into afghanistan. these unforeseen circumstances illustrate the major liabilities of a calendar-based approach and

highlight had the need for a conditions-based approach. like our national military strategy written in 2012 president obama's calendar-based troop drawdown plan for afghanistan no longer accurately reflects the facts and conditions on the ground. like the president's policy against isil, the president's afghanistan policy lacks of strategic disconnect, providing a list of goals or preferences but precluding the means necessary to achieve them. perhaps it is time for the president to exercise strategic patience, as our witnesses yesterday unanimously agreed. former u.s. ambassador to afghanistan, james cunningham, having just served in kabul and left in december, said, quote, i think that under the circumstances, the timeline is probably too short and the rate of withdrawal is too steep.

former ambassador to both iraq and afghanistan, ryan crocker, said, i hope we will take the right decisions on force levels going forward based on conditions, not on calendars. former commander of special operations command and the first navy s.e.a.l. to achieve the rank of four stars said, actual war is too dynamic to accommodate fixed models. so i would urge strategic and operational flexibility as we move forward in afghanistan. at a force size of 4,500, our force in afghanistan will be reduced to kabul. presently in only one location one that retreats from the north, east and south of afghanistan, we'll relinquish the area to the drug runners yield to iranian influence and abandon kandahar to the taliban. the lack of presence creates a vacuum and week of seen what fills that vacuum in syria and

iraq. the ungoverned spaces will allow terrorists to foe meant the same disaster in afghanistan as we have seen in iraq, growing instability, terrorist safe havens and direct threats to the united states. i think our former national counterterrorism director put it into perspective, how we should look at afghanistan. i quote, should the american people think this is hopeless? the last 13 years have shown us that the counterterrorism fight and protecting the homeland in this region is not hopeless. we've been very, successful at stopping attacks from the region. and i would flip it around. from a homeland security perspective, i think it is close to hopeless to think we can have that same success without some ongoing presence in the region. reducing to a, quote, norm allem

about asy presence, at the end -- normal embassy presence at the end of 2016, and announcing it to the enemy, gives terrorists breathing room to plot against the west. as ambassador crocker put it quote, by fixing a date to draw down to a certain number, and then to draw down to basically an office and an embassy simply tells our adversaries how long they have to hold out before they have the field to themselves. by the way, i know of no man more respected than ambassador ryan crocker. if we've learned anything from iraq, it should be that wars do not end just because politicians say so. we cannot let the taliban, al qaeda and isis conquer afghanistan. failure in this manner would destabilize the region especially by undermining the security of a nuclear-armed pakistan. i want to thank general campbell for testifying today. i thank him for his leadership. i look forward to hearing his assessment of conditions on the ground, development of afghan forces and the plan for the way forward.

senator reid. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me join you in welcoming general campbell. thank you, general, for your service to the nation. beginning in the 504 and continuing today. since you took command of the u.s. forces in afghanistan last august, afghanistan has entered what ambassador cunningham yesterday called a pivotal period. the emergence of a national unity government under the leaders has had an immediate impact on security in afghanistan, with the signing of the bilateral security agreement and the nato status of forces agreement. 2/3 of thing afghans polled want u.s. and coalition troops to stay to train the afghan security forces. your challenge is to successfully lead the u.s. and coalition effort to train, advise and assist afghan security forces and conduct counterterrorism operations.

even as u.s. and coalition forces have gone down to postcombat levels in afghanistan. we would be interested in your assessment, whether you currently have the forces you feel you need to carry out these two missions. we're also seeking your best military judgment this morning on what further reductions, if any, you would recommend for u.s. forces in afghanistan and under what condition. at yesterday's hearing, referring again to ambassador crocker, he warned that the consequences of disengagement can be as great or greater than the consequences of engagement. or intervention in the first place. i share the concern of many on this committee that any future reductions in u.s. force levels in afghanistan should be based on the security conditions at the time of the proposed reductions, taking into account the capabilities of the afghan security forces and the status of the counterterrorism fight. we would also be interested in your views on the full range of challenges you face, including the progress that the afghan security forces in building key enablers, such as logistics, special praise operations forces, intelligence and airlift, the afghan-pakistan security relationship, including

border coordination and counterterrorism effort, and the reports of a growing isis presence in afghanistan. again, thank you, sir, for your service to the nation. >> general campbell. >> chairman mccain, ranking throughout standing performance bears testimony to your backing and the backing of the american people. i would like to pay tribute to our military families the unsung heroes of the last 13 thruss years of conflict. in many ways our frequent

absences from home are harder on them than us. without their loves strength and support we couldn't succeed. i would also like to recognize the over 2200 service men and women who have been killed and the wounded. each day we strive to bring meaning to their sacrifices. we honor their memories and service. our sacrifices have ensured that another attack has not occurred. it's been seven months since i've appeared before this committee and much has changed. afghanistan, the region, our enemy and coalition have undergone tremendous

transitions and most have been positive for us. in september, afghanistan completed the first peaceful democratic transition in history. although prolonged this transition was still a monumental achievement. it represented the afghan's commitment to a democratic open society. the zinches night and day. since 2001 the extraordinary efforts and courage of our forces have ensured that another terrorist attack

originating from afghanistan and directed against the u.s. homeland has not occurred. it's been seven months since i appeared before this committee and much has changed since then. afghanistan, the region, the enemy, and our coalition have undergone tremendous transitions. and most of these have been extraordinarily positive for us . i'd like to emphasize a few of these today in order to place our current campaign in context and to reaffirm that the conditions exist for us to achieve our strategic objectives. in september, afghanistan completed the first peaceful democratic transition in history. although prolonged, this transition was still a monumental achievement. it represented the afghans' commitment to a democratic, open society. the difference between a new national unity government and its predecessor is night and day. the president and -- have embraced the international community. our coalition and the afghan security forces. our partnership is strong. we now have a ratified bilateral security agreement and a nato status of forces agreement. which grant us the necessary authorities to continue our mission. dynamics within the region continue to evolve as well. the president has made regional engagement a top priority in order to address the shared security and economic interests for afghanistan. nowhere is this more evident than in the pakistan-afghan relationship. the pakistan taliban's murderous attack on 16 december may prove to be their 9/11 and a game changer for our future. senior pakistani officials recognize they can no longer make the distinction between good and bad terrorists. in the wake of this tragedy, the blame game between both countries has stopped. i've witnessed firsthand substantive changes in the interactions between the afghan and pakistan military

