afghanistan is closely tied with what is going on in pakistan that it is going to be a very difficult situation. a political solution in afghanistan is one thing but at the end of the date it will require political solutions to ultimately solve the issues there. one of those political isss@@@@ having a direct impact on afghanistan and after your confirmation and been put in place, what are your intentions with respect to pakistan? >> thank you for your question. i few afghanistan and pakistan as linked, but not e same. sometimes they leave their names and that might be a disservice to their countries because they are unique. i do believe they suffered similar problems. it is not strictly taliban although it uses that moniker, it is a collection of different groups that have turned inward against the government of pakistan and unless they can bring that under control, i think they will have tremendous problems. it also makes afghanistan very difficult because it offers sanctuary which any guerrilla force or insurgency benefit from and makes it very difficult to defeat. it is like burni

diplomatic responsibilities in the 1990's and the more recent needs in afghanistan and pakistan, thedepartment has been stretched to the breaking points. 16 of every 100 positions is unfilled, as secretary of defense robert gates has recently stated, quote, it's become clear that american civilian institutions of diplomacy and un-- and development have been chronically undermanned an underfunded for too long. this bill supports president obama's request for fund to hire 100 new staff, including 750 foreign service officers. 352 of these positions will be used to expand our diplomatic presence in afghanistan, pakistan and other areas. a further 213 positions will be dedicated to improving and expanding training in critical needs language such as arabic, hindi and urku -- urdu. it provides significant numbers of new diplomacy officers, counterterrorism specialists and the bill has important provisions to promote more strategic thinking in the state department and help the foreign service transition from traditional diplomatic framework to a more expeditionary one. to help ensure the de

we now have president obama's announcement of what his afghanistan pakistan strategy will be after a review process of several months and i want to put you on the spot a little bit and ask you to comment on that policy with this preface. to me as an observer it seems as if the president is leaning in two directions at once. you talk in your book about an enemy centric strategy that would focus on al qaeda in afghanistan and a population centric strategy that would get you more into nation-building area. and i've been trying ever since the president's speech to figure

as ellen mentioned i just returned from a trip to pakistan and afghanistan so let me report on some of the developments that are going on there. in pakistan, the primary security event is this offensive in the swat valley that is being pursued by the pakistan army. we have seen these operations in recent years, but i think there is some interesting and important changes to what is going on this year. in the first place, for the first time, the pakistan army operations in that part of the world have support of the government and of the public. there was a parliamentary solution, which occurs. defences takes place. there been statements of support by the government, and more public support and this is really different from the past when the army went up and there was little backing from the public come a little backing from the government. as we all know who served in the armed forces, when you are up there making sacrifices and nobody back, seems to be caring or supporting you, it is not something that you push hard. it is not something that maintains that intensity. another difference

strong ideological reasons. >> the al qaeda situation is a large part of the problem in afghanistan and pakistan. if we were to capture and kill osama bin laden tomorrow, with the job be done in afghanistan and pakistan? >> i don't believe it would. i don't think you can destroy a cockeyed finally until osama bin laden and others are gone -- i don't think you can destroy al qaeda antel osama bin laden and others are gone. >> i know we have focused on him for a long time. we will continue that work. that is a goal we hold. we had changing focus to the afghan security forces and he agreed that the new goals of 134,000 troops would not be sufficient. we had some additional conversations about the sustainability of a large afghan force. how would we pay for that? do you have any thoughts about that? >> i think a growth in the afghan security force is likely to be required. i would be surprised if we don't. resources it is one to be a challenge. i have not seen a sell recommendation for that. >> general fraser, you have challenges on the counter narcotics front that stavridis has to oversee from his

