[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> coming up in about half an hour live on c-span, a conversation about military and humanitarian issues and afghanistan posted by the brookings institution. we will hear from the executive director from doctors without borders about the bombing of a hospital in afghanistan by the u.s. military and the challenges of providing medical care and conflict zones. we'll hear from a former naval flight officer. that discussion scheduled to start at 10:30 a.m. eastern time. president bill clinton will make his first campaign trip for hillary clinton. we'll have live coverage this

afternoon at 5:15 p.m. eastern from exeter, new hampshire. more road to the white house coverage with senator rand paul also live from exeter, lives tuesday on c-span2 at 6 p.m. eastern. >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house with best axis two candidates, town halls, meetings, speeches, rallies, and meet and greets. we are taking your comments on facebook, twitter, and by phone. eventays, every campaign that we covers on a website, c-span.org. the second session of the 1/14 congress begins today with a pro forma session of the u.s. house life here on c-span. legislative work begins tomorrow in the house. a budget items, reconciliation bill that would defund planned parenthood and repeal the affordable health care acted the senate ardea past that legislation. president obama says if it makes it to his desk that he will veto it.

the senate returns next monday, january 11. they will consider a u.s. circuit court nomination in pennsylvania and a bill from kentucky senator rand paul that would require an audit of the federal reserve. you can follow the senate live over on c-span2. we will be live in the brookings institution in about 30 minutes looking at the military and humanitarian issues from afghanistan. some of the british you aged 11 to 18. members represent their views before government officials and meet every year to debate issues facing young people in united kingdom. >> the youth parliament will look at our last morning session. make public transport cheaper, better, and accessible for all. to move the motion, i call from the northwest of england, rose warburton.

[applause] rose: a 14-year-old is made to pay an adult rate to school everyday. requires weekly doctors appointments, but can no longer afford these journeys. given the chance, would you help these young people? because righty now you have that chance. four years ago, the committee carried out a report on transport. for 80,000 young people but that we campaign on this issue once again. is an illness that we diagnosed four years ago. would you start treatment today? let us use the evidence from the report to create a reformed,

refresh, and reinvented campaign. to us and for reforms discount travels for young people, similar to the young persons rail card. many will question what we can really achieve on a national scale with local authorities in different stages. let us use this to our advantage. we will name the places where transport is accessible and showing moves where it can be. let us lobby to bring pressure to the government for transport. let us give transport another push, the final push it needs. more than is so much buses, trains, and expense. at least young people feeling to stand, deprived and disillusioned. i look forward to driving and honking.

however, when we grow up, we children lose the smiling faces and we forget the honking worried about whether we can afford the bus to school tomorrow. 2008 -- the local transport act was pat -- was passed and required to consult people on public transport. how many of you have been able services?th these in 2010, national consultation on that one third of young people and continued and educational trading if given the financial support for transport. 2015, the consultation has proven that young people are not content on the services. opportunityve the to restore the magic in a day-to-day necessity. today, we have the chance to make a difference and to make a

change. tomorrow, we make young people's voices heard and their journeys more affordable and the transport more accessible. [applause] >> rose, thank you very much indeed. now to oppose the motion from the east midland, i call and daria accor.e aria: i live in between must assure and western. we are dependent on public transport to take us to school or to a part-time job or to our friends. in leicestershire, i know it is a real issue to get from one village to the next. cap and try to work with our bus companies to try to make improvements. it may take a long time before we reach a good conclusion. however, if i went one mile

north, there the story is different because transport is less of an issue. perhaps we should discuss different issues such as racism, mental health, or the living wage. the candidate campaign can really be correlated to accept if we all come from different places with different needs. for example, the person sitting next to you they have a very different public transport network then you . we have different times and different prices. to look atity needs transport as a community and not a nation. ,ransport takes time commitment, and huge investments. , we had a ago national campaign, but i'm not sure much change. we should be using the committee's recommendations and our local areas to set up new ones just use nationally.

we have cheaper transport. how sensible of those demands? who will pay? we are asking local councils to make more subsidies and private companies to reduce their income. the pressure of government to support the discount cards -- they are unlikely to commit to this. maybe it's better elsewhere. for more buses and certain times or in another to make the trains and most areas want and accessible network not in 2020 but today. yes, transport is unbelievably important in certain areas. it needs to be tackled, but not by us all and nationally. let's invest time and effort into a campaign where each can make a difference and we can make a real impact. [applause] >> thank you.

do we have a willington contributor from northern island? is there anyone from northern island willing to speak? this young man, nearest to me. , thelive in a city ecclesiastical capital of violence. is the only city in u.k. with without a train station. why is this? because the politicians aren't bothered. station prevents us access to higher education elsewhere. private cars -- young people simply can't support it. this should be supported so everyone can have access to education no matter where you're from. [applause] >> thank you very much, indeed could before i call the next

speaker, i want to us from kenilworth. he is the attorney general. he said he is about to go. he said to me "they're very , good, aren't they?" i said they certainly are. jeremy, thank you for your support and for being here. it is greatly appreciated. do we have a speaker from scotland? anybody from scotland wishing to speak in this debate? let us hear from the young man here. >> you have to forgive me. i come from mid scotland. favor of the motion.

however, i do have some concerns . i mentioned we are very strapped in the area for cash. said, we sustain, as she where do we find the money? where do we finance this? my council will not be able to afford this. if this was a u.k. wide issue, we would be up the creek without a paddle. this would be a real issue for us. how do we expect companies to provide this? how do we expect local authorities to compensate us? i would like to stress some wording in the motion that i find issue with. how do we enforce the standards? how do you measure price and structure? how do you measure treatment of young people? is that to do with gruffness of bus drivers? is that nodding your head after you say thank you? is that a matter we have to deal

with at the proper department? [applause] >> thank you very much indeed for that confident and capable speaker when i want an honorable member to bring his or her speech to an end, i stand up and say i'm extremely grateful to the honorable member. that is what one of the sketch writers once said is my polite way of saying shut up sometimes. i'm not telling you to shut up. that was a very good speech. i want a speaker from the southeastern and there's one person trying to catch my eye for quite some time. right in the back row with a white top indeed . >> i am from kent in the southeast. it is massive. geographically i can't even , explain how big it is. we have been campaigning for years on transport. which is why i am in support of this motion.

