-- i think it is time for fresh blood. host: tom kean, the chair of the 9/11 commission. thank you for yo >> today, acting veterans affairs undersecretary richard stone will be discussing his department's response to the covid-19 pandemic. watch live coverage at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app. serves as the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction. he is general john sopko. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. host: can you remind our viewers in job, what specific role it has? guest: i am the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction. it is a long term. just call it the sigar without the c.

my job is to oversee all of their reconstruction money -- and the reconstruction money that is being spent currently in afghanistan. i have auditors, investigators, engineers, analysts, and i have been doing it for about 10 years. we are at 70 ig's for each of the agencies in the federal government. the difference between us and them as we are temporary and we go out of existence at a certain time when the amount of money falls below 250 million. we can look at the whole of government. most ig's can. they can only look at their agency. when congress created us, they gave us the opportunity to look at any money spent by any u.s.

agency in afghanistan for reconstruction. host: how much money has been appropriated by the u.s. government for reconstruction efforts and how much has been spent? guest: i think we are over 143.2 billion dollars for reconstruction. i have to check that. we have a billion dollars in the pipeline and a couple of billion of new money that had not been allocated yet. host: from your report on the 30th of this year, 143 billion and you said appropriated for -- 14 billion for agency operations and 4 billion for aid or humanitarian aid.

what would you say to viewers as far as for the money that has been spent, what are they getting from it and where do you find concerns, especially from your investigative work? guest: they are getting mixed results. we have highlighted problems for 10 years. i have been there almost 10 years. they have gotten some successes. there has been an improvement in the afghan military. there has been improvement in the quality of life, the health, and the education of the afghan people. a lot money has been -- we see that and we are dealing also -- we are dealing with a country that is at war, it has been at war for 20-30 years. it is difficult to do reconstruction in a country like that. host: to come to the report, you said this about the current condition of the security in the country, you said this, "almost exactly a year ago with the

united states -- withdrawal agreement with the taliban, peace talks with the taliban have yielded few substantial results. it goes on to say that the taliban have -- expand on that, the role of the taliban and what it means not only for security, but reconstruction efforts in that country guest: the taliban are the main insurgency group and have been. you have to remember why we went to afghanistan. it was because of the attack on the u.s. we went in there to take the terrorists out, to fight them. and kick them out of that country and to help create a stable government that could rule that unruly country for the

future and would keep the terrorists out. that is what we have been fighting there. we lost 2000, over 2300 americans, american servicemen and women. 20,000 injured. we spend all of that money to try to keep them out. now, the taliban met with an negotiated with our government for a withdrawal agreement and as part of that agreement, they would stick out with the afghan government and negotiate a peace treaty. that is going to be very difficult. my agency is not part of the peace negotiations, nor do i have jurisdiction over that. i look at reconstruction, not peace. if there was peace, it would have a dramatic impact not only on afghans, but on the success

of reconstruction. the problem is, it has been stiff. many experts, many people -- i spoke with general allen at the brookings institute about a report released. -- a report we released. our concern that they will wait us out as part of that withdrawal agreement that the prior administration signed was we would pull all of our troops out by may. that would have an impact on that nato troops in their and other troops who come to our senses -- who have come to our assistance there. people are concerned that the taliban are just waiting. there is an old statement that the afghans have and that is that you have all the watches,

we have all the time. that is what people are afraid of. and all the afghans that i have met and talked to are afraid of that. that is where we are. it negotiations have been stalemated, violence is up, particularly targeted violence, targeted attacks, killings, by the taliban and other insurgency groups that are targeting senior officials in the afghan government. newspaper men, journalists, judges, civil society officials, the number of what they called sticky bombs, those are bombs that are attached to automobiles, have gone up tremendously in kabul, which is the major city. that is where we stand. the biden administration now has inherited this and they are reviewing the policies and how

to go forward in afghanistan. host: go ahead. our guest is with us until 9:15. if you want to ask questions about his work, looking at reconstruction efforts in afghanistan. a one for re (202) 748-8001 four republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independence -- independents, (202) 748-8002. you could also text us at that number. one more question. if the drawdown does happen, what is the overall impact on reconstruction efforts? guest: we are concerned. if the drawdown happens quickly, and of course, that could be in three months there would be no u.s. troops. that is what our prior administration agreed to with the taliban. but it was condition based. i have to qualify that. i do not know what that means

and we do not know what it means. many people are saying that the condition is you would have a cease-fire and stop the shooting and killing of the afghans. the one good thing about this is , no americans had died in the last year in afghanistan. none of our troops. to that extent, that was part of the withdrawal agreement, that they would not attack u.s. or coalition troops. they have abided by that, but if there is a withdrawal of the troops, there was a lot of concern -- and we have expressed it in some of our reports -- that the afghan government, particularly afghan military, which is doing the bulk, 99% of the fighting right now, will be hard-pressed. and because we are still there, we still have a tremendous ability to help defend the

afghan government and troops and we noted in our quarterly report that the number of air assaults by our military has increased this last quarter. in support of the afghan military police. if that air support is gone, the afghans don't have the capability, really, to defend themselves, or at least as well as with our forces. there is concern about that. the bigger concern is the funding. the afghan government cannot survive without u.s. and donor support. they raised about $2.6 billion a year and my understanding -- so i get the numbers right -- their annual budget shortfall is about

$8 billion. that shortfall between what they raised and what they need to run their government is paid for by us. if we stop the funding , reconstruction money, support money, whatever you want to call it, most experts say the afghan government would collapse. host: again, our guest with us to take your questions. steve, go ahead. caller: i have seen you in many hearings with the senate over the years. do you ever see an end with -- to me it almost looks like a jobs program. you ever see this coming to an end or a conclusion that is going to be sufficient when it comes to the money we are spending as taxpayers in afghanistan? guest: you know, sometimes it is

interesting. with the cold weather now i am reminded of boxer tony phil -- phil and groundhog's day. sometimes i feel like bill murray. you have seen me on c-span, you have seen me in hearings, and it seems like i keep repeating myself. i think there are better ways to do it over there. i do think there is success possible. >> you can find this entire discussion online at c-span.org. we will go live to a house subcommittee hearing how the veterans affairs department is responding to the covid-19 pandemic. you are watching live coverage on c-span. >> they are not under recognition. members are responsible for muting and on beating themselves. if i have noticed you have not muted yourself, i would look -- i would ask if