that is connected to the insurgency basically comes through pakistan some of it is parked in real-estate. anybody here who has been to afghanistan and pakistan recently has seen the explosion recently of a huge being mass buildings with green windows and ghastly sculpture real-estate seems to be a place they park their money and once you have made a few real-estate deals your money is clean and has a trailer park and other place is through the hawala network. there are efforts to regulate the hawala trade but anyone who spent two the hawala network knows how hard that will be. another place that i visited that was very, very interesting is down and the karachi, the karachi stock exchange has grown 250% annually. so if you go down there and there are four or five stockbroker's came out of nowhere. one was a bookie for the cricket games. who appeared, the head of the stock exchange, there is a terrific head of the karachi stock exchange resigned in disgust and and demanded they be interviewed he said of of this drug money bid is definitely dirty money. they are flipping stocks and you do a couple of stock trades and the money come

pakistan. some of it seems to get park in real estate. as far as, well, anybody here who has been to afghanistan or pakistan recently has seen the explosionof what we locally called in architecture, this sort of huge bank nations with green windows and really ghastly sculpture. real estate seems to be a place for their parking their money. once you have made a few real estate deals your money comes out clean. it has a trail. another place that it seems to go is to the hawala network. there are efforts to try to regulate the hawala, but anyone who has been and i hawala market anywhere in the middle east or south asia knows just how hard that's going to be. another place that i visited that was very, very interesting is down in karachi. the karachi stock exchange has grown by 250% annually since the drug trade exploded. and so if you go down there and start meeting, there are four or five stockburger sue came out of nowhere. one used to be a bookie for cricket games, for example. who appeared to be laundry day schmo, the head of the stock exchange -- there was a terrific head of the karachi stock exchange who resigned in disgust and demande

it's in pakistan itself and in afghanistan where the civilian population sees this as a threat to their sovereignty and, therefore, is less likely to be supportive of us. but also specifically pakistan needs to learn counterinsurgency. and i won't go through the litany of challenges there. you know them well. but we need to be able to help them while at the same time we have a limited role to play. i mean, their sovereignty is very important. it's incredibly important to getting support for their government that we not have too heavy of a hand there. i guess my two questions at the end are, what can we do to better help pakistan get to the counterinsurgency level that they need to get at? 'cause as successful as they've been in swat and other regions recently, it's been a pretty heavy-handed conventional approach that's created 2 to 3 million refugees even as it's driven the taliban. that's number one and number two how do you see us striking the balance in afghanistan between fighting the people we need to fight and stopping the number of civilian casualties? >> sir, i think you said i

pakistan. you know, afghanistan is not going to fall to the taliban any time soon. the situation in afghanistan is bad and it's getting worse, but the real problem is in pakistan and i don't mean to suggest the pakistanis are the enemy. i'm talking about something different. the scale of the problem in pakistan is a huge by comparison to the scale of author iraq or afghanistan. iraq is 31 million, afghanistan is 32 million people, pakistan is 173 million people with 100 nuclear weapons and army bigger than the u.s. army and al qaeda headquarters sitting there in to third of the country where the government doesn't exercise effective control. so we could do all kind of things right in afghanistan and still be completely screwed if we fail to stabilize pakistan and somehow present state collapse and extremist takeover. so i think the focus needs to bea what are we doing in pakistan and then afghanistan becomes the ad -- add job rather then the other way around. >> i feel we just scratched the surface and it's a good time to turn to the audience for questions. let me a

certainly we need to hold the governments of afghanistan and pakistan accountable for governing their own nations, but it is incumbent upon us in congress to hold ourselves accountable. before we can even do that, the administration must clearly articulate and outline how it envisions completing its military operations in afghanistan. 11 months into its term is not too soon for that outline to be provided. we are asking the congress be a proper check and balance. we are asking for congress to do its job. the people of this country want clarity. they are tired of endless wars. please support the mcgovern-jones-pingree-lee amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. mckeon: i rise in opposition to this amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mckeon: mr. chairman, chairman skelton and i agree this amendment does more harm than good. this amendment sends the wrong signal at the wrong time for the government and people of afghanistan, our military men and women deployed and deploying to afghanis