leadership in just the last couple of months. they're now talking. positive exchanges between core commanders recently occurred in kandahar, in jalalabad. last week six afghan army cadets are now attending the pakistan military academy and this wasn't happening before. we're doing everything we can to promote their closer cooperation. particularly to address extremist sanctuaries on both sides of the border. we must temper our expectations. i remain optimistic that both countries are working towards a more productive relationship. the enemy remains in a state of flux too. the taliban failed to achieve any of their stated objectives in 2014. constantly pressured by the n.s.f., suffering from dissention within their own ranks, and lacking popular support, they turned to high profile terrorist attacks, particularly against soft targets inside of kabul. the desperate attempt to remain relevant are failing to win over the afghan population. they're killing innocent civilians and fellow afghans. it's time for them to lay down their arms and rebuild the afghan nation. the possible rise of isil is also a new development. thus far we believe that the nation's presence in afghanistan represents more of a rebranding of a few marginalized taliban, but we're

still taking this potential threat with its dangerous rhetoric and ideology very very seriously. we're working closely with the n.s.f. to evaluate and understand the dynamic nature of this fledgling network. the potential emergence of isil represents an additional opportunity to bring the afghans and the pakistanis together to confront this common threat. and we will continue to engage with leaders from both countries on ways we can collaborate to meet this challenge. we're all driven to prevent them from establishing a meaningful foothold in central asia. u.s. forces afghanistan and our coalition have undergone tremendous changes as well since i assumed command. on 1 january, u.s. forces afghanistan formally ended its command mission and we commence

with our new mission, operation freedom sentinel. we've also ended all detainee operations. simultaneously, troops from over 40 nations, which comprised the new nato mission resolute support, began executing their trained advise and assist mission in order to build the capabilities and long-term sustainability of the ansf. they also assumed full security responsibilities, they're ready and it's time. the ansf were challenged and tested but they held their own against a determined enemy. on a battlefield the n.s.f. fought and demonstrated their increasing capabilities. today the government of islamic republic of afghanistan remains firmly in control of 34 capitals and all of its major cities. the n.s.f. successfully promoted or protected eight million afghans who courageously defied insurgent intimidation and voted in two rounds of elections. the n.s.f.'s professionalism and their nonpartisanship enabled them to remain cohesive in the face of an extended

political impasse after the elections. all portions of the afghan security forces continue to respect and obey afghan authority. the n.s.f. special forces in particular have proven to be the most proficient in the entire region. they're consistently executing unilateral direct action missions against insurgent leaders and facilitators. they're leveraging their own intelligence, using their own special wing helicopters to carry out long range missions in low illumination. this is a remarkable capability for any military. afghan continues to be a dangerous place. casualty rates for all the a.s.f. increased in 2014. roughly 5% to 7% higher. however this must be viewed in light of the fact that their operational tempo was four times greater in 2014 than it was in 2013. and that over 100,000 coalition

forces were no longer on the battlefield. even considering these higher casualties, the a.s.f. attrition rates, which account for all loss to the force, have not impacted combat readiness too severely. the army and the police recruiting has not been a problem. afghan youths continue to join the ranks and the a.s.f. security forces are widely respected and viewed as an honorable, patriotic profession. the afghan national army remains the most trusted institution in the country and the afghan shield and sword of an exceptionally proud people and a fledgling nation. after watching the s.a.f. respond to a variety of challenges, i don't believe the insurgents represent an existential threat to the government of afghan. however, the a.s.f. still need a great deal of help in developing the systems and processes necessary to run a modern, professional army and police force. they also need sustained support in addressing their

capability gaps in aviation, intelligence and special operations. to address these gaps, our trained advise and assist mission and mentorship will be vital. our advisors at the security ministries, army corps and police zones are now our main effort. although clearly challenges exist, i believe that the n.s.f. capabilities or capacity and the morale will be sufficient. backstop by our advisory efforts and enable our support. this will allow afghanistan long-term security at the end of the resolute support mission. the afghan president recently remarksed, and i quote compelled by tragedy and cremeanted by mutual sacrifice the partnership between afghanistan, nato and the u.s. has entered a new phase, end quote. i believe we're at a critical inflexion point in our campaign. many challenges remain before us, as the new afghan government forms. it's still finding its footing and it must do so while contending with the security threat, corruption and economic

challenges. yet the myriad of challenges and transitions over the last seven months offer us a tremendous opening. the administration offers us an extraordinary opportunity to develop a meaningful strategic partnership that will stabilize afghanistan and in turn offer greater security for the region and the u.s. homeland. there's a new spirit of cooperation in kabul, something we didn't have before. i firmly believe that our concurrent c.t. and t.a. efforts will reinforce and deepen our strategic partnership and shape conditions for a favorable outcome to this conflict. we could offer no greater tribute to the american people our fallen and their loved ones, than by finishing this mission well. if i could, i think the members have charts at your tables there. i'd like to show you a couple statistics. i'm asked, what does progress mean? have we had success?

has it been worth it? i just offer you these two slides. a layout in 2001 and 2014. in every measurable statistic, from roadways, cell phone uses schools, teachers, females in schools, literacy rate, on and on and on, continues to go up. the one that's quite striking is the life expectancy on the bottom right there. in 2001 it was 43 years. today it stands at 64 years. that's 741 million life years of hope that the coalition, the american people, have provided to the afghan people. the bottom two charts show kabul then and now 2001 and 2014. on the right is present-day kabul. the fifth fast of the growing city in the world. that's progress. that's success. and that can only happen with a

coalition of the security that is provided. finally, let me conclude by stating that u.s. forces afghanistan is currently involved with a winter review of the campaign. this review is looking at all of our lines of effort in afghanistan, not just the military. as i stated, the afghan president is a credible and effective partner. he's asked for nato and the united states to provide some flexibility in our planning to account for the fact that his government remains in transition. i have provided options on adjusting our force sponsor through my chain of command. shoot is how long we stay engaged on a regional level in 2015. once again, i expressed my profound gratitude to all the committee members for your unfailing support of our mission and our troops in afghanistan. i'm humbled and i'm privileged to lead the men and women of their caliber and their courage. every day they make us all proud. liked for to your questions. thank you. >> thank you very much, general. in an address to the nation on

27 may, 2014, president obama said about afghanistan, quote, we will bring america's longest war to a responsible end and then announce calendar dates for our withdrawal. the beginning of 2015, we'll have approximately 9,800. by the end of 2015 we'll have redulesed that presence by roughly half and we will have consolidated our troops in kabul and on bagram. we will have consolidated our troops in kabul and in bagram. one year later, by the end of 2016, our military will draw down to a normal embassy presence in kabul with a security assistance component, and i'm not making this part of his statement up, just as we've done in iraq. general, we're worried about it being just as we've done in iraq. so, i guess the fundamental question i have for you, in light of the fact that there was a six-month transition, the government of afghanistan, isis

is now locating there, other things have happened since the president made this statement. do you believe that our troop presence in afghanistan should be adjusted, the schedule should be adjusted, in light of ensuing events since the president made his statement on 27 may, 2014? >> sir, thank you for the question. as i mentioned in the oral statement, i have provided options to my chain of command to take a look at, as we do this update, for additional options. >> you provided those options. do you favor those options? >> absolutely. >> thank you. are you worried about a lack of u.s. military presence in kandahar, the spiritual home of the taliban, including i.s.r., air power capability and advisors there?