transport as in england only issue would be so crucial to help us. it would be shared resources. it would mean everybody gets a chance to share the resources like buses, making it cleaner. be able to talk to bus companies to make them cheaper. i try and travel to council meetings and it takes an hour to travel on bus. if i was in a different area of cap, it would take me 10 minutes six and east of england. it is not fair. transport needs to be better. so that all sorts of young people can access different areas of the country. and we can all become friends. >> what about a speaker from the west midlands? the young man in the gray suit indeed. i represent the area of dudley in the west midlands. while i don't agree with this

issue, i also agree with this issue. we are talking about england only campaigns. i looked over to my friends in london who get their bus transport for free. that is a lot of young people in england that we will not be campaigning on. is that right? no, it isn't. my second point is for the motion. i went on a bus a couple weeks ago and i was questioned for 10 minutes about my age. because it was a weekend day doing a mark for bus.wicke i was questioned for 10 minutes on a bus. is that acceptable for young people? this is not correct. i urge you to vote with your heart rather than what everybody says. thank you. [applause] >> what about wales? someone from wales. there's a fellow waving at me very distraugh

demonstratively. >> thanks very much. i would like to start by saying thank you very much for all the work you've been doing to make sure we can be here today. without the work that you have done, we would not be here and i'm incredibly grateful for that. [applause] mr. speaker, the motion that is before us today fails to take into account one fundamental matter. people use transport to get to school and to college and university, to wherever. the motions that are also on the paper are going to be focused around these places and colleges. i could go on. if we cannot actually get to the schools, if we can't get to these colleges because the services are so weak and so expensive, how on earth are we going to enact any

of these other motions? it's simple. we can't. mr. speaker my commute takes me , two hours each way to get to college. it is a four-hour journey. i leave just after 6:00 in the morning. the trains go every hour and it is an absolute nightmare. i'm still doing it. i don't know why i'm still doing it but i want to do it. ,the fact is, mr. speaker the , train service that i'm going on is horrendous. we are not doing enough as a youth parliament and as young people to campaign on these issues. we really should be doing them. in the constituency that i represent in wales, it costs three pounds 90. i was speaking with some transport staff in london yesterday and it costs roughly the same amount between zones 1-7. this is hardly london.

i'm just going to close by saying in order to enact any of the other motions and to be extraordinarily successful, this has to be done through schools. we need to make sure the young people get to the schools so that these motions actually can be successful in the first place. [applause] the speaker: what about the northeast of england? let's hear from you. >> my name is anna cooper and i represent northumberland. as representative, thank you very much by making a simply assembly.simpl when you are 14 is old you have , to pay an adult fare for a bus. now excuse me, but when i was 14 years old, the only money i had was pocket money from my mother. my brother is 15. when he was 14, he still have to pay as an adult. that is just horrendous. when you are you are not an 14, adult.

that is despicable. a few years ago public transport was debated here. it was a national campaign. that was fantastic. the thing is people say it is a local authority issue. if it is a local authority issue , then we should lobby and we should campaign to our councils to help us. if the councils don't have much control over it then why don't , we do that to the operators as ?ell you why don' why don't we we campaign to the operators to help us? if young people have to pay so much they are going to use it , less and less. your friends back at home, we'll all use public transport. it is up to us to help them. we represent young people and young people use public transport every single day. it is up to us to help them.

i carried out a campaign for two years and the one thing that stood out to me was the cost of travel is taking over my family. that was from an average student at a school in northumberland. now, if that is taking over their family, that screams emotional. they need help and the only help they can get is from us to help them. if this is the national campaign, they tell decision-makers, they tell people in power, bus operators, that this is pathetic, public transport needs help. young people need help to get to schools and to get to socializing to help people. thank you. [applause] the speaker: i want a speaker from london. the one with the turquoise top. >> yasmine from the london borough of ealing. having only had transport as a campaign a few years back, i

would echo others saying we should have a new focus. something that is more of a national campaign that a local issue. let's instead look at the injustice that young people around the world face everything they could based on what? their skin color, their religion. it is absolutely appalling. mr. speaker, we cannot let this continue anymore. as someone mentioned earlier, religious hate crimes are now over 3000 over last year. how can we let these injustices continue to increase while sitting back and not helping those most vulnerable in our society? we all know that the campaign has given us the voice to have a voice when society says that our voice doesn't matter. it has given us the confidence to stand up for our beliefs but the society says we really shouldn't have police. it is given us the ability to make a change in society.

let us all together grasp that change. let us grasp the opportunity that we have been giving. us help those young people who face oppression and discrimination in the daily lives. let us vote for ending discrimination because it is a choice of improving lives. [applause] the speaker: how about a contributor from yorkshire? if somebody holding up a newspaper of some description? yes, you, indeed. i am from wakefield east. transport has consistently been appearing in the top five in make your mark. us as young people want transport to remain cheaper and more accessible. within wakefield east, west bus transports of becoming limited. those in the rural areas are struggling to get buses at a fair price. i live in a small town within wakefield and if i want to get

the bus to school i have to take , two buses. this costs me six pounds a day. some will not even accept my bus pass. i know this does not just affect me. it affects everyone . one of my colleagues who spoke in this very chamber last year has to travel using a real card to university. this rail card does not work until 10:00 so she has to pay a.m. full price every day. this is not fair and this issue needs tackling. thank you. [applause] the speaker: we need to hear a contributor from the east midlands. who are we got from the east midlands? this blond gentleman here. >> i am from lincolnshire. school transport has been mostly supplied for free in the u.k. why is it mostly? youou are an education, should be supplied for free for educational reasons.

it should not matter in my opinion. you should offer it for free for educational reasons. [applause] the speaker: what about the northwest of england? who have we got from the northwest of england? the young woman on the second row second in. forgive me, the lady next to you. the lady with black hair, yes, yourself, thank you. >> i am from liverpool. public transport has improved a lot in my area over the last couple of years as a result of the work done by young people. i think that there should be more of a local or regional campaign as opposed to a national campaign. obviously the situation varies from area to area. your experiences with public transport are more likely to be more positive living in the city

rather than living in a rural area. [applause] >> a voice from the southwest. there is a huge forest of people from the southwest. i would like to hear from the woman in the second row second in with the black and red dress. >> i am sarah staples from plymouth, the isolated city of the southwest. it takes us four hours on train to get to london. the same distances traveled much quicker and other areas of the country. take buses, for instance. i pay 45 pounds a month for my bus pass and i still don't have a bus that can get me to wowrk -- work on time on sunday. we can't travel to different areas. we are lucky in plymouth. other areas in the region are more rural and don't have buses to get them anywhere. we need to fix this for young people. it is all of our fault. [applause]

speaker: what about the eastern region? >> i represent the good people of central suffolk and north ipswich. mr. speaker, it is now government policy that all young people are expected to stay in education until they are 18 years of there's no free from school transport since the age of 16 and the government has not provided any further funding to support transport for those who reach the age of 16. the only funding available is provided by the school which covers the bus fare. problem solved ? well, no. i live in a very rural constituency and many families have to drive just to get to the nearest bus to get to the nearest school. that's often a few miles away. in my case it was nine miles , away. that is not something that many families can afford. it is eating into the budget of those are poor working income. i strongly feel the cost of the bus fares should be significantly reduced or

-16apped altogether for post graduates. having access to a facility in which you will be educated should be a right of all post-16 students in the united kingdom and if education is going to go up to 18, it should be government-funded as well. i look forward to living in a world one day that is not totally discriminate those of poor backgrounds to get to the place of education or work. how deep mom and dad's pockets are should not determine your grades. i only have four more words -- let's make it happen! [applause] the speaker: a wonderfully fitting conclusion. wind up this debate. please give an enthusiastic welcome to ryan simpson from northern ireland. [applause] : thank you, mr.