smart power means helping the people of afghanistan and pakistan to build roads, schools, hospitals and better agricultural systems. it means helping to create jobs and assisting those who have been displaced by the war. this is what the people of afghanistan and pakistan really want from the united states. if we provide smart assistance to them, madam speaker, we will defeat the violent extremists. we will bring peace to the region and we will make america safer. this strategy is at the core of my smart security platform for the 21st century. this is legislation that is described in house resolution 363. madam speaker, i encourage all of my colleagues to consider resolution 363 and to support it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: mr. jones of north carolina. . mr. jones: madam speaker, i want to thank my colleagues in the house from both parties for joining me as co-spon or of h. are r. 24 legislation to redesignate the department of the navy as the department of the navy and marine corps. as of today this legislation has 278 bipartisan co-sponsors. for the past seven year the lan

challenge in afghanistan in figuring out how to get all our partnered nations, it would be far too ambitious to stay on the same page but at least in the same book in confronting pakistan and afghanistan. and nato set up the way it's set up is an important alliance and very difficult to manage, that many different countries coming from that different amount of perspectives so i respect the difficulties the organization faces. we went through the meetings on increasing frustration and the last meeting we had which regrettably didn't have as much time we would like for was visit the operation and we saw it can work and you can bring that many different nations together to tornado nate -- coordinate in a way that is effective. and my plea is the soft forces over there try to spread that message out more prodly among the other aspects of nato i think would be very, very critical. >> sir, if i could make a point. i need to attribute more countries to nato and more to this conference. what we're seeing actually is an extension of special operations, cooperation beyond nato and those who parts pailt in -- participate in other operations where they work with a nato soft countr

, over which border extremists return to afghanistan and return to safe havens in pakistan. there is on a checked narcotics trafficking, all u.s. and coalition power, not just military force, also diplomatic and legal tools needed to turn the situation in afghanistan around. general mcchrystal, i also invite you this morning to clarify your understanding of u.s. standards for the treatment of detainees and to comment on allegations for detainee mistreatment units under your command during your tenure as commander of the joint special operations command in 2003-2008. you may want to address both that issue and the tillman matter in your statement. both subjects were discussed yesterday and connection to your nomination to your current position. general fraser, if confirmed, the challenges facing you may be different, but they are also complex. as a result of the success in colombia over the past decade, security has improved for colombians. you will still be confronted by illegal narcotics trade that is constantly adjusting its tactics in response to u.s. surveillance and co

pakistan as an independent country. it's winning or losing the war in afghanistan. and we have to remember that pakistan is a nuclear power. . if the taliban is successful in this area, not only will afghanistan go down the tube bus in likelihood, they'll have control of nuclear weapons. i know we have precautions being take ton stop that, but in the event that takes place and we lose control of the nuclear weapons, you've got a real possible conflagration for the whole area in that part of the world. i'd like to to the chairman, and i hope in conference this is changed that this micromanaging you're doing to try to tell the pakistani military how to manage its business is stopped. mr. berman: this is really just to take what you said, i agree completely with the urgency of it. if i didn't, we don't have a lot of money. i would not be authorizing, we would not be authorizing these sums. we share your sense of the urgency of the situation. secondly, the letter you cite is correct, the letter is not correct, but the existence of the letter is correct. but it was addres

the northern part of india that use the infected afghanistan, pakistan, nigeria have never interruptedthe indigenous virus but in addition we have another group of countries that are infected as a result of spread from nigeria, chad, sudan and those are the hitherto countries that affect this area and in addition we have the challenge rear facing due to the spread of polio from indiana and angola part i do not want to belabor everything we will do to get the job finished is published here and not the topic of today's discussion but i have touched on what we are doing over the course of my presentation. key is to sustain the implementation of course, strategy's come independent a violation of major barriers to interrupt transmission. we're hoping to get a fresh look in each of the remaining effected areas processing a number of new approaches. in the process of developing and the foul it -- evaluating a new vaccine with type wine and iii vaccine and additional strategies to have those days to run those for spreading. to give you a response with jesse the complex ability of the response

