and afghan government.hat kinds of long-term commitment you might contemplate, and i wonder if you would comment on the possibility of some continuing base presence, perhaps jointly operated system of bases in afghanistan between us and the afgha afghans? >> senator, thank you. when the president first announced the strategy at west point, he was very clear that we were making an enduring, long term commitment to afghanistan and the region. having made the mistake historically of walking away, then paid a very dear price for that. so that's been clear from the beginning. it's an important message to emphasize as we begin this transition process. we just had a team in kabul this we can starting to discuss the outlines of a strategic partnership with our afghan partners, being clear about the kinds -- our expectations of that partnership and the kinds of commitments we would be willing to make. the president has also been very clear from the beginning that we do not seek any permanent bases in afghanistan, th

success requires afghans taking the lead and afghan ownership of the mission. all of which in turn depend upon their confidence in our continuing support. both messages and the thread that unifies them are part and parcel i believe of the general petraeus is counterinsurgency strategy which is so instrumental in turning the tide in afghanistan. the success of the mission depends on afghan security forces holding the ground which they are helping to clear of caliban. -- taliban. that is what undercuts the enemy's directive when they say that we are there to occupy afghanistan. control of territory by those forces is robbing the caliban of their propaganda target and bringing us closer to the success of the mission. that is why i have pushed so hard to grow the size of the afghan security forces and the key metric on how many are partnered with us and being mentored by us and how many afghan units are in the lead in joint operation. that is why a number of us are pushing so hard including the president himself for approval of the pending proposal of up to 70,000

and the afghan government.hat kinds of long-term commitment you might contemplate and i wondered if you'd comment on the possibility of some continuing base presence, perhaps a jointly operated system of bases in afghanistan, between us and the afghans? >> senator, thank you. the -- when the president first announced the strategy at west point, he was very clear that we were making an enduring long-term commitment to afghanistan and the region. having made the mistake historically of walking away and then paid a very dear price for that. so that's been clear from the very beginning. it's an important message to emphasize as we begin this transition process. we just had a team in kabul this week starting to discuss the outlines of a strategic partnership with our afghan partners, being clear about the kinds -- our expectations of that partnership and the kinds of commitments we would be willing to make. the president has also been very clear that we do not seek any permanent bases in afghanistan that we don't se

it is afghan forces. it is afghan police who are on the streets. that is the face of security. afghan soldiers further out in the outer rings and afghan special mission units on the streets every single night conducting on average two to three targeted operations which are to be sure assisted by intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance platforms from u.s. military or some of our partner element or some intelligence agencies but it is afghan forces doing knock on the door, going over the wall and conducting the actual operation with some assistance as i said in relatively small numbers, typically. >> let me ask you about pakistan. in your testimony, you, i think, appropriately acknowledged the great efforts the pakistanis have made in recent years against the taliban and tragic floods. i also was struck and i was glad to hear your tone of guarded hopefulness about what they might do next in dealing with the sanctuaries, the key part turnovers afghan insurgency and i found myself hoping you were right but wonder if you worry about the counterargument which would be if the afg

people and afghan institutions. so i think right there you have a very good example, essentially of what wright generally looks like, and we will see if that's among the areas in which transition may proceed when president karzai makes his announcement. but we've literally only got to, basically two battalions a little bit more of that than isaf forces there. they have stepped back already in what we would call any tactical or even operational watch stage even at this point. >> thank you. the other question is about why it's important to make it clear that we are at some point leaving. i know it's a difficult balance because you can make the one argument and they know they have to wait us out, but on the other hand, if we don't make it clear that we are leaving and we appear to be an occupying force, we strengthen the insurgency. we also create dependence in some different elements of afghan society. the goal here isn't that the second we leave, the other side wins. the goal here is as we said, that we build up the