>> sir, currently with the forces that we have in kandahar, i'm comfortable where we are through 2015. they provide us the opportunity to continue to do our mission of train, advise and assist. down in kandahar, that's what the 205th corps, the police with the special operating forces and the air force, and we have the requisite i.s.r. to be able to continue that mission through 2015. >> those options that you've provided to the president, does that mean that the options that you support would not draw down to a normal embassy presence in kabul? >> the option i presented to >> there are several options laid out to make sure we can continue with our mission. this is a very first season completely on their own. they had done quite well but this is the first one at the current force levels we are at.

as you mentioned, the current land brings us down to kabul by the end of 2015. as we look at that, again, we're asking -- the president has asked for some flexibility and in my options, i believe i have provided options for the afghanistan president and for my senior leadership that would allow us the flexibility to continue to get after the mission. >> a group of us met with the afghan president and he was very strong and adamant that this current plan will put the nation in danger and i hope that our leadership will pay attention to him when he comes or a visit here i believe in march. senator reed. >> thank you, general. you have two distinct missions. one is train, advise, and

support afghan national security forces and the other is to counterterrorist missions. those two missions might require different footprints and terms of where you are located in the country. is that being considered by you and your recommendations to the president? that sort of dichotomy between two missions? and does that shape your recommendation in terms of what locations and must hold simply for counterterrorism, others youmight hold for training? that is accurate? >> they are complementary missions. they can't lament each other and lead toward protection. got to take a holistic look at both of those as we provide options to be senior leadership. we have not shown great flexibility in the past. and the october time frame come it can board for some

flexibility and the president granted some great flexibility that enabled us to continue with the mission. >> there is another aspect of the counterterrorism was alluded to by our panel yesterday. that is regional threats, not just solely located within afghanistan itself. is that something you are considering in terms of the recommendation to be president? >> both u.s. forces in afghanistan central command, my headquarters, the afghanistan president, take a look at this regional approach all the time. as a mentioned up front, what is different in the last six month as we reach out the afghan president has had especially to intel. i have seen change in the attitude, military to military talking together. this had not happened since about 2011.

that is quite good. i think of they continue to work that very hard and understanding of a common enemy duvets, they have to get rid of the sanctuary on both sides. that will lead to a positive outcome. we do look at it regionally. >> the afghan national police. the responsibility to train and also to create a justice system overlaps not only with yourself but with many other u.s. agencies. you have talked in general terms about the afghan national army and special operations forces but what about the police? ultimately, it will be the police and the villages that make sure the country is stable. >> there are about 157,000 police. a little bit different trade and equipped than the army.

however, they do some of the same missions the army has to go through. when they worked together, the army has this cross pillar coronation. changes in leadership, having confidence, holding people accountable, working together, the taliban cannot defeat them. they do not have the humvees the intel fusion. none of that. the police continue to work that very hard and they are working through a holistic review of an optimization police on the army and police presence. the leadership has looked to changes of police and how they are organized and how they work more towards their community. i know that is where they want to get to. we do advise at both levels and we continue to work that very hard. >> there are requirements that the government of afghanistan

has asked us to fulfill. are there any outstanding requests we have to government of afghanistan that they must fulfill that will ensure our mission is success? >> in terms of troops, equipment? >> troops, equipment, reform of their systems. it is a partnership and we are focusing on what they are asking of us. i know come under the previous presidency, there was a long list of things we asked and we are not particularly successful in getting at. you seem to apply quite accurately that the president ghani there is a new sense of cooperation. are there some significant issues out there they must deal with and we must be aware with? >> they continue to work very hard with the corruption piece. they continue to work at that. they have embraced the

international community. every event i have seen the afghan president, the first thing he does is think the american people and the international community for the sacrifices. they are working very hard and president ghani. we would be in a different place if he had been in a different position the last couple of years. he gets on that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, general. thank you for the time you spend with us personally on these issues. senator reed brought up about the police versus the army. give us a general idea of the size of these. the army is much larger.

but tell me, is it 10 to one? >> the army is -- 157,000 for the police. there is an additional 30,000 that are the afghan local police. >> i took a very personal interest in the training of the afghan and one reason is the oklahoma played a significant role not just in 2003 but also in 2006 and 2007. i watched what they were doing and i was there when they opened up the kabul military training center. i even commented it reminded me of something very state of the art. kabul is the fastest growing city. how is the traing innter? does it remain as effective or is it growing? >> it continues to be a bright

spot come a training place that embraces the last several years of what we have put into it. each have their own regional training centers. his special operating forces have the equivalent --they are very good. i told the core commander i wanted to look at his training. he took me out there, walked through the medical training their marksmanship training, through their protocol. all of those unannounced. it was pretty remarkable. i came away refreshed. all of that training is afghan led. i am confident they continue to do that. >> i was really impressed in those early years because we were participating and not in a personal way. then, the expressions on the

basis of the afghans. i thought they wanted to drink, they were proud of their competence, particularly at the training center. i never dreamed at that time we would be back here 12 years later talking about it. this has been asked before but for a different reason. let me reflect. we have the administration talking about 5500 and then ghani wanting us to re-examine that and just yesterday or the day before, we agreed. what concerns me if we are at 10,000 now and we had general mattis told this committee that we should be looking at approximately a recommendation at 20,000 and you are readjusting from 10,000, is

that implying that somehow we are going to make an adjustment from the 5500 that is not going to be up anywhere close to what general mattis said we needed? >> none of the option recommended increase like that. most of the options i and discussing with my senior leadership includes allowing more flexibility. >> does it bother you that we are talking publicly about what we are going to be doing, when we will withdraw, when we will downsize? obviously, they know everything we know. does that concern you? >> i think the general put it best. he said he helped there would be more ambiguity. we are where we are. >> but do we have to continue being where we are? when it we go and start making our own plans exclusively looking after our own defense?

the last thing i want to mention , when he talked about having to do something on the size of the force, right now we have iraq, afghanistan, syria, africa, jordan. just yesterday, we introduce legislation to try to get more of our help to our very great ally, those in the ukraine. do you look at the overall picture and talk to the rest of them as to what our capacity is with all of these things going on and is that factored into any recommendation you will have in terms of changing our structure in afghanistan? >> when i look at the actions i present to my senior leadership, i'm cognizant of what is going on in the world. the requirements the joint staff has to deal with. i particularly focus on afghanistan, the impact it has.