but i work closely with him but he's definitely in charge of that policy in afghanistan and pakistani know i am the book and in this particular day that you started the conversation with ambassador sharper earlier today and i did not hear or she had today but generally speaking we are close together. in fact, have some time suspiciously so so hopefully there will at least be some daylight between what we say. the timing of today's program i think is very opportune. in a few weeks as you know secretaries' day clinton will be going out to india to an ounce whether our indian friends, new strategic partnership between our two great nations. you're program is also an opportunity for me to tell you that secretary clinton's visit will answer some of those who are whispering that president obama's new comprehensive strategy in afghanistan and pakistan has somehow caused a diminution of india's importance to the united states. and i am here to tell you that that is absolutely not the case. on the contrary, this is a time of great optimism and of great promise in our relations with india. our

planning and activities across the middle east and europe, danger reaches far beyond borders of afghanistan and pakistan. afghanistan has become the u.s. military's main effort and central front. the president has authorized 21,000 additional u.s. troops, including 10,000 marines in the southern part of the country reinforcing our british, canadian, australian, dutch, and danish allies. president obama has ordered a new civil military strategy focused on protecting the afghan people and appointed a new leadership team. our goal is and afghanistan that does not provide is in short to al qaeda, that rejects the role of the taliban and has a government that looks towards the needs and security of the people. the government is all our -- sending more than 400 civilians to the country, most of whom will be deployed for the road construction team and various other units labor into being -- bring improvements to the people of afghanistan. with the new strategy, we in our -- international and afghan partners will have capacity to make real headway. of course the situation in afghanistan cannot be in isolation f

with how we will confront afghanistan and pakistan, nato is set up the way that they are set up, this is difficult to manage this many different countries, i certainly have a respect for the dignity is that you are facing. we had meetings on this increasing frustration, the last meeting did not have enough time and this was inspirational. you can actually bring this many nations together in a way that is affected. my plea would be that we were trying to spread this out more broadly among the other aspects, a couple of things i wanted to ask you about. >> you need to a trivia more countries to nato and this conference. we see an extension of special operations cooperation beyond nato, and those who participate in other operations, they may work with the country and they may become part of the team. the first annual conference was attended by some countries that were not in nato, because they choose to develop those relationships. this is very encouraging. >> this is in valuable, with the mantra of counterinsurgency. many of these nations are now involved. i want to talk to you about th

cleared of insurgents to prevent their return, and developing and strengthening mechanism for pakistan-afghanistan cooperation for they can not be separated. the substitute also requires that the report include a detailed financial plan of the resources, of the programming, of the management of u.s. assistance to pakistan and the criteria used to determine their need and value in advancing our u.s. objectives. the substitute seeks to ensure that congressional oversight and notification keeps pace with changing conditions on the ground and in turn changes in strategy and their implementcation. the republican substitute also fully funds the administration's request for the critically important new pakistan counterinsurgency capability fund. and i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. berman: mr. chairman, i'm very pleased to yield -- the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman claim time in opposition? mr. berman: i do claim time in opposition. the speaker pro tempore: i

i think general jones was in -- he visited afghanistan, pakistan, and india over the course of the past week and spend time talking with the president on that issue as well as honduras yesterday. i think we have seen some progress. i think there seems to be -- i think the events that happened in pakistan over the past several weeks have united many in the cause against extremism. we obviously have a long way to go. i think the administration believes we are making important progress on that front. thank you, guys. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> president obama hosted a reception in honor of lgbt pride month. his remarks last about 20 minutes. [cheering and applause] [cheering and applause] [cheering and applause] >> hello, everybody. good to see you. [applause] >> you moved to slow. >> it is great to see everybody here today. i have a lot of friends in the room but there are some people i want to especially acknowledge. first of all, someone who helped ensure that we are in the white house. please give