success requires afghan buy-in, afghans taking the lead and afghan ownership of the mission, all of which in turn depend upon their confidence in our continuing support. both messages and the thread that unifies them are part and parcel, i believe, of general petraeus' counterinsurgency strategy, which is so instrumental in turning the tide in afghanistan. the success of the mission depends on afghan security forces holding the ground, which they are helping to clear of taliban. and that, to use general maddis' words is what undeuts the enemy's narrative when they say we're there to occupy afghanistan. the growth and size of apability of afghan security forces and control of territory by those forces is robbing the taliban of their propaganda target and bringing us closer to the success of the mission. that's why i have pushed so hard to grow the size of the afghan security forces and to keep metrics on how many afghan units areartnered with us and being mentored by us. and how often afghan units are in the lead in joint operation. that's why a number of us are pushing so hard, including

cells that are trying to carry out attacks on the afghan people and afghan institutions. i think right there you have a very good example, essentially, of what life generally looks like. we'll see if that's among the areas in which transition may proceed when president karzai makes his announcement. but we have literally only got two -- basically two battalions, a little more than that, of isap norses there -- forces there, and they are largely stepped back already and what we call an operation overwatch stage even at this point. >> thank you. the other question is about why it is important to make it clear that we are at some point leaving. i know it's a deli cat, difficult balance because you can make -- delicate, difficult balance because you can make the one argument, we are leaving, you have to wait us out. on the other hand f. we don't make it clear, then we appear to be an occupying force. we strengthen the insurgency. we also create dependence in some different elements of afghan society. and the goal here isn't that the second we leave the other side wins. the go

and afghan country.hina has bid on mineral extraction around the world because it's trying to build its growing basic industries. but india has been equally aggressive in various locations, as well. >> senator, if i could. i'm so sorry. the authority for this task force to operate and do this economic development work that's so crucial to afghanistan's long-term sustainability, that authority is basically going away. and so we -- this is a place where you could help enormous uhly by providing the authority for that work to continue in afghanistan. >> if i could second that. because in iraq, which was vastly more violent. i mean, we're talking about 220 plus attacks per day in iraq, and, you know, we will have somewhere in the neighborhood anywhere from 20 on up to 60 depending on the season in afghanistan, and there were vastly more easily extractable elements in iraq, of course, with the oil, with natural gas, with sulfur and with some other -- not to mention fresh water. and it was very difficult to at

right now when american and 21 afghan. i would like to see the ratio be 10 afghans one american. but with a new air power and leave somebody as a sitting duck second, reduce the dollar's. 100 billion is a rounding error but we have to start somewhere. honestly, if you give something to somebody for nothing what do you get in return? lyndon johnson tried to have a great society and ended up with a culture of entitlement now we have that for the same reason. we give something and expect nothing in return. we cannot continue to do that and it is not good to do that. stop the nation building and what our forces get back to do what they do very well which is destroy the enemy. that is why i call it "the wrong war" i am perfectly willing to take any questions you may have. [applause] >> hello mr. west i am at a researcher from the dc area, what needs to happen before the afghan government can say we can take it from here? >> we have to tell them because if we leave it up to them, they will never tell you to go home. why the one to tell somebody who is the golden goose to stop laying th

after that and the ability of were afghan government to. pick up their responsibility for government over the last few weeks there has been additional hardship in the mission and an increase in anger after nine afghan children were killed in a nato led attack here's secretary gates last week like to begin by joining general petraeus and offering my personal apology. for the accidental killing of that nine afghan boys by coalition forces and here's president karzai talking about incidents like this and civilian casualties as a whole they want it stopped. they want it both reduced they want to stop president karzai said he actually wanted foreign troops out of afghanistan so not only are they losing the u.s. supported president of afghanistan now new evidence that the war is losing support from the general public as well this washington post a.b.c. news poll just out shows sixty four percent of americans do not think the war has been worth fighting and a much larger number seventy three percent thinks the u.s. government should withdraw troop

to chill their themselves from insurgency it doesn't mean continue to make pakistanis afghans and afghans many pakistanis you were in were siding in a civil war so you know during the civil war there were americans in the south in the americans in the north in the solution was to get a political solution to live together but until you created military situation that could happen it could happen the same things through here you can't just say well we need a political solution we have to have the security situation that allows of what you said i mean you are you are a colonel solution definitely isn't doesn't seem to be showing itself but that's why i feel like at least somebody talk about that about the fact that this isn't working because fragile reversible yes that's obvious and ten years in fragile and reversible aren't what the american people want to hear and i thank you both very much for joining us and this is where traces first hearing on capitol hill since taking over and who knows he might not be heading this war for too much longer if the rumors to stay true thanks. still to com