>> i know that you will make a recommendation that will factor into that. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate it very much. general, what should the role of afghanistan's neighbors particularly pakistan the reconciliation process? do you have a concern about the role they are playing? what you see our biggest challenges the? >> president ghani said this several times. he wants to take charge of this. this is important for him. he knows it will take some time. he is reached out to pakistan, the chief of the army there and said, i need some help. i think that dialogue continues to go between them.

i was in pakistan last week having these conversations. they continue to dialogue. neither one wants to let the other down. i think pakistan, for years, has been an issue. we always said you cannot talk about afghanistan unless pakistan is enough equation. the general is moving in a different direction than we have seen in the past. i think there is very good dialogue to move forward. his leadership will make a difference as he works with some internal issues he has in pakistan. if you are in afghanistan from leaving everything that comes -- if you are in afghanistan you think everything that comes at a pakistan is that.

we have an opportunity, if we work hard, to make this reconciliation peace a potential reality. >> are there challenges with regard to the border? >> as far as cross-border? there always are. along tokunar, there is nothing that says this is the border. people have families right across the border. there is more cooperation now between the afghan border police and the frontier corps on the pakistan side. about two weeks ago, the corps met. they talked about border issues. last week some of the border policeman went to pakistan for a week and toured different spots.

we used to have u.s., afghan, pakistan. i was up there probably four weeks ago with the chief of the army. they will be a coronation center at a key point on the border. we'll put another one just south of kandahar. i think we are working very hard. >> i'm grateful for the work you have done to protect women's rights and educate girls. what are we doing now to ensure that progress on women's rights will be protected as we transition into a more advisory capacity and is the afghanistan government capable of sustaining the progress you have made? >> thank you for the question. they work this very hard. i have a gender advisor that works with the senior people in the afghan government. we continue to see change in

the number of women that join the police, joined the army. they get some very tough goals to try to get to overtime but they are working very hard for that. the police are doing better than the army but they understand how important it is. president ghani has made this one of his priorities. he spoke about this to the senior leadership and meetings i have been in. he is also trying to incorporate more civilian and women into the ministries. moi is a little better than mod. they have about 10% over the next couple of years, it'll be tough based on the culture. all of them that i have talked to want to get after this. i believe they are genuine. >> what is the status of terrorist attacks specifically against schools with girls? >> i do not have those. >> is at rising, falling, the same? >> i would say it is probably the same.

wherever there are soft targets, the taliban insurgents can go after that and they will do that. it gives them more of a strategic impact because the media will pick up on that just like they did this tragic incident on the 16th of december. they had a military school and killed all those children. the afghan people understand they want their kids to go to school, have this education, but i have not seen a spike in those numbers. >> thank you. >> senator. >> thank you. just on that question, to follow-up, if the taliban is victorious, it will be devastating for the rights of women in afghanistan. >> absolutely. >> general campbell, ambassador cunningham told us yesterday

as did all of the panelists, that the rate of withdrawal is too high. i tend to agree with that. i think it is very difficult for anybody to dispute if you analyze it. i believe our congress in a bipartisan way is open to having a more robust assistance to the afghan forces. i feel it in talking to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. i think the american people are willing to stay the course and help and not an out front way but a supportive way. more than a lot of people think of we articulate that come i think it is important for the president to articulate that. i think it is important for you to be clear to him and the defense department to be clear to alter the present course we are on.

i am really pleased that you have gone even further than our panelist yesterday in saying this is not a hopeless case. a lot of progress has been made. we just do not want to let it slip away. i do not see this in any way that we are starting a new war. we are partners with afghanistan for 13 plus years. we have stood shoulder to shoulder. we have lost over 2000 soldiers. it needs to end successfully. i just hope that somehow, we do not make the mistake that senator mccain has so wisely warned us of in afghanistan to rush out when just a little more presence and support would be there. i encourage you to speak out on that. i assume your advice calls for a stronger presence.

i appreciate the optimism that you have. you said there is a new spirit there. it does appear that president ghani is much more in tune with the challenges. a lot of progress is made, but some i have to tell you we have heard that before. we have been hearing this for a long time there is a new spirit there. i think there is truth to it but isn't it true that in a combat situation that it just a few u.s. forces with communication ability can embolden and encourage them to remarkable degrees and help them to be successful in a way that if they are out under attack and they do not have that kind of support and confidence, they are not as effective finders? i have heard of low ranking and high-ranking officers say that is true.

>> our men and women are incredibly gifted. they are bright, intelligent. once other forces are around them, they learned through osmosis. they continue to get better. >> an experienced officer in iraq last week said iraqis will fight and they fight so much better if just a few americans are embedded. it creates a confidence that goes when beyond the numbers. do you agree with that? >> i have spent 19 months in iraq, three different tours in afghanistan. the afghanistan fighters, there is no doubt with the proper leadership, they will continue to fight will stop the difference between afghanistan and iraq is the afghans having

nationalistic pride about it. i am not sunni, i am an afghan. they had this pride. they can carry the day with the right leadership. >> we are moving to troops outside the capital, it appears to a normal state department relationship with the afghan government soon. that is in two years. i just think that is taking a risk. i hope that you will make clear your views from a military point of view. the american people i think will support it. i think we can have bipartisan support for a more realistic approach to the drawdown in afghanistan. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator. >> thank you.

thank you, general campbell. i appreciate the time we spent together yesterday going over a challenging problem and that is how we do the requisite oversight of what we are doing in afghanistan and how as we pull into the back and allow the afghan forces to take the lead, how you protect data that could make them more vulnerable once they are in the lead and once we are in a supportive role. i understand the attention there. i just wanted to put on the record that i think you have worked very hard to reverse some of the confusion that existed around the inspector general's support as to what should and should not be classified. you have taken steps to declassify a lot of that information. the commitment you made it to continue to work on what you bill strongly about in terms of unit data and some of the other data that could put people at

risk if it continued to be unclassified. i want to thank you for your attention to that. i think you understand that the oversight is important and i think you also are very cognizant of the risks associated with some of that data of getting into the wrong hands. i appreciate your help on that. i want to express my sympathy for the death of kayla mueller and the other contractors. this has been a theme of mine for years. that is how do we manage the contract in force in theater how do we oversee the contracting force in the editor, and how do we protect the contracting force in theater? i am worried about that. last year's national defense authorization, there was a prohibition against funding any project we cannot inspect

because of security reasons. i want to get your take on where we are in terms of protection of the contracting force. we have contractors that will have to make some of these systems because afghanistan is not ready. they do not have the technical capability of maintaining some of what we have equipped them with. contractors will be a reality in that for a long time. i think we need to discuss that protection not just that but also protection. >> thank you very much for the question. i concur with you that the protection of our service men and women and the civilians in afghanistan is up most on my mind. we do what we can to give them the right resources, give them the guardian angels to provide that protection and support. without going into our techniques and tactics of how