speaker. transport is what we all rely on to carry out our daily lives. morning, i have already been aim a car, train, and bus. i know the struggle. i know people, one of my closest friends in fact who have a two , hour commute home from school every day. as we heard in this debate, everyone can relate to her. infrequent services, constant changes, and even when the service does turn up it is at an inconvenient time. it is no use to anyone really. all young people feel the same. whether that is turned to meet up with their friends in town or or evenal appointment, to simply get to their school or college, it is simply unacceptable. let us think realistically. could this campaign be achievable? with the exception of certain devolved institutions and their transportation networks, we are not lobbying the government. we are lobbying the transport companies that control the fares and some local authorities the

that control services. we've already seen the great disparity in transport across the country. local authorities are in contrast to each other up and down the country. this will lead to uncoordinated campaigns for success in one region to be a failure in another. we've done so much already. in 2012, the committee's topic was transport. they have given us the guidelines for what campaign could entail. they've outlined the fair thresholds for children, accessibility for the disabled, rural transport for those less central, and for young people who suffer from the inability to pay for their fares. we have made up some ground so perhaps we can continue on. perhaps we can start to enforce the local transport act. this is legislation designed to involve young people in decision-making. there is no evidence of that. we can fight to raise the adult fair thresholds to 18 -- the way it should be.

we can fight for more efficient routes into the countryside to help those who live in rural areas. a transport campaign would be a never-ending journey. there is no scheduled timetable, and the route map is ever-expanding, who knows what potholes lie on the road ahead. when has that stopped us? we have campaigned on the living wage and mental health and all campaigns in the ground. it is our duty to strive to make the lives of young people better. my favorite fictional politician , frank underwood does share , some advice on the subject. he said it is common sense to take a method and try it. move.fails, we above all we must try something. , when you vote to on the campaign today you must remember , that young people are vital to any society and so is transportation. as yourself -- can our great nation, the united kingdom,

survive when two vital parts of society cannot mix effectively? the speakwer: thank you for that and a thank you to those of you who have been patiently waiting and have not yet uncalled. before we wrap up, i want to acknowledge the presence of mr. stephen hepburn came into parliament with me in 1997. stephen., [applause] i know we are finishing a bit late this morning, but i'm afraid we have to try and keep on track so you need to be back here from westminster where you are headed for lunch by 1:30.

i look forward to opening this afternoon's proceedings, thank you for a great morning's debate. now to the brookings institution in washington, d.c. for a conversation about military and humanitarian issues in afghanistan. opening statements from the panelists and then they will be taking questions. >> if i could say a brief word are policy andy advocacy director at mercy corps. she has worked at this capacity for some time and is a former peace corps volunteer in nicaragua and has worked on capitol hill and on national legislation. she is a longtime advocate for those in difficult circumstances around the world and mercy corps is thin is for this. one of the topics i know she is thegress -- address point of the afghan people and refugees.

is theoen communications director for doctors without borders and you know they do incredibly important and courageous work thend the world and was victim of a terrible tragedy. the most famous and worst single tragedy of the entire fall of 2015 in afghanistan. certainly in terms of a tragedy that we all would have liked to see avoided and that was caused by mistakes made by the u.s. military and afghan security forces and we'll discuss that issue as well. have themored to joining us here. let me say something about his role in this conversation. he is an active duty marine corps officer with considerable experience in the broader middle east conflict zones and previous assignments. we are pleased to have him in brookings.

he draws on this great repository in his mind on various issues that get to the heart of what happened. the basic question of how to you use military power in as safe away as possible in a difficult combat environment. he has experience not only as a pilot but also as an individual who helped coordinate unmanned with asituations background as well in foreign area operations. he has a sophisticated understanding of the way in which military operations affect populations in which they take place. is the director of -- when we had an event at brookings, one of our co-panelists described that in words i would concur with as the single best book on the afghanistan conflict.

she also wrote her first book which was a nexus of counter narcotics, outer insurgency, criminality, and the ways in which these issues and concerns occur in places like i didn't assume -- in places like afghanistan. therefore, she has wrestled with the issue of human security and the broader issue of the trends operations in and politics in afghanistan as well. i will say one more brief word of introduction and pass things onto vanda. she will try to give us a lay of the land in afghanistan. she was there in the fall and had an extensive as it. i had a much shorter visit in december myself. i will try to guide the conversation and interject in response to questions but we will start with vanda.

then we will go to who i will have to say will have up broader expiration of what mercy corps is doing. jason will then speak about whatever topics he wishes to what certainly the kunduz paramount on his mind as it should be for all of us. che will give us a broader interpretation of how things stand from a military point of view. i will add one final word. they secrete to summarize my take on afghanistan today. reasons that there is for hope despite it all. going to hear a lot of reasons to be worried, a lot of policies that have to change, a lot of bad things that are happening, and reasons to believe this country is fragile and perhaps on the precipice of being able to hold it together. i will note two things that give me some reason for hopefulness and i will frame this as not i

hope too much happy talk but as a way to midas there are things to hold onto. one thing is for every military setback we have seen, we have seen at least some counter resolution or some degree of cause for hope at the afghan forces in particular. afghan forces and police have resilience and a willingness to keep trying. help, there is still corruption in the ranks, there is still an overly excessive tendency to focus on checkpoint manning rather than offensive operations, there are problems. if we look at the case of kunduz and the tragedies that transpired when the taliban took afghanistan's fifth-largest city, it was afghan forces that took city back within a couple of weeks. a second reason for hope is the afghan people themselves.

they put out a survey, that survey this year this past fall showed a lot of concern among they hadn people that seen deterioration in their personal security, greater fear about their well-being, and that was all very bad news and very sobering. they also expressed high confidence in their own army and police and they expressed, believe it or not, a certain happiness. we have a colleague here who studies happiness and has one pointed out the afghan people have something about them that's resilient. maybe happiness is a little strong but there is certainly a degree of innate optimism that remains and that was apparent in the polls. we proceedther a do, to our main themes of the overall course of politics and military operations in afghanistan, the well-being of the afghan people, and the role of ngos and that effort.

i will turn things over to vanda. vanda: good morning to you all, happy new year, it is wonderful to see you here. it is wonderful to focus on afghanistan were so much political attention is focused. but afghanistan remains a crucial country, one in which we have made a commitment and where we also have tremendous hope among the afghan people. people are increasingly at more intense work. there are many indicators it will become more intense in 2016. i was enormously pleased to hear comments on president obama's top-down foreign-policy priorities to include afghanistan. priorities are many but

russia was mentioned among them so focusing and highlighting on afghanistan and resurrecting some very serious international and u.s. thinking about where the country is heading is very important. thank you all very much for coming. in afghanistan in september and october, i was asking the afghan people what makes you happy? what is the good story? one of the answers i got frequently was we still have our humor. this perhaps indicates the resilience of the afghan people. but even that humor is increasingly challenged. one of the most distressing aspects of 2015 is the tremendous brain drain. country isn to the often mentioned that the young people will act different.

we will hear more about the aspect that hope is challenged or not. were all, afghan refugees among the fifth-largest group of refugees coming to europe, at least 70,000 of them. the young people that were to be the hope of the country. 2015 was a very difficult year along every single dimension, secular and political. 2016 has kicked off in it ethical way -- in a difficult way. news of the attack on the indian consulate. the battle is still ongoing. what is significant about that is it is clearly designed to ofail and and any hope resurrecting peace talks with the afghanistan -- taliban.