what the afghan government and the international community are held responsible in their eyes and and in the eyes of the people of up on the stuff let's talk about the afghan government throughout this government and like himself type of piece of meat in the kings of corruption see here do you think is really gaining from that still raging on enough hands down you know what the government of understand says about corruption or about governance that in itself has created a vacuum a corruption of poor governance and lack of rule of law has created a void where the taleban and opposition are coming in recruiting and also or holding the civilians as shields and thereby they they create a situation where this civilian casualties become a reality because they bring nato into civilian areas they bring their opposition into civilian areas by hiding there we have to provide for the people of water sort of what they need so they will side with the government of afghanistan and with the international community. governors the high officials of the government and the political and economic mafia i

we now have an entire afghan army. and what i'm saying is put that army out in front the way it should be, that we never had before. and third, i don't believe that the population protection gets us anywhere. gradually, you can have the afghans do it for themselves, but i think we're just spinning our wheels doing population protection. i think we should get back to our number one mission as we begin to pull out, and i think we're going to, put maximum pressure on the taliban in the way only americans can and build up the afghan army. now, everything's a risk. it could be in the end it doesn't work. the only alternative then would be ha we would purr cyst -- would be that we would persist in what we're doing at the level we're doing it for another decade. and let me give you the statistic. we have 65 battalions, and we have roughly -- well, so we have 240 companies, and each company has three to four outposts if they go all the way down to the platoon level, so we have a thousand outposts now in afghanistan. there are

it is afghan forces. afghan police are on the streets. that is the space of security. afghan soldiers further out in the outer rings and afghan special mission units are on the streets every single night conducting on average two to three targeted intelligence driven operations which are to be sure assisted by intelligence surveillance or platforms from u.s. military or some of our parter elements or intelligence agencies but it is afghan forces doing the knock on the door. going over the wall and conducting the actual operation with some assistance in relatively small numbers typically. >> let me ask about pakistan. the audience may follow up. in your testimony you appropriately acknowledge the great effort pakistani staff made against their own internal talent and in dealing with the tragic floods last year and so forth a. i also was struck and was glad to hear your tone of guarded hope for less about what they might do next in terms of dealing with the sanctuary's. the key parts of the afghan insurgents in. i found myself hoping you are right but wondering how much

people deliver the afghan government to its people. it hasn't happened and what you see is that this idea that going to fight a strategy of clear hold and build well it's how well the insurgency very easily says you know we're not going to clear in or snort right you can fight american marines and american soldiers on the battlefield killed a little hard to deliver government a box and if you can't even get to where you're supposed to make the delivery and i want to thank you so much for joining us and of course another horrible story. now it's time for a break on return it's that time of the night it's time will tell you two things they have the most foreign policy experience because a few international business deals then over the weekend protesters young and old came out to condemn the abusive treatment bradley manning so are americans finally starting to wake up and take notice you have seen that in spite.

they are meet are the afghans who m.p. they're trashing clean the latrines are not getting out on the ground they're not they're not doing what they were is what i have and i have several friends who are doing that work there and there are a few who are out there if you will or based on work well provincial reconstruction teams but they're very few in numbers and they're very limited with their resources they're also really limited with who they're working with and so what we see in the south in particular where this idea was going to bring government in a box and referees from the more fabulous you're going to bang you're going to bring a government a box and we are going to basically deliver governments to the afghan people deliver the afghan government to its people. it hasn't happened. you see is that this idea they're going to fight a strategy of clear hold and build well the taliban insurgency very easily says you know we're not going to fight you nuclear power and you're smart right you can fight american marines an