the influence spreads and in the case of al qaeda we saw them establishing a presence in pakistan and afghanistan before 9/11. the infection phase and we then saw this contingent affect where the of violence and radicalization sponsored by that group spread around different parts of the world. the third stage is intervention where western powers intervene in that area to try and deal with the threat of groups like al qaeda. when that happens, the entire dynamic shifts and instead of being an outsider who's dispossessed the local leadership group and scene with a certain amount of suspicion by the population we turn up with large scale military forces of the nature of things we do a lot of damage and end up alienating the population and creating what sociologists call the primary group cohesion response where people essentially bond to the closer rather than the more distant person to the person that's more like them rather than the foreigner and we end up in a rejection with a whole society ends up turning against us. it doesn't always happen and i use a number of examples to suggest that. the fi

that larger framework, you have different parts of the middle east, iran and iraq, the gulf, afghanistan, pakistan, you have got a number of very important places in our foreign policy and in our national interest. i think what the president has done is to add to the very strong national security team with dennis. given the list of countries, they will be plenty busy. i don't think that anybody should believe that this will conflict or supersede the important work that special envoys are doing on the ground in many of these places even as somebody is here at the white house coordinating a series of people dealing with an important region in the world. >> a few questions. i want to go back to the paris speech. what was the anticipation from the white house and how it would affect -- >> i am not laughing at you, april. ok, go ahead. [laughter] go ahead, i am sorry. [inaudible] [laughter] wanted dollars for charity, you can take your throws. >> going back to the cairo speech, what was the anticipation of this administration and how will it would affect election margins in iran. >> the speech wasn't e

pakistan. but obviously they are saying our troops in afghanistan and the military in pakistan and our support of the military efforts in pakistan require more flexibility than what this bill will allow. from intelligence briefings, i understand how volatile the situation is in pakistan. just on tuesday there was a hotel bombing, 18 people killed. the back stand army has been engaged in a battle in the swat valley against taliban militants. any legislation on pakistan must give the administration both flexibility to react to the fast-paced developments and the opportunity to develop a plan on how it will implement its strategy for pakistan and afghanistan. instead of flexibility, this bill is full of restrictive and intrusive provisions that i'm not sure would even apply to the united states. where the democrat majority is trying to dictate and micromanage the president's administration's pakistan policy. their bill even includes language to increase pakistani teacher salaries. it goes into the detail of the level of assistance for student meals. wow. that doesn't sound like we are giving the

we also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in afghanistan and pakistan. that is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend on. let me also address the issue of iraq. unlike afghanistan, iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. although i believe that the iraqi people are better off without the tyranny of saddam hussein, i also believe that the events in iraq have reminded america and the need to use diplomacy and build a national consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. [applause] we can recall the words of thomas jefferson who said i hope our wisdom will grow with our power and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be. today america has a dual responsibility to help iraq

mcchrystal, the core of the new af-pak strategy is to destroy extremists and safe havens in afghanistan and pakistan. he would apply from that is not necessary to form a coalition government or reconciliation of political elements in afghanistan, as general petraeus did in iraq. it seems, rather, but the goal requires only that an agreement be reached with the taliban to block allocate operations in afghanistan. my question is is it to acceptable in your opinion to have the taliban once again in charge of afghanistan if they agree to deny al qaeda safe haven in afghanistan? >> sir, i find it very unlikely that the taliban would make a critical agreement to do that i have a difficult time even speculating. that said, i think the president's intend, in my belief, is that we need to create in afghanistan, a state that would not allow the return of safe havens. in my view, it means it will have to be a government that may be a working coalition, may have some former taliban, but based upon taliban statements, right now i cannot see them being a critical -- being a credible an official part of the govern

this is an example from the tribal areas of pakistan and afghanistan, they have mapped out along the different parts of this trial agency, fm radio, they will need to have taliban meetings, to engage the communities. increasingly, more sophisticated social mapping to figure out where the people are and what they will respond to. the other thing is bringing in professional management, accountability, and we're doing in the area of communications. this is just an example of using indicators to monitor what is happening in terms of social mobilization impact in august and july. we began investing heavily in terms of community mobilized errors in this area and you can see over time what happens in terms of refusals. finally, the need to developed special strategies for specific issues. as you can see here, not everyone and not polio eradication was a wonderful idea. we had to adapt our strategies as we went forward to deal with these issues, to ensure the communities were fully engaged. using locally appropriate mechanisms with community dialogues in northern india to achieve that. this