and other actors. i am personally very hopeful that the talks will get off the ground soon. nonetheless it is significant being on again, there are people trying to undermine it. the number of casualties was not particularly high in the last attack, the attack is significant. it is yet another move by the taliban to isolate the international community from the afghan people. to eliminate public and private ofces in which the exchange deeper understanding and mutual commitment to be resurrected. the only access and communication of official government buildings is another

limitation, there are few kabul, the fact that they are increasingly being hit is focused on the psychological dimension of the war. and some suicide bomber near the kabul airport, of course no casualties but nonetheless, 2016 is off with a bang and not a good one. what happened broadly last year? the official assessment is that influence inas an at least one area of the country, that number might be an understatement. of the afghan security forces have gone up significantly, at least 26% in 2014 to 7000 dead in 2000 -- and 2000 injured.

and prior to it in 2013, the level of casualties was not sustainable. we are seeing that the recruitment keeps outpacing the attrition, whether it is from casualties or from soldiers and ol.icemen going aw one reason that is happening is because the economy is in a critical situation. the only employment available for many is participating in the security forces. that dynamic has its limitation. they calculate that poor logistics, continuing inadequate air support, a big loss and robyn intelligence capacity, it is simply -- a big loss and decreasing intelligence capacity.

migrating to other countries seems to be the better option. so while the attrition rate is for byccounted recruitment it is still bad and needs to be addressed. is the taliban's plan was months in the making. there was months preview of the challenges that the province had. there were years of political buildup. it iss on kunduz because significant and very much about the political dysfunction that characterizes the country. the exclusionary politics, ethnic and tribal competition resulting in abuse. kunduz was the snake pit of afghanistan's politics. it's not surprising that the taliban would've been so successful in the province.

they have only had the provincial capital for two weeks but they did not expect to hold a provincial capital. they were actually surprised by how well they did. one of the reasons that's compounded the difficulties of the government was the proliferation of the afghan local police, the officially sanctioned militia, and other militias that have been involved in power abuse and problematic exclusionary politics in the province. interestingly enough, the taliban come up for months was ablenduz went down to recruit its own version of the afghan local police in kunduz and was a key factor for both why they go to the city and also a key factor in how abusive the taliban behavior was despite because,s, precisely the government cannot control the other militias and neither can the taliban.

we are seeing a big proliferation of malicious lately -- malitias in response to isis. i want to express my appreciation of the u.s. government and their military determination not to expand the alp despite pressure from the afghan government to double in size and perhaps bigger. politicalave been a patronage of easement -- appeasement of powerbrokers that challenge the government. the taliban has been steadily pounded. the situation is hardly good despite the fact that there are at least 18,000 afghan soldiers and policemen stationed. in 2016 we can expect the kandahar will come under significant pressure. already, the taliban was making

a lot of maneuvers around the province preparing for a push on kandahar. let us not ever think it is easy for the taliban either. the movement is facing great internal challenges like it has over the past decade and arguably longer. one latertion from the sectionaln eyes asian of the group -- sectioning of the group. it has come with many costs. one has just come out against him. the transition is challenging. fact, the rise of isis in afghanistan and places like bul and iraq has

caused damage. this mental taliban leaders --ecting are lower as a disgruntled taliban leaders defecting are lower as a result of isis. the politics involved with the government, local government officials and all the powerbrokers and the taliban, perhaps we can get into it in the q and a. sectiono focus my last on speaking on the politics, which i will say is the core of afghanistan's troubles. the taliban will continue pushing, but the country will not heal itself if it cannot get fractured political infighting focused on personal power grabs and focus on governance. ofeed, the year was one

plotting, efforts to undermine this functional and nonfunctional so-called government of national unity. not typically between the two withng men, but crucially powerbrokers on the sidelines. of whatately, instead there is being used to focus on inernance, to make some push improving the efficiency in the military, make some push and cleaning up the bad criminality , the government is instead staying with political infighting and infighting with other powerbrokers. announced in 2016 the parliamentary and district elections will take place. we will see.

but they will be contested and consume much political energy. perhaps even more problematically, 2016 is whereed to be the year something takes place to adjudicate major constitutional reform involving the relationship between the ceo and president as well as electoral reform. perhaps according to some such as ceo abdullah abdullah. it will be very contested and challenged and is already being manipulated by important powerbrokers including former president hamid karzai. i think what we can see in 2016 is continuing economic dire situations and outflows of pushes,major taliban and the system stacked in

infighting. basic survival and power grabs instead of focusing on the crucial landscape of the national interest and government in the country. that leaves the international community in a very difficult situation. clearly, we want to help afghanistan. the united states should continue assisting militarily and politically. but we also need to demand greater accountability and far greater focus on governing the country instead of tearing it to pieces. you, greatank framing. now i will turn it to the director of policy and advocacy at mercy corps. >> happy new year. hosting this for event and continuing to put a focus and attention on afghanistan. mercy corps is a global development organization, we operate in 40 countries, we've

been in afghanistan since 1986 so for over three years -- 30 years. we are helping them to improve their lives through a wide range of agricultural and development programs, for the last two years we've reached 2.5 million afghans, trying to help them improve their livelihoods including through food security. we work in the north, east, and south including in kandahar and kunduz. we use what is caused a community acceptance model of security and community mobilization implementation approach which is developer speak meeting we were close they with communities to make sure we're hearing their needs and working on a project they think will improve their lives. we are also working with communities to help ensure we are able to be safe and work in rather difficult and challenging environments. vanda'sa lot with assessment on the security front

and it is weighing on the minds and hearts of afghanistan's pe ople. another focus has taken a downward turn and jobs and unemployment have gotten worse. unemployment has increased pretty significantly. the drive for afghans to make a difficult decision to decide if they want to stay or travel to europe or other locations. fromof this is stemming afghansls of living below the poverty line and the thoughts and feelings that the economy isn't getting better with security being so difficult. the investment climate is difficult in afghanistan right now. wave ofeing another human migration of afghans. were the4, afghans largest global refugee population at 2.6 million

people. the syrian refugee crisis has now put syria in the lead but that is still 10% of afghanistan's population. europe, about 50,000 in which i think is close to the second or third number of displaced people that approved -- moved to europe from other countries. would likethings we to focus on is that it's not just refugees or people on the doors of europe that are part of the problem. one of our afghan staff need a poignant point that rich people can move to europe, which we don't think of refugees as being wealthy. most of the ones going to europe are not that relative to those in afghanistan and have become internally displaced, the situation in afghanistan is very difficult. you have some of the highest children arerates,

not schooled when they have been displaced and have to move one area to another. we are looking at one and 30 afghans are now internal he 940,000 people. -- or 940,000 people. it is a country prone to natural disasters and so we will see -- thisn those despite placement as well when people are forced to flee to other parts of the country. is anmple of this with ourwe are seeing vocational and training program in kandahar. we are seeing what is supposed to help refugees from pakistan who are returning to afghanistan , help them get on their feet. but we are seeing more need knocking on the door saying we need jobs and we are also seeing positionicants to this that have higher literacy levels