we would do that, i would just tell you that this is up most on my mind. we continue to watch that closely. as we downsize, we cannot say we are taking the military out on the we have to add another contractor. we have to take a holistic look at what the requirement is and there are some places that would say we will not put in military or contractors. we have to mitigate that a different way. we look at that very hard. it was an unfortunate incident two weeks ago with kaya where we did have three of our contractors killed. we continue to learn lessons from that. we want to continue to keep them going down. a lot of that is because of the procedures we put in place. we continue to look at that very hard. >> it he gets briefly. president bush was the first one who spoke out about the

propaganda tool. it continues to be a recruiting tool. can you speak to the issue of at gitmo and terms of the biggest threat we face and that is the recruitment worldwide of terrorists to join the fight particularly the fight that isis is conducting in a barbaric fashion that has nothing to do with conventional warfare. >> thank you. i think there is a lot of things out there that would incite people to attack americans alread that are preconceived. i cannot tell you how much gitmo does or does not do that. my experience tells me there are people who want to do harm

to people in afghanistan and united states. any number of things can make them do that but many of them are preconceived. what i have to do is continue to work hard on my force protection inside of afghanistan and worry about that. i do not go out and look at different pieces and how they recruit. >> i want to thank you general, for your tremendous service to the country and for your family and all of those that serve underneath you. i think we are very fortunate to have your leadership. i wanted to follow-up to understand just in terms of where we are in the current plan . in the consequences of it, just so we understand, if we keep the current timeline that was proposed by the administration

and they do not adopt some of the options you have proposed to them, what does that mean in terms of why the withdrawal would have to start in terms of the fighting season? logistically, what would that mean for you? >> we would never use the term of withdrawal. we are in a transition. the current state as we have 9800 u.s. 12.9 with the total nato force. we are centered in kabul and baghram. we have several special operating camps outside of kabul and other places in the country. we would have to go to a kabul center by the end of the year. >> would that require you to move out of places during the fighting season?

>> part of that is physics. >> manning logistically. that would have to be done while you're in the middle of the fighting season? >> we would do scope and try to mitigate that as much as we could. just based on physics â >> that is something we hope the president will take into consideration because it is an important matter of physics. we would not normally take to have to do this in a fighting season. is that true? >> we like to have every opportunity to make sure we provide the right rating to the afghans. we are doing everything right now in the winter campaign to get them ready. we are advising. we do advise at the battalion level with a special operating forces.

it would have an impact and we would continue to work through that. >> general, last march, you testified before the readiness subcommittee and you had called -- a game changer. it is ugly, it is loud, but when it comes in, it makes a difference so it would be a game changer. do you still believe that? >> i currently do not have any a tens in afghanistan? the comment i made in march i would still stand by. >> you would agree certainly that thea 10 is our best life form.

>> the air force does an incredible job. they are not doing that with a 10's today. i appreciate them supplying me with the best they have. the air force picks the platform to do that. >> let me ask you about no contracting with the enemy. that is legislation senator brown and i had pushed before the committee and now it has been expanded to authorities beyond the department of defense , state departments. how has that worked in afghanistan? we had money going to your enemy, going to people who were misusing our funds to work against our interest.

how is that on the task force been working? >> probably about 780 plus different contractors since 2010 we have taken a look at embedded those in 100. and has denied insurgents $9.8 billion. that has been a game changer. we can reach back quickly with that based on that success nato has already adopted that methodology. >> thank you. >> senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for meeting with me yesterday, general. i believe there is more flexibility needed to do what is needed.

to look at the situation on the ground and determine the decisions we make. you mentioned before, kabul centric that we might come if we found ourselves in a situation, what would that do in these areas if we wound up in that situation? >> the plan is that when we go kabul center, we would work in the course through rta. that they have the capacity to sustain a fight there. we would continue inside kabul at the ministry level. >> when you look at the numbers we need and there is obviously no exact number as you go month to month and take a look coming determine what you need, what

are your best ballpark, where we need to be in 2016, 2017? >> i provided those options to my senior leadership. i would rather discuss that in a classified session. >> that would be fine. as you look at helmut and nor istan, what is or definition of success in those areas say at the beginning of 2017? >> the afghan security forces have sufficiently contained the insurgency. the governors are providing the necessary governance to the people of that particular province. without going into great detail, i see great work happening today. i was there thursday. i will discuss more in a

classified hearing what we get --what to do. >> when you look at the taliban and their goals, what are the things that give them hope and how do we eliminate those things? >> president ghani has said 70% of the taliban want to come back and get into the peace process. they are tired of the fight. a lot of their leadership is disenfranchised. i think now with a new national government that almost 85% of the people in that country there is no reason the taliban cannot come to the table and talk and be part of the political process. the president has reached out to him to do that. there'll always be a small portion of is an irreconcilable.

i think president ghani continues to work this very hard. they are engaging in many of the tribal elders, showing them the government can provide to the people and that i think is what the taliban wants. they want a government. >> i want to thank you and your team because, when i was there last year, there was no question from the military as to whether the afghans would hold. there was concern. from everything we have seen the way it was laid out, we have hit our metrics and more. would you agree with where we are and the metrics we have laid out? >> i would. not by metrics but the metrics

we work with. from the numbers to the level the army is training, they had taken over all of the training. there is a difference of the motivation from the leadership they understand it and not have as many of the coalition forces and they have to take this on and they want to take this on. i have talked before about their special operating capabilities being quite good. guys getting out the back, they have little devices, talking to another and telling them they have an insurgent coming. it is a remarkable capability they have. they do not stand a chance with that capability. they continue to get better.

>> thank you for your hard work on the pakistan peace. i know how hard you're working on it and as he continued to get that in a better place i think the whole area becomes a better place. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you general for being here. i appreciate your service and the conversation you had with me yesterday. to follow up on the comment on the taliban, these think they will make significant movements to reassert control to territories and how important what the mission will be there to counter that? >> the taliban are a resilient force. they have the issues but they continue. some of the remote areas, outside the cities, it

is very hard to have the afghan security forces. they go after small targets whether it is local police away from the village, they see that, they attack that. there are reports they will take over a district center. when i was there, they would take over a district center and the security forces would not be able to take that back. today, all of the district centers are owned by afghanistan. the insurgents were to attack, the difference today is that the police and army would get get that back in six hours. our ct capability is the best in the world. we continue to have that as one of our missions.

i can give you more information in a classified peace. >> do you believe al qaeda will see increased pressure? >> i think you have to continue to keep the pressure on aq. over the last several years and four or five months ago particular, the pressure we have had on al qaeda has been quite good. part of that is based on what pakistan has done, the big operation they have had going on since june. it has forced people into afghanistan. our ct capability is quite good. >> we spoke about the capability gap of the afghan forces. do you feel that that is going to have an adverse operational impact on them? >> i think we will continue to work that and close that gap.