general jones visited afghanistan, pakistan, and india during the course of the past week and spent time talking with the president about that issue. i think we have seen some progress. there seems to be, the event that happened in pakistan over the past couple of weeks have united many in the cause against extremism. we have a long way to go. i think the administration believes that we are making important progress. thank you. >> coming up later today admiral. timothy e. keating speaking at the atlantic council. the topics include north korea's most recent missile testing. live coverage at 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. earlier today the supreme court released its opinion in the connecticut firefighters case. it involved a promotion exam for firefighters that was rejected because very few minorities would receive promotions under it. a group of white firefighters wanted the exam abandoned. supreme court sided with the white firefighters, overturning a lower-court ruling that had been endorsed by the supreme court nominee sotomayor. tonight at 8 eastern, you can hear a portion of the oral

you look at iran and the the middle east, then afghanistan, pakistan. i still think that the border is still the most dangerous place in the world. that is not to mention iraq or what is going on in this country. then you have the financial crisis we have been going through in this country. if there is any good news i think we may have reached a bottom. nobody knows for sure. you have these enormous programs that have been launched. the stimulus package, the help to general motors, the help to the banks, all of this. we are at the very beginning of solving these problems. it is a very serious time here. i cannot recall the time when there have been this many different problems that a president confronted when he got up and went to work every day. host: you cannot go to a news magazine rack or turn on the tv without seeing it barack obama. is he over exposed? guest: there is no question he is getting a lot of exposure. you do run the risk of being overexposed, but this grows out of the fact that first, he is a new president and we are in the very beginni

manager's amendment to resolve jurisdictional concerns in the bill and legislation providing for afghanistan, pakistan, security and prosperity enhancement. it is also -- it has makes in order an amendment in the nature of a substitute ordered by ranking member ros-lehtinen which is debatable for 30 minutes. the rule for 2410 makes in order 27 amendments listed in the rules committee report. each amendment is debatable for 10 minutes except the manager's amendment which is debatable for 20 minutes. the rule includes a motion to recommit with or without instructions. mr. speaker, the united states is faced with many challenges on the world stage. it is critical that congress put forth the necessary funding to help rebuild our diplomatic capabilities abroad and mitigate the damage that was done on the previous administration's leadership. h.r. 2410, the foreign relations authorization act for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 is the first foreign relations-related authorization bill to reflect essential democratic priorities since 1993. as such, it provides a new direction, forward and vital resources to boost

helped her, he has education, he has the budget, financial migratory reform, he's got iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, iran, middle east, north korea. is there a danger in the public kind of losing the idea of what he is actually trying to do? how do you balance bringing your transformative drive to call it under policymaking to remain in touch with people's concerns, preferences, understanding about where his presidency is going? >> but what the president is doing is he receives every night a dozen letters from people who have written to the office of presidential correspondence, and he reads them every night. i have seen him put a note on, say, to tim geithner, is our program helping this person. he is fighting the bubble in a way that i have not seen, i do know, with president bush but i think because of coming in as he did, he's really trying very hard to stay in touch with people and what people are thinking. and that's just one, it's a concrete way that he is doing it. >> i think in terms of the agenda as the president was saying he really doesn't have a choice. he can't tell the economy to wai

in this hearing, you have a wealth of other responsibilities that are also important in afghanistan and pakistan, a variety of other places. one of my concerns is that with the media attention on piracy coming up, if we shift too much of our focus in that direction, we distract from the other very important missions as well. just wanted to know if you could comment on how you see their role in combating piracy in that part of the world and any concerns you may have about how it may distract from some of the other missions? >> we have -- obviously, across the military, there is robust capability to take on piracy in different ways. special operations contributes some of the capability to that as was evidenced here a couple of months ago. how that force is used is a matter of policy. it's my responsibility to train the force to do what it is it is asked to do. we do keep some elements of our force on standby, on alert to respond to that kind of situation so that if they are infrequent, then i think we would consider it not to be much of a -- much of a burden on the course. >> even with everything