than average. they are very high and seven afghanistan in the first place, but it speaks to the situation of the economy when you have folks who have that levels of education coming back and trying to get vocational training and secure a job in this increasing pressure cooker that afghans are feeling where they have less job opportunities and do not see hope for a lot of opportunities. see this massive flow of afghans both externally and likeinternally, it sounds a humanitarian crisis and that is what's on the front page of the newspapers. but we as ngos on the ground and others agree with his we are looking at a long-term development crisis. one of the reasons people are leaving is that they don't see possibilities within their communities. specifically, we are seeing a thisf rules, internally

place people moving from rural areas to urban centers which is something we will see over the next decade in afghanistan. it is a shift to urbanization including large pockets of poverty within urban centers where we have folks fleeing from the countryside trying to make a living and make a wage within cities. we would argue and push for both in afghanistan and other capitals around the world for more sustainable solutions for all of afghans because you need to increase the level of development. but also specifically for displaced afghanistan. and we need to put more attention, not less, on the systemic problems which are making afghanistan and unattractive place to live and drop in work. some of the underlying issues even if we have it fixed 100% tomorrow, knock on wood, god willing, if security was fixed we would still face developmental challenges that need to be addressed for afghans

to have development and further prosperity. working on addressing the depletion of natural resources, dropped in afghanistan are increasing, land erosion badly, it's making it hard for people to stay on their farms and feed their families. i would recommend for folks interested in this and these issues, putting forth to the paris climate talks, a summary of what the different challenges are in afghanistan and the long terms. looking at the droughts and how do we start doing sustainable development in some of the more agricultural areas of the country. addressing the depletion of the natural resource base and acknowledging that afghan populations will double by 2030. unemployment, and need to think about creative do with thejobs and food insecurity that will increase with a growing number

of afghans. if you talk to your average afghan, something that will come up in conversation quickly is frustration and annoyance with chronic energy problems. it hamstrings economic development and makes life more difficult on a daily basis. it is something like depending on if you are in rural or urban areas, but rural areas have some of the worst areas of electricity in the world which makes it difficult if you're a child trying to go to school. something mercy corps and other ngos are looking at is how to address underlying issues and how to support afghans in their quest to improve their country and develop further. we spend a lot of time working on technical and vocational training. we have a program that trained that22,000 men and women are now working in kandahar in a similar program. i know we will get a question about why are we throwing money at afghanistan, it is a black hole of money.

but if we get this right and go back to development best practices, and working with communities and not just throwing money at a problem but looking at sustainability, but that basically means is you are you can try to keep them open past went dollars are there. we would advocate strongly for a market based to intervention. somebody, whatn does the market mean -- need? do a survey. i would fix that? do we train people in motorcycle repair and 70's. there is a cap and employment in these areas. the train fill that gap.

the train and cannot on the other end without a job. that would be even more frustrating. looking at that market based is important. what this means for real afghans is have a beneficiary who came afghanistan for years ago. now supporting her family. she is bringing in more money than her husband, which is kind of exciting. she does not want to turn back to where she was in she is resettled in it do that through economic development. in the energy sector, there is marginal access to electricity. we encourage others to pay attention to the energy.

it's intertwined. there is a lot of talk about pipelines and things along those lines that are developing systems in afghanistan. we are pleased that the adopted a has renewable energy policy which of energy to come from renewable source. that's an exciting policy environment. that will help get people at the electricity. we have started working with boston university. we partnered with them. it's a solar pv system. while the price of gas is low here, it's expensive if you're only making four dollars a day. savings avoided from having to

spend money on diesel fuel, the university will pay back the cost. if a virtuous loop and cycle and investment in while the investment opportunity in afghanistan may not be the top waste -- wall street banker. there could be some interesting opportunities for social impact investing. that will help increase the livelihoods and development goals for afghans. question we'll get it from the effective of having been there for several decades, with the dumping of billions of dollars into development programs, there have a lot of mistakes. that people seen need to get the rule straight.

there is a role for the private ngos to helpe for the most vulnerable. we talk a lot about syrians and the no laws generation. forans about war now decades. that has taken a pretty serious toll. how can we support that? i would help a lipid capacity of other service providers to make sure we have a sustainable transition western mark --? 10 years from now, we will not be talking about this. we'll be talking about more sustainable development. they won't have to migrate to someplace else. your join you in thanking

colleagues who work at mercy corps. speakcohen is going to next. doctorse director of without borders and the united states. we worked in 70 countries. you are a humanitarian organization paid we have been in afghanistan starting in 1980. members assassinated and we left the country. he returned in 2009. one of our hospitals was bombed by u.s. forces on october 3. that led to the death of 42 of our staff and patients. withared our coordinates nato and afghan forces.

he also worked in a hospital for years and it was a well-known struck her. after thempbell investigation acknowledged that itwere on the no strike list --. this comes at a time when we are concerned about the deteriorating security situation have talked a lot about. we continue to operate hospitals . treat 26,000ies people a month. about 2000eople, deliveries of newborns. at the time of the bombing of the hospital, we treated over 100 were wounded in that facility.

it continues to be quite difficult. we have teams working in a hospital there as well. what we have seen is that growing deterioration over the last two years in terms of security in many of the contested areas, this has heightened services, particularly health services to rural areas, particularly those in those contested areas i was just talking about. 2014, hit issued and access to health care survey we did. -- conducted. surveys remain relevant today. that one inrevealed five the petitions we interviewed had a family member or close friend who had died to

to a lack of access to health care. people are unable to reach health care and were dying as a result. for those reached our hospitals in the four locations, 40 cap based real challenges in terms , beingting, landmines harassed on their journey to reach the hospital. there is a wide gap between health care services that exist on paper and those that exist in the area where they were. some of those findings of been reinforced by the un's secretary-general. they found hospitals that have been developed for which the gps coordinates did not match anywhere in some of them weren't even in afghanistan. found was barriers we lack of money and the high cost.

the long distances that people had to travel and the impact of the armed conflict in the country great of a lot of the petitions bypass their closest facility. the really did not have competent -- confidence that they had the facilities they needed. those who manage to reach a health facility, various obstacles had to be overcome. the main obstacle was related to the conflict. illustrates and we can see this again in places like kunduz where the situation has deteriorated even more. facility,g of our there is no axis.

they will have to go someplace further away. access00,000 people lost to health care. we know a lot of the areas are being taken over by armed --.sition groups in to, cost can be a huge barrier for patients. two in five people have had to borrow money to afford health care. 44% of the patients. overall funding, quality of care has been quite challenging. that has been reinforced by other studies as well. we are in a situation in the last couple of months where it's been outlined. see the chronic issues from an economic standpoint.