and the afghans have been extremely bad to one another. a lot of other people have been as bad or worse than the taliban. and the taliban i think -- >> charlie: you mean in history. >> no. >> charlie: in afghanistan. >> in afghanistan. the taliban were welcomed by a lot of people because they got rid of people who had done horrible things that the taliban did not do. there was no corruption with the that ban. they didn't interfere, you were all right. look at their statements, look at what last year the statement they did during mullah omar. they spoke there much more as a nationalist organization than as a religious organize sean. >> charlie: do you believe that. >> we didn't come to the table and say the taliban are splendid. we came to your table, charlie, to say look there are pressures on the taliban that are building up. weariness. people who don't like their strict moral code. there are things the taliban have begun to move on, they are not eliminating all women schools, that kind of thing. there's an opening here. when you're in a

it is afghan soldiers further out than the other and afghan special mission units on the street every single night conducting on average two to three targeted intelligence driven operations which are to be sure assisted by intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance platforms from u.s. military come some partner elements or intelligence agencies. but it is afghan forces during the mock on the door going over the wall and conducting the actual operation with some assistance again as i said in a relatively small numbers typically. >> let me ask pakistan and i missing some of the audience may follow up on the subject. in your testimony, you i think appropriately acknowledged the efforts of the pakistanis have made in recent years against their own taliban and dealing with the tragic flood last year and so forth. but i also was struck and glad to hear your tone regarded hopefulness about what they might do next in terms of dealing with the sanctuary's and the taliban parts of the afghan insurgency and i found myself hoping you are right, but wondering how much you worry about the counter

, the afghan army is able to stand up for themselves against the taliban. if somebody says what about the fact that karzai is a balm and cannot get things done, i say, hey, that is none of my business. that could still remain a mess. it may not turn out perfectly, but if we prevent the terrace from taking over, that is enough. -- but if we prevent the terrorists from taking over, that is enough. tavis: the president is hearing from critics, and the democratic party at their annual meeting last week passed a resolution -- his party passed a resolution encouraging him to get out of afghanistan quicker. they're pressing now on afghanistan. i raise that because he is hearing it from a lot of different people. what are they not hearing? obviously what you are saying, others are saying about the war not been winnable, the strategy is wrong, too many trips, etc., the people are around him are telling him something different, and he is talking with experts. why is he hearing that? >> i would be careful, because i bet if we were having this conversation next septemb

to afghans.without the regional clue how to exactly this happened and could happen again. so what we need is each of these regional players to be approached separately and being told, look, what is the division of afghan and what is the picture of afghanistan that would make you shiver in or feeling comfortable? in being able to address those and they are not really in metaphysics science. they are quite simple areas. and at the same time, trying to address them and they are not too complicated provided to you read separately. in a public meeting they will not talk about that. and then have a conference, where there will be, i would say, a stability pact. and that could be putting down some rules of the game through which everyone may respect afghanistan and afghanistan may respect sensitivities, in a way that will not be temptation to get too much involved. i think that will be more than enough in afghanistan, if we get the regional meeting. >> certainly the u.n. has many challenges ahead of it,

we he look at it through the prison of an afghan army fighting principally afghans. that is an acceptable force with credibility now. our commands have can dense in it. that force is operating at th level side by side with us. and as a result of that, they're going exponentially. i looked at them again in february very closely. i'm confident that we're going to be able to start spring and summer of this year in those two provinces with transitioning to them in the security area. and that's where we will be more in a support role and less in the lead role. and that's obviously the transition we're going to make. i think the command will be pretty conservative about this. because they don't want to move down that road and then have to reverse it so i think we'll move slowly initially. and then we'll find ourselves gaining a little momentum as we gain some confidence over the analysis and the judgment that we're making. the afghan uniform police know where to go, still need more training and there's corruption there to be sure. overall, the afghan security forces have m

the afghan army and police have added 70,000 afghan security forces over the last year and will meet the current target of 305,000 afghan security forces by october of this year. a large, capable, effective afghan security presence is what the taliban fears the most. because it would demonstrate that contrary to the taliban's propaganda that the war against the taliban and al-qaeda is a war the afghan people believe in, and it is being fought by an afghan security force that they believe in rather than a war waged by foreign occupiers as taliban propaganda would have it. the administration is now considering a request to grow the afghan army and police by between 45,000 and 70,000 people which could bring the total, or would bring the total afghan security force levels to a range of 352,000 to 378,000 by the end of 2012. and i have twice recently urged president obama to approve this request for additional afghan troops. it is a key to the success of our mission and the faster reductions of u.s. troops. it is also far less costly in terms of u.s. casualties and taxpayer dollars than