the places they had gaps, it is hard for the u.s. army, the afghan army. we have built and programs over the last several years. in some places, we provided them too much. you provided them a program that they are not going to get to. now, we come back and say, how can we adjust this? what will work best afghanistan? that is what i see now. it is very hard for us to do that for any army. the way they distribute equipment is tough but they understand how important it is so we continue to work that intelligence. i see them work in the intelligence room very well. they are in stovepipes. today, they have many fusion cells that bring them together like we have done in the past. that will give them a greater capability.

their air force continues to grow. it will allow us to be able to continue to transition out. what president ghani has told me is our greatest legacy will be the systems and processes we provide afghanistan. >> are there some missions they just will not be able to do? >> i think there is some areas we have to continue to work with the afghans to make sure they have the confidence. i have no doubt they have the capability to do all of the missions required but sometimes come it is the leadership, the confidence the leadership brings to be able to do that. they have had many people around for years and years. president ghani retired 48 generals yesterday. when he first took over, he retired 15. that opens it up for some of

these young, bright, energetic officers they have in the afghan army that have been trained in the u.s., the u.k., germany, to assume leadership positions. president ghani is enabling the ability to do that. they hold them accountable. leadership makes a difference. >> and i correct in saying it is an all volunteer army? what the retirement of these generals, that should encourage more enthusiasm within the ranks as well? >> i think we will see there is hope to continue to move up. they see there is room to move and it will continue to energize some of the young lieutenant colonels. it is an all volunteer army like ours. they do not have issues with recruiting. the issues they have are they have only been recruiting in the winter.

we want to get them to recruit on a sustainable basis the entire year. we are working through that now. >> thank you very much. >> senator shaheen. >> thank you for your service and for being here today. i am struck by the tables that are provided in your testimony about both the changes in afghanistan society as a result of the last 13 years. i think most of us as politicians would love to have 70% of afghans express confidence in their new government. 64% believe it is unlikely that the taliban will return to power. 55% believe their country is headed in the right direction. do you have a sense of what

would happen to the way afghans feel about the progress in their country is the united states withdrew all of our troops and support? >> the afghans i talked to continue to express appreciation for the sacrifices of our men and women, express appreciation for what the coalition, especially the united states, has provided to them over the last 13 years. the difference between iraq and afghanistan is that afghanistan people and the government do not want the coalition to leave. to the average afghan if they see us continue to go at that pace, it would lower their morale, the afghan senior leadership continues to tell the afghan people there are ways to mitigate, we continue to get better, we appreciate the support, but this will be

an afghan side. there is a balance. they absolutely do understand the sacrifices we have provided and there is a difference between this leadership we have today and the leadership a couple months ago. >> you talked about the efforts of president ghani and ceo abdullah to reach out to the taliban and try to begin some sort of negotiations. can you give us any insight into how far along that is? >> i would rather discuss that in a classified setting. >> to what extent are the taliban -- do we see signs their influence about what is happening with isil and the new reports that isil has begun to infiltrate the 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 ghani 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. they continue to work hard on the training, they continue to work hard on trying 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 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 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, 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

>> thank you, mr. chair. general, thank you so much for joining us here today. i know i do not need to say anything to boost your self-esteem but i do 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. all of us on the panel appreciate you being here. you are in a very difficult position at a very tentative time as we move forward in this transition. one thing that has been of great concern to me is ensuring that as our united states armed services are moving or transitioning out of the more leadership type positions that we do have the afghan capability to back it up. logistics is always a great concern of mine. i did ask the panel yesterday some thoughts on what just ask -- on logistics and a great comment that came from admiral olson is that is -- do they have

those capabilities without that united states support? >> thank you for your service as well. we continue to work the logistical piece. we identify this as a gap. maintenance in the u.s. army, we continue to have contractors in many places. a lot of that in the aviation realm. we do have that in afghanistan. we work hard to build the mechanics, the right level of personnel to build the equipment. that will take time and we continue to build that capacity

for the afghans. i think they will continue to have a small portion that will need contractors to work some of the very tough uses of equipment. i think they continue to grow that capacity. i saw some training in the maintenance area and went into one of the maintenance bays. they had several mechanics working. these are men working on these vehicles. they were doing quite well. their issue was not getting the right parts. as we did a deep dive on that, the issue is how they distribute departs from the warehouses, get them down to the corps. we are working that very hard. i went into a warehouses inside kabul. they had all of the things they needed in their. i told president ghani, we have to get the commanders in there.

the culture inside of afghanistan, they get this in there, hold on to it. they understand the impact it will have on the fight. i think the senior leadership has moved that well in the recent weeks and are using the wintertime to make sure that all classes continue to move out to where the units need to build for the fighting season. >> we see the afghans are picking up more of the maintenance. i am pleased to hear that. i have been very concerned about that particular piece of it. will we see a transition and a way her -- away from american contractors to more national contractors of the not region? one thing president ghani had

made clear with his meeting with us 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 or would it be more of a local force? >> you probably have 34,000 contractors. 10,000 are probably afghan contractors. they continue to try to work that number. that will go down significantly this year and we continue to try to make sure we have afghans tied into this. we build that to make sure they can sustain that over time. >> thank you very much. >> senator cain. >> thank you for your great service. i'm incredibly heartened by the

progress. we just have to tell this story. this is something americans should be proud of. we should thank those his serve in afghanistan because this progress has been hard one. just two items -- the increase in life expectancy is virtually unheard of. you can look across human history, you will not see the life expectancy increase of that kind in such a shortperiod of time. they have gone from 0% to 28 percent in 15 years. that is impressive. i agree with a bipartisan consensus on this panel. back to maintain this progress. i think it is ok to have a plan but he do adjusted based on reality. you encourage the white house to

make some adjustment in terms of the authorities. it is important afghanistan and because there is a powerful there did about the success in afghanistan that we need to apply around the globe. there is a contrasting narrative to iraq and afghanistan. iraq did not want to stay. we did not stay. they then run a government of national disunity. the situation in iraq went to hell in a handbasket. u.s. and others are playing a leadership role.