violence, it's not just the taliban and the other groups that are involved. there has been heavy fighting between government and international forces. humanitarian organizations need to find -- provide assistance. there has been a lot of challenges with the lending of humanitarian aid and development programs since the real intervention started. this blending of efforts that are meant to stabilize the country and support the afghan government comes at a cost of fighting assistance to people in areas that are not provided by the government. the services are not trusted. we have alluded to with the bombing of our hospital that we

have several -- serious concerns. in terms of what decisions are being followed to distinguish between civilian and military targets. there is an expanded put. there will be questions and challenges for humanitarian organizations. including the rules of engagement that are called into those areas. especially when they are calling in airstrikes. concerns inlar other areas where the fighting intensifies around the city. it's critical. we have set this a lot since the bombing. treating the wounded is not providing material support to

the enemy. responsibility under the law of war. this is one a one inch it even conventions. 101 geneva convention. behind willf war sides. it for you have to observe the sanctity of those places. uncomfortable -- incumbent to make sure you treat everyone based on mead and need -- need and you alone. -- need a loan. lone. it's going to be very important in the coming year if not years.

this is not only important for their security on the ground or in --. for their ability to provide care on front lines. critical that we see in the next year the ability where there are armed opposition's. >> thank you very much. i'm going to respond. we have had this terrible tragedy and general campbell has taken responsibility and there is an ongoing investigation. have a situation where military personnel have tried harder than any previous boring history to be careful with the use of force in it was a controversy at the

time when it general petronius whether general crystal he is too many restrictions on the use of force by nato personnel. how do you look at the overall --flict from a tactical of perspective question mark --? che: good morning. say that i am not representing anybody in the department of defense. these thoughts are mine. i have free license to think intellectually, which is a bit of a misnomer because i am a

marine. with some these issues of an product, afghanistan represents a lot of different challenges. it's not unlike a lot of other areas. the challenge of the ungoverned spaces makes it very difficult to apply the laws of our conflict. when you have challenges that don't get the conventional state on state actor type of scenario we've had through history. i can tell you from first-hand experience that it's very unfortunate. our thoughts and prayers go out to those who are victims. notas almost unequivocally intentional. one of the first things that we consider is the collateral damage that's going to happen.

apologist, when people refer to the fog chaos, when things are ill-defined it's and actficult to decide in a manner that is going to have such finality. my information is dated. i had dual responsibilities. the one strike that i disputed in in 2010 took about 2.5 hours. if people think these things happen without thought or preparation, you are mistaken or misguided. case, it was looking for one individual. the information coming in was from of variety of different sources. you have to decide which information is correct and accurate. i won't go into kunduz.

i will say that general campbell has spoken directly and said that it was a mistake and there were errors human and mechanical. when you rely on human beings to make decisions like this, we are depending on dean's organization. we don't thrive well in chaos. when there is a lack of clarity, it's difficult to make the right decision. i am ambivalent. not to be cruel, i don't know what to expect. do i feel good about afghanistan? i don't feel either. it's a chaotic situation. there has to be some sort of order that will come out of that chaos. the problem is there has to be a

uy in fromm -- b afghanistan. muchave to question how they are going to have. if they don't feel safe, they will not buy into these things. it's here today, it could be gone tomorrow. this does not provide them any impetus to provide information. you find things that happened where you have a bad strike. that information is just not known. information is available until after the fact. upon any's incumbent military organization, they need

to find out who's out there. i knew very little about non-governmental organizations. my job was to learn how to fly and aircraft. i started to learn about the presence of the some of these organizations and what they represent you one of the things i will close with is everybody needs to remember that in ungoverned space, civilian security is the first thing you need to think about. responsibility of nongovernmental organizations to do so in --. before i get into the rambling aspects of it, i will ask a question back. when you go into an ungoverned space like that, how often do

you coordinate with those who provide security so you can the strike?nts like dialogue withtive those that provide services? i am going to give you a hisce to respond to interesting question. i'm not going to try to play any other role as moderator. we will go to all of you. we have more than half an hour for your questions. n: i like to stress that one of the concerns we have an spacesng in ungoverned is any perception that we are working with the military or security forces.

that can put us at risk. we have to be very careful about any open dialogue. i was with usaid in africa. push back the military and say you can't roll up to the school and put the school at risk. there is a set of guidelines. they are called guidelines for engagement between security forces and nongovernmental organizations are in --. rules.ys out i will work through chain of command so that i am not colluding with security forces. that my staff at risk. -- puts my staff at risk. it's a bit old.

it's from 2006. it took a long time to put together. it is an invaluable template -- pamphlet to make sure we are not at risk like we are -- by looking like we are helping the military. jason: half of our programs are in active conflict zones. being in touchis with combatants and explain why we are there. when the fighting restarted in re-shared coordinates of our facilities. wereiterated that we remaining inactive civilian hospital and the situations. seenhallenge is the are more and more coalition forces

in cities. there are different chains of command and different planes flying different places. and syria. in yemen concern ofe ungoverned spaces, how to retain the states -- safety of humanitarian organizations on the front line print the majority of our staff are afghans in they are taking incredible risks to do this work. they continue to work on the front lines. it is a constant challenge of security and the management of risk. marine,about being a the engage with different

soldiers at academies. we think there are intellectual debates about the use of force in the context of the current wars today. that is real question we have about a provide preventive they are forces around the world. are the conventions being adhered to? it's a humanitarian organizations and medical facilities to know if the rules still high. one of -- will apply. general campbell has been very rested in the investigation of this incident and -- good we don't know if the rules of engagement have been changed or broken. it leaves the one question. we want direct dialogue to have those discussions. not just inential

afghanistan but everywhere else where humanitarian organizations are operating today. >> couple of things that came general intent -- -- e che: i'm not assu city governance person. you try not to give the appearance of colluding with security forces. necessity, it may be that anybody is helping has to learn to become apparent a pentathlon.

there is a need to understand that stability and security is not someone else's responsibility. may not always times, the lot of security and be provided by someone with their health. you might want to branch out from one singular mission. >> we have a lot of the table. i am looking to your thoughts. please wait for me to call on you. ask just oneself question. you've been targeted toward one of the panelists. that would be helpful their possible. i will begin with two questions at a time.

>> i work for the university of massachusetts and i've worked in m afghanistan. i think one of the things you is in the press all the time the failure of afghans to buy in. i think that's not the case. i've been working with the ministry of higher education in afghanistan. it's been a few success stories that hasn't gotten much press. it's been transformed in the last five years. people have bought into making changes to hire education and have put their lives on the line in the process of doing that. 40% of the students are suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder or other mental health problems.

important and you understand their are a lot of afghans every day putting their lives on the line to make system better. although the problems of corruption and chaos are tremendous, none of the kinds of improvements have happened from a system where it was the old boys network. on how good you are. these are the things that don't take the test. they are not exciting. they have been phenomenal transformations in afghanistan. >> not a question, but still a worthy comment. i am chairman of the -- i

start with you. i would like my condolences to the 2000 plus lives lost. and from the heart of my tribe, i would like to extend that sympathy to you and to the government. you always put stability and then security. in afghanistan, is reversed. security then stability. the question our people ask, and they are very concerned about, is what happened to the friendship between the afghanistan in the united states of america. why did the united states of america, after pushing the government to sign the agreement, not doing anything to

protect afghanistan against outside invasion of the country. -- afghanistan is not at war with pakistan, iran, or anybody. is a war, a battle being fought by foreign forces, by foreign individuals, foreign terrorists in afghanistan using afghanistan as a battlefield. this is what is driving the people of afghanistan out here at i want to thank you for your sacrifices. . work with the people every single tribe in afghanistan. , 36 wives,her ruled 62 children. when i say this, my question is why is afghanistan not doing more to stop afghanistan from interfering? >> here in the front, this gentleman here.