, and given more afghans the confidence to defy the taliban. we made considerable progress in growing and professionalizing the afghan's -- afghanistan's army and forces. as significant as our troops' achievements in the fields are, they can easily be undone by poor decisions made here in washington. today's debate is not being conducted in a vacuum. our troops are listening. our allies are listening. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman given an additional 30 seconds. mr. mckeon: the taliban and al qaeda also are listening and finally the afghan people are listening. mr. speaker, i want to send a clear message to the afghan people and government that our coalition partners, our military men and women, that this congress will stand firm in our commitment to free us from the problems that the taliban created for us on 9/11. we will not have this sanctuary ever happen again. and i urge my colleagues to vote no on this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: i think it's mr. -

a lot more bells and tongues too from the afghan capital of lowlier ok a quick look now at some other international headlines and a suicide bomber blowing up a bank in northern iraq killing at least eight people eight all those were wounded in the blast in the town of how deep or reports say the terrorists told the people queuing at the bank to collect their salaries security personnel was said to be among those killed to be the first major attack at the town since october two thousand and nine when five people were killed by a suicide bomber. over three hundred christians to the streets in pakistan to protest against the assassination of the country's minorities minister. was killed on wednesday when militants gunned down in his car this was the second assassination in two months with a high profile opponent of the country's strict that's me little's meanwhile elsewhere in the country a powerful explosion targeting police in southwestern pakistan killed at least three officers and four civilians. use even though authorities have given up hope of finding any more survivors after last

army strong afghan police so kind of all reinforcing what the u.s. wants to build there and in addition you see afghan students saying we want this better life for ourselves we are studying in university we want to build a great country here we want to build industry here but we don't have the infrastructure we don't have the things that we need and of course that's one of the other aspects of the u.s. mission there is building infrastructure and kind of having a civilian surge there that works on those aspects and you really see told through this afghan story a reinforcement of the u.s. and nato mission there and you even have you know a poem with the beginning that says democracy is the answer that's from an afghan women's group so lots of messaging throughout that video and those kind of videos are shown and i'm sure not surprisingly i don't think anybody would be surprised but on big screen t.v.'s in the media center throughout the whole summit nato you know definitely doesn't surprise me that they try to sell the war but then you would like a li

last year was the deadliest year for afghan civilians since the war in afghanistan began with a fifteen percent jump and the death toll since two thousand and nine that's according to a u.n. report released today two thousand seven hundred seventy seven people were killed and those are the numbers that we know of insurgents and not i saw forces were responsible for seventy five percent of those deaths and that's a comparison of the pentagon and general david petraeus would like to play off as a positive for the afghanis see it that way this week we saw a major breakdown in relations with hamid karzai rejected an apology from general petraeus for the accidental killing of nine young boys so how long can you keep fighting a war for hearts and minds are the people you're supposed to be rooting of oppressors are the ones that are paying the biggest role with their lives joining me to discuss it is christopher swift a fellow at the university of virginia law school center for national security law chris thanks so much for being here a pleasure good to see you now do you think that you know a

representatives in 34 afghan provinces. millions of afghans benefit from u.s. support, from food programs, health services, and infrastructure and development. afghans are asking to take a greater lead in all aspects of governance, development, and efforts to achieve peace. mr. de mistura clear that afghanistan makes -- takes its call for sovereignty very seriously. how should the transition take place? how can you in support this process as well as maintain its commitment to afghanistan development? these are some of the questions they will be a part of what mr. staffan de mistura will be discussing with us today. i will keep this brief because in his biography is in the flyer. he is one of the most accomplished officials having served in the organization for over 30 years. 40 years. even more reason to take everything he says very seriously. under challenging conditions he has promoted political dialogue, led reconstruction and development and humanitarian assistance efforts, and has overseen elections throughout the world. his take -- his work is taken him f