77% think that the coalition staying and helping is a good thing. these are places to -- people who chased the soviet union out of the country. they want the u.s. to stay. we are the partner of choice. you see that it's an interesting places in the world today. india, what has had a tradition of nonalignment now does more military exercises with the united states than with any other nation. they are seeing us whether it's training or any other platform. 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, and the then ambassador said you have let iraq take your eye off the ball in afghanistan. iraq pulls our attention away. at that point, we were worried about the same thing happening. i have been calling on congress since june, we need to be in this battle 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 from afghanistan and our continued

need to harvest and accelerate the gains. that is just and from editorial comment. we're trying to make sure we will not take our eye off the ball. you indicated that you don't think the taliban and an x essential threat. -- an x essential -- existential threat to the government. it can exacerbate sectarian divisions as people think one group gets more than the other talk about the administration's attack onit can corruption. >> i do agree that corruption could change the entire dynamic. he ran and dr. bella ran on the idea that they would have to get after corruption.

one of the first things he did was reopen the kabul bank case. they held people accountable there. he has taken corruption into that. i think he and the doctor, that is everything they do as they select new leadership and select new companies, on and on they take corruption in hand. how bad that has been and how that impacts the nations for the next several years he has told me in private that he works 20% security and 40% on the economy and i know as part of that, the corruption piece comes on both sides. but he worked hard to make sure that they pick people who were not corrupt and dr. bula does the same thing. they want to remain apolitical they want to make sure anyone who's corrupt is outside of their leadership. they want to make sure they can

do everything he can to get rid of corruption. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> senator cotton. >> thank you for your brave service. i and all people are very grateful for what it you have done. you're the little over 10,000 troops in afghanistan, correct? >> that is correct, the requirements for the nato mission is about 12,000. >> most americans who did not

serve in the military and see it and experience it through movies and television, if you look at the recent movie "american sniper," chris kyle is giving over watch to marines kicking down doors is what they have in mind when they think about our operations in iraq and afghanistan, do you have many or any infantryman or others conducting those operations in afghanistan today? >> i have men and women that continued to provide drone force protection. we do not plan offenses combat operations at all. i have to make sure the men and women are on the combat outpost that they have the ability to provide their own protection. they do have to have a ground defense area. >> it is fair to say you have more troops providing things like ariel support -- aerial

support, brigade division, things like that? >> as opposed to --? >> dismounted or combat patrols. >> we have the ability to provide force protection and at the same time provide the requisite expertise to do the isr mission. that ties hand in hand with force protection. isr is a great force protection enabler. >> i think the distinction between the type of it from -- and for tremendous typically see in hollywood movies, it is important for those, that they see the difference, that what a lot of what our troops are doing is supporting the afghan security forces. that helps build public support

for our continued mission. this is not the kind of war we are fighting that we were a decade ago. that is something we should all be mindful of as we try to marshal more public support. a related point, if you could speak roughly, when would be 2015 fighting season end in afghanistan? when do the conditions become too harsh? >> it depends on the season, the winter season has been very mild. the passes have not closed down between pakistan and afghanistan and many would say today that it is a continuous season. we would look at it as fighting season. the afghans continue to talk in those terms. fighting season is tied around the weather.

from the april time frame to the september sign -- timeframe are the traditional months we have seen increase in enemy activity and operations. >> how does that impact the timing of your decision point to recommend that we keep the current troop levels or are able to reduce troop levels further? is there a point at the calendar when you can no longer wait? >> as i talked about earlier there is a point in physics when i have to start the scoping retrograde equipment to get to a number at a certain point in time. we would call those decision points and i feel comfortable where we are right now that we have flexibility in that plan as we move forward, there will come a point in time. when we have to make a decision by x. >> i will encourage you and the defense nominee to speak out using your best military judgment. you'll find there are a lot of members in this institution, the

senate and house of representatives, who would support you and the president's decision to keep at least 10,000 troops in afghanistan because it is in our vital interest. i know the risks -- i know that you know the risks we face in leaving too early, this is not your first rodeo. and they are embodied in the pictures that you have over there. those are great gains and we should be proud of the effort our troops put into it. i worry about an american city going dark because of a terrorist attack that is launched from afghanistan, the land from which al qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and it is the singular achievement on the war on terror that we have expelled al qaeda from that area and that they do not return. it is critical to make sure that does not happen.

>> thank you mr. chairman, i want to joint my colleagues in thanking you for your extraordinary service to our nation and your dedicated and diligent work in afghanistan over a number of tours following the very worthwhile work done by your predecessors. 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, the source of the improvised explosive devices, ied's, that so ravaged our troops in such large numbers and yesterday in the hearing we had with ambassador cunningham and former ambassador crocker, they indicated -- or more precisely ambassador cunningham indicated

that ied's continue to be a problem. would you agree they are a continuing military threat to the afghanistan forces as well as our own? >> thank you for the question. i would tell you that ied's have become the weapon of choice not only in afghanistan, but any insurgency or terror attack. something that started years ago has been picked up and continues to move, is not only afghanistan but will continue to be a threat to both coalition and afghan security forces. we do work very hard at the counter ied capability of our afghan forces. i can get you the statistics but the number of ied's continues to get better and better. as they are continued to be trained, it gets better and better. that is noteworthy.

>> 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 ingredients across the border? >> there is ample material inside of afghanistan to build ied's, there are reports of what it takes coming in from afghanistan, i have talked to general hill as well. they have been impacted by the threat of ied's on their own forces and civilians, they understand they have to go after that as well, the afghanistan would tell you that some of the parts and materials have come from pakistan, yes or. -- yes sir. >> that is perhaps an area where the coalition forces can even

impose greater cooperation with pakistan? >> absolutely. one of the things that pakistan has done for our afghan forces i don't think it is scheduled yet but the general has reached out to the chief of the army in afghanistan and offered up counter ied training inside afghanistan for the afghan forces. >> you and i spoke about the possibility of purchasing helicopter parts and components for the mi-17's that afghanistan now has, purchased by the russians, financed with taxpayer funds, from other sources either intra-europe or elsewhere, is that an effort you will pursue -- is that an effort that you will pursue? not only helicopters that parts and components for helicopters for the afghan forces.

>> as you know, mi-17 is a critical component for the air force, and to continue to keep them flying and in the fight it will be a continued focus. we want to make sure we do that within the authorities that i have to make sure that we acquire those parts in the right way. >> in the right way means, the russian export agency that has sold the afghans so many helicopters with our money? >> we are trying to help the afghans work through their process to make sure they get their parts to build a sustainable capability in afghanistan so once we are gone they can do that themselves. >> one last question, i know that you have focused on the health care needs --

particularly the mental health care needs of the brave men and women under your command, i want to thank you for that effort. thank the united states armed forces for their increase focus and attention to that issue. thank you again for your service. >> thank you sir. >> senator rounds. >> thank you mr. chairman. general, thank you for your service, we appreciate the comments so far today, i have just a couple of questions. last year was the deadliest in the war, more than 5000 soldiers and police being killed. they were going out on more than four times as many operations as last year so more casualties could be expected. how does the increase in the operations, up by more than four times, affect the complexity of training that still needs to be developed?