>> thank you p or my name is peter. as i listen to everyone's comments, i keep thinking to you're saying, corruption, economic development, lack of security, lack of local buy in, you could he saying the same thing about iraq. my question is, what does that , the united states, about the very limited capacity of an outside government to affect meaningful change in these societies? thank you. you want to begin with the pakistan question if you wish and then we could go to others for the second question? >> i would like to respond to the second one on the comparison of afghanistan and iraq. i think there are meaningful differences. it is one of the reasons the united states should persevere. i was pleased by the president

-- the german decision to increase the number of troops. nonetheless, both countries highlighted precisely the difficulties of changing governments and political mindsets. also, the questions of pakistan, excusestan's favorite for all the country's problems is pakistan. there is no doubt pakistan continues to support the taliban. why thethe reason different groups, including the taliban, has so much track and -- traction, is because of politicians. the united states, and more broadly, it has been very a primeive demanding has notof a country

been able to focus not just the government, but the outside, political the inciting has gone on. that involves making tough decisions of cutting some aid that will be meaningful. about political processes. the red lines are violated over and over and they say, ok, next time we really mean it. it is time now, for the good of the afghan people. the reason afghanistan and iraq as was said in the beginning, the afghan army of police than

iraq. both countries suffered from fixed line -- fixing -- fictionalizing problems. offices in the province that have gone on for a number of years prior to the fall of the year. there is more a sense of cohesion and buy-in and we need to appreciate that and help the afghan military and the people to maintain their wherewithal. with respect to pakistan, pakistan has been the most difficult foreign policy for the united states. the government has gone through many efforts to control, persuade, appease, pressure pakistan into behaving differently in afghanistan. becauseailed to do so

of afghanistan continuing to be different from ours because of their expectations. but because of also pakistan's ability. withed to continue working pakistan both because of our in afghanistan but also crucially because of afghanistan. we will not be able to radically alter pakistan's behavior. that ando accept afghanistan these to accept that. i think their president did accept it and is gracias -- courageous putting on the table tremendous amounts of political p or much of it was burned in ashes by the continuing attacks. in reaching out to pakistan. at the end of the day, knowing pakistan will continue to be the more than cold war between iran and saudi arabia will continue, impacting

afghanistan more and more. afghanistan's politicians need to focus on governments in an and not move abroad as an excuse for all of their problems. >> the first thing i would say is probably, i have been educated in various places and one thing they talk about is the power of analogies. they are bad because you can take an analogy and make it work however you want. no two places are the same. to compare iraq and afghanistan, it is a difficult correlation. i cannot speak to policy. i am not a policymaker. was pointinganda at, one of the issues i see is a cohesive have effort of governance in order to make a stand against something like infiltration in that manner. you mentioned you represent a

number of different tribes. a number of different tribes have different interests. >> i don't agree. [indiscernible] i didn't say there is a problem between the tries. quite it has been in existence for 5000 years. >> i will end this because for one thing, there is no microphone to pick up your erudite thought. audience at home will be frustrated. for a fewhave time more rounds. anyone have a comparison? i know you operate in a number of areas. >> i know we have problems of lack of assistance in iraq, particularly in areas affected in the islamic state controlled areas. in terms of lack of assistance where it is a parallel there.

i would not compare the political situations. >> we are actually putting together a study tomorrow on research we have done inside iraq. it looks on the importance of civil society and improving iraqi's feelings of working with the government. at inimportant to look our investments in civil society and iraq have gone down dramatically. there is a need to keep supporting civil society in afghanistan and iraq. in afghanistan, we put out a report in february that looked at what was driving these two violence. one of the biggest findings we found was a lot of it was governance grievances p or why is the government responding to the needs of what i as a youth feel is important. focusing on those things makes sense for the government to be

looking at, paying more attention to displaced youth, around afghanistan. not exactly parallel but research we have done, heavy and -- quantitative and qualitative research of government should be looking at and a lot of times, it does relate back to gaps in government. >> i will begin further back to make sure i do not overlook folks. ica hand about two arose from the very end. begin there and come up two arose out of that afterwards. >> thank you. my question is, what benefit do we get from pakistan?

>> i think we have to be congress and of the fact of, what is the real reason for the basic root or the cause for instability in afghanistan before we can really understand and appreciate and seek to approach a solution that would be sustainable in the future. >> i will take a crack at the first question and see who wants to respond to the second. che already did a good job so i will add to their wisdom. i will frame this in the following way. we have a different set of options we could think about developing for the next american president. pakistan fore on the just ask is not quite what it was it i will not necessarily go quite as far as the two questioners and be quite as

critical of pakistan but i share a lot of your concern and i do think the next american president may be in a position tougher,lly offer a less generous kind of relationship if we do not get more help and perhaps go for a higher standard of cooperation if we do. like a free trade agreement could be part of the makef pakistan were to more of an effort to cooperate with us. perhaps a concern that will deflate the aspiration for a better relationship. the next president for united states could try to frame this in different terms than we were able to in the last 15 years. the last point i will make, and in fairness to pakistan, there have at least been baby steps toward trying to put pressure on some extremist groups in the western part of their own country. in many cases, it is for reasons that have nothing to do with

afghanistan, that have not made any improvement in afghanistan. some of the groups have moved beyond the border and there is still active collaboration and communication with their network between pakistan's's government and that network in particular. overall, i think the questioners have a valid concern and i would suggest the next american president can think about the relationship in may be fundamentally different terms. that is my take and others may want to chime in on either question. i will add more comments on pakistan. from the national interest , pakistan is a far more important country. pakistan is a country with nuclear weapons. pakistan and india is a space

where nuclear war could break out more than anywhere else. country,is a fragile chronic miss governance, corruption, and, importantly, extremist groups that various governance fostered for a long time. states cannot afford to push pakistan to the brink. pakistan is cognizant of that and has played politics with respect to afghanistan of, you push us to the brink, we will collapse and it will be awful for you. they are absolutely right. it would be awful for everyone. , making has great power the united states yield to quickly at times. -- too quickly at times. even though the logistics issues

will be less acute, perhaps future, then the broader issue of who is strategically more important, what is the fundamental significance of pakistan, it is significant. that pakistan will not go away. the reality afghanistan needs to work with. there will be limits to how much pakistan will alter its behavior and how much it will be controlled. afghans need to look at themselves and ask themselves, we are living in a difficult with manyod problematic neighbors. none more problematic than pakistan. how can we engage the international community as opposed to fly under the rock, internal problems with the sole expert in -- of problems.