occupation and afghan government demonstrations called the country's president hyde park as eyes can the nations of the killings protests are continuing despite the u.s. leader and military officials apologies for the incident civilian casualties are a sensitive issue in afghanistan where more than one hundred innocent afghans were killed and nato military operations in recent weeks political activist daoud sultanzoy explains why the alliance can't cope with their anti-terrorist making matters worse for afghans. it's very difficult to translate these apologies into really meaningful. things to victims' families these are casualties that have been happening for too many years and there are too many civilian casualties the people of afghanistan the civilians are the victims of both the nato civilian casualties that need terrorists who come with suicide bombings and with and discriminant the targeting of civilian areas and the people of afghanistan are tired of both the hearts of the people of afghanistan or in the hands of two incompetent players one player is the international communi

it needs to the afghan-lead. it needs to the afghan-lead.

and is afghan forces. it is afghan police who are on the streets. that is the face of security. it is afghan soldiers further out in the outer rings, and it is afghan special units that are on the streets every single night, conducting an average two to three targeted intelligence- driven operations, which are to be sure, assisted by intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms from u.s. military or some of our partner elements or some intelligence agencies, but it is afghan forces during the knock on the door, go over the wall and conducting the actual operation with some assistance, in relatively small numbers to the glee. >> let me ask about pakistan. it is a guessing that some in the audience they follow up. in your testimony, i think you appropriately and knowledge the great efforts the pakistanis have made in recent years against their own internal taliban, dealing with tragic floods last year, and so forth. i also was struck, and i was glad to hear your tone of guarded hopefulness, about what they might do next in terms of dealing with the sanctuary's, the key

to the news now afghan president hamid karzai says nato and the u.s. should stop their operations in the water and country it comes just days after karzai cousin and nine children collecting firewood were killed in two separate u.s. attacks that is daniel bushell has the details. the afghan president hamid karzai as you say was furious at what he sees as a spate of killings by nato troops he gave a speech his exact words were the u.s. and nato i asked to stop operations on our soil he made the call as part of an emotional speech highly critical of the organization and its allies as a whole comes after visiting survivors of an air raid in the east of the country where he saw the leg over a one year old child amputated knee actually cried on seeing those themes just a few days ago nato troops killed because i was causing in another night raid in kandahar and that follows just recently nato admitting he had killed nine children in a similar raid and just before that another sixty five civilians afghan officials alleged were killed an investigation is unde

success requires afghan buy-in, afghans taking the lead and afghan ownership of the mission, all of which in turn depend upon their confidence in our continuing support. both messages and the thread that unifies them are part and parcel, i believe, of general petraeus' counterinsurgency strategy, which is so instrumental in turning the tide in afghanistan. the success of the mission depends on afghan security forces holding the ground, which they are helping to clear of taliban. and that, to use general maddis' words is what undercuts the enemy's narrative when they say we're there to occupy afghanistan. the growth and size of apability of afghan security forces and control of territory by those forces is robbing the taliban of their propaganda target and bringing us closer to the success of the mission. that's why i have pushed so hard to grow the size of the afghan security forces and to keep metrics on how many afghan units are partnered with us and being mentored by us. and how often afghan units are in the lead in joint operation. that's why a number of us are pushing so hard, includ

paul be afghan side also at a higher standard in this case what the afghan government and the international community are held responsible in the eyes and in the eyes of the people of up honest a. political activist how you'd sultanzoy in kabul talking earlier to t. . in or clinton says the u.s. is losing an information war to foreign media outlets including r.t. this week the secretary of state asked congress for more cash to step up america's efforts to get its message across what is going to can has this report. war declared the u.s. is now officially in an information battle with foreign media which provide alternative views on world news views which often running contrast to the coverage of events by the us mainstream media we are in an information war and we are losing that war i'll be very blunt in my assessment al jazeera is winning the chinese have opened up a global english language and multi language television network the russians have opened up an english language network i've seen it in a few countries and it's quite instructive we are cutting back the b.b.c. is cutting back s