>> are you referring to the capabilities for the medical piece to reduce the number of casualties? >> you are losing soldiers right now, at the same time you are trying to train them up. when you lose them at this rate, how do you bring them in and get them set up? >> thank you for the question. probably a 5% to 7% increase. most of those was actually on the afghan local police, they are outside on the far places of afghanistan designed to protect individual villages, they are not equipped with the same kind of heavy weapons and training of the other police. the taliban have recognized they are a threat because they are inside the villages and are against the taliban, so they have gone after those key targets. the ability to recruit and train the afghan's has not been an issue, both on the army side and the police side. the issue they need to work on

is the number of females they continue to bring in, for the most part they don't have issues recruiting. we are trying to continue to lower the number of those who died of their wounds, we are increasing capabilities on the medevac. they have combat lifesavers, the medics where insignias to recognize them as medics. they continue to put as many folks in the terrain as they can. they understand this is an issue for morale and leads toward readiness issues, everyone is working this very hard. i've talked personally to the surgeon general in a one-on-one

session to make sure we can do everything we need to do to help them build that capability. i've talked to the chief officer and he is concerned and is concerned about the number of people they sent to school to make sure they get the medical training they can. >> is the coordination different between kabul and the local governments as well? is there a coordination between the central government and the local units of government when it comes to this training? >> i will have to come back to that and take it for the record. i can talk as far as the military side, cannot talk to you of the civilian peace. 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 just finished another one that is quite good i couldn't tell you that kind of

coordination between them. i know there are mo u's, or memorandums of understanding. they do bring in casualties to the military hospitals as well as work them there. if you are referring to that coordination, they do that. >> i yield back my time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. general, thank you, i am sorry i had other meetings, but i appreciate you being here. we hear an awful lot about what is going on and what happened in iraq and we fell backwards and lost mozul, and you would think all the money we spent on training and equipping would have been put to better use. now we have afghanistan and will be back at the end of the year to 5500.

briefly, what do you think it will take us to maintain a presence so we don't fall backwards in afghanistan and what you think will maintain to get iraq back to where it can sustain itself? >> the key for afghanistan is to continue to build on the capacity of afghan forces so they have the requisite skill sets to make sure they don't do what the iraq he army did which is fall apart. they have leadership and training, i don't see that happening in afghanistan. >> but it seems like it takes our presence for that to happen. when our presence is gone, we should of seen maliki falling apart, and not having anything as far as a contingency plan. back home in west virginia come a they want to know do we have to go back and do it all over? can we prevent that in afghanistan?

>> i believe the afghan security forces are not going to let afghan go the way of iraq. they've told me that in the senior officials in the army and police tell me that, they believe that strongly and they have a government that wants to continue to work with national forces and to provide requisite resources for leadership to not go down that route. as i told you before they went through the election, people thought they would fracture along ethnic lines and they did not and they are proud of that. i don't see that happening with continued training and continuing to build up the afghan forces, i do not see that happening. >> my other concern is the economy and i've always believed, and i've been there myself, their economy was about $4 billion, that was their economy as far as afghanistan. that went from $4 billion to $20

billion based on american input of money and the war effort we put there. their economy is wrapped around us. that had continued to grow and was spiking up to 14.4% growth rate in 2012. then it fell to 1.5% growth rate as we started retracting. the production increased by 17 percent, it is important that opium traffic business makes up 1/5 of the afghan legitimate gdp. how will the country ever be a to stand up on its own. when the drug trade is so profitable, how can we divert them from the drug trade? if they don't have the war effort in the money we are pumping into it, where can they

stabilize their economy? >> leadership is going to make a difference. providing the right leadership and the right resources to go after that will continue to help. he is going after this entire piece of the economy. he spends 40% of his time just on the economy. he knows he can't do it just within afghanistan although years and years down the road with the minerals and 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. he's hah reached out to the entire region to help him on the economic realm. when he first visited pakistan he talked about security, economics, sharing of intelligence people to people. so that is foremost on his mind. he has a background from the

world bank. if there's anybody that can turn afghanistan and economy around it is going to be president gaunie. >> my time is just about up. i would like to talk to you more about that on the extraction of precious medals. what part of the world is getting those contracts? china has been a big player in copper. i don't think we have a united states corporation. so my time is up sir but i would like to talk to you in more detail about that. >> senator till liss. >> thank you, mr. chair. and general campbell thank you for your distinguished service. i wanteded 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 that miraculous turn around of this country and 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 8 million with 36% females. the numbers here are startling. to a certain extect we all know that what we have to do is implement a strategy in afghanistan that prevents terrorists from preparing themselves to launch attacks like they did on september 11th. that should be the first priority. but i also think that those who seem 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 life the 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 progress that we think they're in a position to make. my question relates to chairman mccain mentioned that some of our members met with president gani and hi talked about flexibility. you talked about changes that you recommended. are the change that is you've recommended substantially aligned with what president gaunie is is wanting in terms of the current strategy? >> he knows where i stand on that but i think he would support the options i presented. >> and how do you feel about how those options have been received by your leadership or the administration?

and other in other words to what extent do you think that they will be acted on and you will be given the authority to act on the option that is you've recommended? >> sir we work, we're talking those now and i feel very good about where we are. >> would you characaterize those changes and those additional options as minor course corrections or some fundamental shifts? >> sir, i characaterize it as i said to this committee seven months ago that when i got on the ground i would make continual assessments and i've had six months on the ground now to make those assessments both where the afghan security 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 gaunie has asked for and that will stay within where we need to be to reach our strategic objectives inside of afghanistan. >> general, 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? >> sir, i think in some areas we will continue to have the same pace or maybe increased pace based on the increase the afghans have built up. in some areas it may stay the same in some it may go lower. >> any areas you think may be at risk?

>> 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 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 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 kandahar completely?

>> we go to 5,500, we go to kabul-centric, 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, 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 assessment? of the new afghan government's attempts to 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 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 counterterrorism 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 u.s. c.t. 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 withdrawal from afghanistan. we certainly don't want to see what the president described in 2014, a 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 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 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 hearing is adjourned. thank you, general. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

thomas allen harris talked about his film, through a lens darkly: black photographers and the emergence of a people, in which he exploresâ read more

thomas allen harris talked about his film, through a lens darkly: black photographers and what's the story of you and your father? >> my father and mother divorced when i was maybe six seven. my father never took any photographs of my family of me my brother. both my brother and i are

conage makers. my grand father took thousands of photographs of the family. so as i was making this film i was thinking about the ways in which this idea of framing, what that says about the person in front of the camera, behind the camera, the connection between the two. and also certain amount of grief that i never got to see myself. >> still alive? >> my father's still alive. >> do you have a relationship with him today? >> a relationship, perhaps you could call it a relationship. >> but why though do you think he didn't take photos when everybody else in the family seems to have taken thousands?