cash for more war in iraq, afghanistan and pakistan. cash to help china sell its cars to americans. meanwhile, back in the u.s. of a, factories and dealers are closing. people are losing their jobs, their businesses, their homes, their retirement security. who are these people who are coming up with these innovative ideas to keep wars going and to move jobs out of america? who are these people? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. blunt: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, republicans are eager for this discussion, this debate on health care to move forward. we are eager to talk about health care in committee, on the floor, at hearings, at news conferences, wherever people want to talk about a health care system that ensures more quality, widespread coverage and accessibility. in fact, we have a plan that will be based on five principles, and

it's in pakistan itself and in afghanistan where the civilian population sees this as a threat to their sovereignty and therefore is less likely to be supportive of us. but also specifically pakistan needs to learn counterinsur generality. and i won't go through the litany of challenges there. you know them well. but we need to be able to help them while at the same time we have a limited role to play. their sovereignty is very important. it's incredibly important in getting support for their government that we not have too heavy of a hand there. i guess my two questions at the end of all that is what can we do to better help pakistan get to the counterinsurgency level they need to get at. because as successful as they have been in the swat and recently, it's a pretty heavy-handed approach that has created two million to three million refugees as it's driven back to the taliban. and how do you see striking the balance in afghanistan between fithe the people we need to fight and stopping the number of civilian casualties. >> i think you just said it better than i could. i certainly suppo

activities across the middle east and europe the danger reaches far beyond the borders of afghanistan and pakistan. afghanistan has become the u.s. military's main effort and central front. president obama author on some 21,000 additional u.s. troops including more than 10,000 marines in the southern part of the country reinforcing our british, canadian, australian, dutch and danish allies. as you know, president obama ordered a comprehensive civil military strategy focused on protecting the afghan people and appointed a new leadership team. our goal is in afghanistan that doesn't provide a sing query for al qaeda that rejects the rule of the taliban and has a government that works for the needs and security of the afghan people who elected it. u.s. government is also sending more than 400 civilians to the country, most of whom will be deployed outside the capitol to the reconstruction teams and various other units laboring to bring improvements to the lives of afghans at the provincial and district levels. i believe with the new strategy we and our international afghan partners will have both mil

[speaking italian] >> we spoke about afghanistan and pakistan, or italy has been a critical part of the coalition that is trying to assist afghanistan to make certain that this is not a safe haven for terrorism. [speaking italian] >> we had an extensive discussion about my interest, in pursuing non proliferation, as an important agenda for all people, and given that i will be visiting russia before in visit italy, he was able to offer some insight and how to approach the reduction in nuclear arsenals, and hopefully this will be a topic at the summit. [speaking foreign language] >> in addition to discussing the general situation in the world economy, we also spoke about the specific issue of security and how the g8 nations can assist people who are desperate in poverty, to make certain that they are not falling deeper into poverty and this will be a major issue of the summit. [speaking italian] >> overall i am very grateful for his leadership and is consistent friendship -- is consistent friendship -- his consistent friendship to the united states, and this will continue as long as we ar

when it comes to afghanistan and pakistan, we are part of the same coalition that wants to make sure the afghan government is able and strong to sustain development for the afghan people and make sure they are not serving extremists. when it comes to the world economy, all of us have an interest in improving financial regulations that will prevent the kinds of crises we saw happening most recently. across the board, we have a host of common interests, in addition to the others. our people like each other. we recognize we have shared interests. i think that will make the path for continued cooperation that much more easier. >> [speaking italian] f [speaking italian] >> my answers and some very elegant. [laughter] >> prime minister netanyahu announced some conditions yesterday. what do you think about them? [speaking italian] -- >> [speaking italian] >> first of all, i think it is important not to immediately assess the situation based on commentary the day after a speech. i think anytime and israeli prime minister makes a statement, the immediate action tends to be negative on one sid