side also at a higher standard in this case both the afghan government and the internet's community are held responsible in their eyes and and in the eyes of the people of hope on islam. civilian deaths are escalating in afghanistan another weapon terrorize people around the world claiming countless innocent lives every year the history of the car bomb export an arson special report coming up later this hour here's a look. at larry klayman says the u.s. is losing an information war to foreign media outlets including our t.v. this week the secretary of state called on congress for more cash to step up u.s. efforts to get its message across or she's got a chance young has more from washington war declared the u.s. is now officially in an information battle with foreign media which provide alternative views on world news views which often running contrast to the coverage of events by the u.s. mainstream media we are in an information war and we are losing that war i'll be very blunt in my assessment al jazeera is winning. the chinese have opened up a global english language and multi l

explains why can't cope with its anti terror agenda making matters only worse for afghans. it's very difficult to translate these apologies into really meaningful. things to victims' families these are casualties that have been happening for too many years and there are too many civilian casualties the people of afghanistan civilians are the victims of both nato civilian casualties that need terrorists a problem with suicide bombings and what indiscriminate targeting of civilian areas and the people of afghanistan are tired of both the hearts of the people of afghanistan or at the hands of two incompetent players one player is needed for national community and one where is the afghan government and both players are incompetent and ignorant about the true meaning of hearts and. mines the intention of this war was to fight terror but people of afghanistan have become a victim of terror the united states and coalition forces have to do much better and they have to also hold the afghan side also at a higher standard in this case the afghan government and the international commu

they are capable of talking afghan to afghan. without the regional blueglue that could happen again. we need each of the regional players to be approached separately and been told the vision or pull a road picture -- polaroid picture that would make them to a comfortable. it is not metaphysics science. it is simple areas. they are not too complicated. in a public meeting, they will not talk about that. then have a conference where there will be a stability pact. that could be putting down some groups -- rules of the game in which everything -- everyone will respect afghanistan in a way where there will not be a temptation to get too in evolved. -- too involved. >> the u.n. has many challenges ahead of it as it seeks to fulfil the steps you have just laid out. we wish you all of the best. it is a treat to have someone for it -- someone from the u.n. here in washington. thank you for coming out. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> on "newsmak

the pakistani army believes to this day that the afghan taliban is an asset for them. that sooner or later, the americans are going to leave afghanistan. and there will be a struggle for influence there and their biggest asset is the afghan taliban. up until a year or so ago, they believe victory was in sight. they were going to win in afghanistan. we were going to pull out. hold on to your asset if you think they are about to win. but over the course of the last decade, the pakistani taliban -- i'm sorry, the afghan taliban has given birth to a mini me, the pakistani taliban. which targets the government of pakistan. so the pakistani military has an extraordinary difficult job of trying to parse the difference. they are still convinced the best way to deal with this is to fight those who are your enemy, and use those who are your asset for the future. the united states in a very american way, of course, says do more. you got to take the entire thing down. pakistani's look at us and say you are hopelessly naive. first of all, you won't be here when push comes to shove.

in other news the afghan president says nato and american troops should leave his country just days after hundred cars cousin as well as nine children collecting five killed in separate u.s. attack. and a rift in the arab league as member states mull over backing a libyan no fly zone but they are united in calling for gadhafi to go. this is the r t news channel a very good evening for me kevin no it's now eleven pm here in moscow in the main news the world's attention still on the earthquake disaster in japan and crews are working at the fukushima number one nuclear plant in the tsunami hit north to try to prevent a possible melt the night after a powerful blast of the facility into the air and said the explosion was caused by a failure in the cooling system while the reactor itself was unaffected evacuations are under way over. a twenty kilometer radius now would be fears of contamination the three patients at a local hospital just three kilometers from the plant have tested positive for radiation exposure they were already at the hospital when the blast occurred officials say they showe