jason: che, any comments? [no audio] >> hi. i have a question. it is about to get worse because of the iran saudi conflict. that will mean more displaced people and more people in need. how do we protect to the humanitarian space and how can the u.s. set an example because they are at the forefront of all of these conflicts militarily. they in a sense have to uphold the moral standard because we have seen when saudi bomb tiananmen, and the russians in syria, they have not been careful about avoiding hospitals. detect keeping

assets safe and secure? >> over here. >> time and time again over the last decade and a half, we have seen a lot of the u.s. and coalition's efforts to partner with communities and partner militarily with a lot of communities rebuff, because of ofhan and the nature rejecting a lot of foreign intervention and foreign partnerships, i wanted to know how that has transformed recently and what the u.s. is doing to try to partner with and whetherctively that still continues to be a limiting factor as well as military partnership. annhy don't we start with and work down. first, the u.s. setting by example, as chetan -- as jason

was saying. but something in how we go about really important. requiring in afghanistan something called a partner vetting system that many ngo's have serious concerns with because it hurts our security and so do not work with ace id right now and many other large ngo's. changing that policy to make sure we are able to operate and maintain trust, i think it is incredibly important. a good change in policy to reverse that in 2016. the vetting system requires ngo's to take the partners we work with and share the information about partners we work with with the u.s. government and we do a lot of vetting ourselves to make sure we are working with trusted partners but sharing that

information with the u.s. government could make it look like we are collaborating with different parts of the u.s. government that we do not want to collaborate with. u.s. aid funding that required a type of vetting because we need to keep the humanitarian imperative. so we are able to access populations in good faith. jason: the u.s. has accepted responsibility for the strikes, something for which the saudi's have not really done so far. an investigation, albeit an internal investigation in not allowing international scrutiny into that investigation. that would have taken things to another level because fundamentally, when it comes to breaches of international humanitarian law, the way to investigate those should not necessarily be limited to the perpetrators of those incidents but should be held to outside

scrutiny. we are in an environment in which we have no illusions about the dangers of humanitarian workers and humanitarian -- and workers face. healthffected are workers in places like syria that have been directly targeted and it has become part of the strategy of the war effort, really since the war started in syria by the government and now we see many facilities being struck either directly, intentionally, or otherwise during the coalition bombings in syria and yemen. we have real concerns and it will require dialogue with , alsoent groups involved pushing back on nonstate actors to ensure they respect the sanctity and on the flip side it requires medical groups like my

organization to announce when that happens. we cannot just sit quietly when our facilities potentially are turned and used for military advantage. the nature of war changes many people when in fact the rules are really meant to simplify the actions in areas of conflict, to ensure as much as possible that we limit the impact on civilians and those staying on the front lines to assist them. that includes wounded combatants who should be provided assistance as well. beneficial to all involved on the front line. it has been contested quite obviously in afghanistan, syria, yemen, and it remains something frameworks a viable and is beneficial. is important that particularly states in the u.s. government and others really

enforce those principles. michael: thank you. vanda or che? is a complex issue. but very important and very in war.t getting the right calibration is a major challenge not just in afghanistan and iraq, but also somalia. the about disclosing who partners are, controversial decisions. partnered with problematic actors in places like afghanistan. we have embraced some of the most vicious, abusive people because they promised to kill the taliban are the trade-off that they kill the taliban and in the short term but in the long-term, they generate a lot of opposition among the population toward their rule. sometimes, it may be effective in delivering governments and stability for a while. but often, it undermines governance and in the long-term,

poor governance undermines stability. we worked with who turned out to , demanding we curtail as much as of the corruption, as much of the siphoning of money, very difficult to do in an opaque environment. the amount of interaction we have of local interactive's is ability tot and our really understand the motives and actual behavior might be quite limited. hugeight remember the that moves, anything afghanistan, including nato trucks. for of the vetting expanding was driven by u.s. that the response

taliban was making as much money for a while out of nato. it was obviously very problematic. the response should not necessarily to be demanding what paralyzes jobs that need to be done, including economic jobs. smalley is another example -- somalia where it -- is another example where the obama administration, that shabbat cannot make any money, including foreign aid. until the obama administration walks away. cannot paycided we many more hundreds of thousands of people as a result of the policy. needed to understand when to demand accountability from our partners, but we should not become prisoners of commanding

such restrictive rules that we have no capacity to do anything anymore. : protecting ngo's, i think places like doctors without borders, red cross, they are all established when we had civilized warfare. laws of war and when you have one of the combatants that do not abide by the laws of war, that requires a change on our part. in the ngo's case, they have a hard choice to make, go in unprotected or affiliate with those who will protect you. to the other piece about deciding who we will partner with, there are a couple of things we do with the department of defense. general betray us talks about culture. that is where we are focusing money, time, and effort, folks are weitary

could always put more money against it but that is up to congress to decide. that involves multilateral exercises, formal and informal vetting. then you get assistance, what we have tried to do in iraq and other places. these are all things we try to empower or the special operations dip -- command has a term where they try to put the indigenous force front and center to make it their fight, their responsibility to provide security and stability in that case. those are the four lines of efforts i am familiar with. i hope that hit it. michael: i think we will have to go around. we only have five minutes left. the c-span is probably getting ready to cover the redskins victory parade.

thanks to all of you for starting your new year on these very important topics that reflect a lot of nations and commitment from u.s. well because the war has been going on so long and we are also concerned about the well-being of the afghan people and the effects on our own security. i want to thank you for being here. let me please turn to each of the panelists for a minute or so and wrap up individually. again for putting this event on. one major takeaway is continued support and partnership with the afghan people. i think it is very needed. the afghan people are looking for a new year where we do not have to pick up and leave your homeland behind to go look for a better life. they will continue the national support for that, it would be extremely appreciated. and that we have to be doing development and look for root causes. there is so much poverty in afghanistan. there are many ways to do that.

the ngo's, we of do not roll around with guns. relationshipsur with communities for security and will continue to operate that way. for the next couple of decades. thank you. jason: i think, as an organization that has been around, we're not naive to the dynamics that are there and the dangers in those areas. it is important, though, that we do not set expectations based on of certain groups that do not respect the laws of war. for us, part of the dialogue is fact that wehe will treat anybody as a medical organization, this is very much recognized by the u.s. government and reiterated very strongly.

when the general said they would intentionally strike a hospital of a protected facility, that is an important name it. when the battle broke out, and the taliban took control, several commanders took the gate of the hospital. they did not enter and they allowed us to continue working. that is through a dialogue that happened with different armed groups that is required as -- and the committee groups. continue to be required. it is based on some sense of trust, albeit a very, very, with at face valueit when you are dealing with difficult violence. but it will have to be on the basis of that and we continue. in afghanistan specifically, as the situation continues to deteriorate in many parts of the country, it will require ngo's -- last fewe to leave the minutes of this discussion peer

we will have it up at c-span. worker taking you live now to the second session of the 114th congress starting today, a session of the u.s. house p legislative work begins later this week. among the items on the agenda, a budget reconciliation bill that would defund planned parenthood and refill the affordable care act. the senate already approved that legislation. president obama said if it makes it to his desk, he will veto it. on the other side of the capital, the senate returns next week, monday, the 11th. a bill from kentucky senator rand paul that would require an audit of the federal reserve or you can watch the senate live over on c-span two. the speaker pro tempore: this being the day fixed pursuant to the 20th amendment for the meeting of the secon