in afghanistan and pakistan, as you know, active conflicts, a challenge of insufficient political -- in corners of pakistan in particular. in india, a different problem with insufficient vaccine effectiveness which i will come back to as we go through the presentation and in northern nigeria, a combination of problems related to the political leadership that different points in the program and the societies in which the program was operating. the whole thing complicated by areas that have been polio free. in addition to the countries that you see in red, another 15 countries this year alone were reinvested by these countries. this is where we are, that is what the eradication program is. i would like to look at the lessons we have learned before returning to what we're going to do to try to get the job of eradication finished. as i was putting this talk together i shared it with a few friends and they said you need to talk about partnerships and the power of partnerships and i said i am going to presume partnerships as we look at what we are trying to do, whether it is the partnershi

in afghanistan and in pakistan. i will go into an intelligence center and there will be some analysts to a computer that is coming back to the united states to reach into databases with years of data and connections. there will be another one who is getting, right next door, who is getting adel link from a satellite that has just taken a picture. there will be somebody else to is actually-- is getting reports from humans and analysis there and they are right next to my commander who needs an answer to a question and bang, there does. it is just incredibly powerful and inspiring. the modern intelligence is not held by distance. you don't view-- communications go around the world. you can find the right person no matter what time zone it is, wherever they are around the world to answer that question and be involved. these sorts of self and teams that are forming from all parts of the intelligence community are giving it power and effectiveness to operations we were only dreaming about years ago and the job of the dni

this amendment will assist in our fight against terrorism across the globe, especially in pakistan and afghanistan. currently, the terrorists reward program run by the state department assists in our hunt for terrorists by promising a cash reward or other type of assistance for information leading to the arrest of some of the world's most deadly terrorists. the rewards for justice program established by the 1984 act to combat international terrorism has now paid over $77 million to more than 50 people who have provided credible information to put terrorists behind bars and prevent acts of trim. as a staff member, i helped write the amendment that president clinton asked for when we wanted to offer rewards for persons indicted for war crimes. we also passed legislation under chairman hyde that loosened up this program so we could provide more cash assistance to people who may not be able to read in very rural parts of central asia. the program has been the key to success in apprehending people, including a terrorist who murdered two c.i.a. employees and injured three others in his 1993 rampage outs

this new president is trying to change the way that war has been breaking in afghanistan and pakistan which is tied to the afghanistan situation. what he is trying to do is through a combination of military action, political action and diplomacy, trying to change the mix and gradually x craig -- extricate ourselves from that conflict. i doubt that will succeed. this president's having inherited a mess has a right to try to fix the situation. that is what the american people elected him to do. this bill provides the financing to do that. it added funding to the imf. people from the other side of the aisle have complained about this. in 1999, the last time we voted on this, the majority party then with our friends on the other side of the aisle at the imf to the transportation bill. 162 republicans voted for it. abided interesting that today with the new president, they are not providing that support. under the gi education proposal bill it had one remaining gap that needs to be filled. that legislation said that if you serve your country in the military for a certain time frame you cou

americaism and promote instability, which actually is happening in afghanistan and happening in afghanistan and pakistan today.

if you consider the issues in our neighbor countries in iraq and afghanistan and pakistan. this is a critical juncture in history. all of us are duty bound at this historic juncture to remain vigilant, to be careful, to be conscious not to make mistakes. in the election, people did what they were responsible to do. they did it the right way. but we have heavier responsibilities on our shoulders. those who in some way, those who are looked upon as the source among the people, those politicians and those orchestrating the political ways, those people, the party leaders, they should be so cautious about their words and their deeds. if they showed just a little bit of extremism, then this extremism will penetrate into the ranks of the people and will lead to dangerous consequences which will get out of their control. they, themselves, cannot control it at a certain point. we have had those instances. extremism in the country, and society, an extremist move will bring on another extremist move. as political -- if political elites want to ignore laws and break the laws and take t