esther dobbins and i share this responsibility. the job i was given for the two years that i was special representative and continues, is to see if it were possible for the united states of america to open the door for afghans to talk to other afghans about the future of afghanistan. when i think about reconciliation today, i come back to two principles. number one is the one that i just mentioned. there's only one reason for the usa to be involved in this, and that is to open the door for afghans to discuss with other afghans the future of their own country. i am sure that remains an effort of the special representative of afghanistan and pakistan. the effort to move this peace process forward remains extremely important. i think the secretary clinton, , both of saidy this war will not end until there's some way to see if reconciliation is possible. there is a second principle as well, which is, i always felt in -- inme ahead district the time had this responsibility, this idea that if you favor reconciliation is another reason to

i think ambassador dobbins gave a long list of the incredible achievements that have taken place.nistan in the 1980s, 1990s, it is to meet incredible what has been achieved. and i will take today's problems over those problems any day. so i think, i'm hoping that does come out loud and clear in today's discussion. i do think that a lot of the negativity of late in particular does stem from the very difficult and tortured the sa negotiation that has taken place. and i think that has been again once dominated a lot of the press coverage and a lot of the discouragement. i think they've been particularly frustrated, frustrating discussions, precisely as ambassador dobbins noted, because the vast majority of international experts in afghanistan, officials working on afghanistan that i know, certainly think the bilateral security agreement is really in the interest of afghanistan as those the interest of the u.s. and the international community, that it is essential for increasing the prospects for stable and peaceful future. but equally, the vast majority of afghans i know also feel th

thank your distinguished guests, ambassador dobbins in particular. also our panelists for this first panel which is titled the united states and afghanistan, the longview. i think it's only in a town like washington, d.c. we can talk about looking beyond 2014 as a longview. but given the tendency to view, have a quite a reactive u.s.-afghanistan policy in relations certainly of late with lots of focusing deed on security transition in the upcoming political transition in 2014 in particular, i do think in terms of the current discourse in washington talking about life beyond 2014 in afghanistan is taking a longview. i think one of the objectives in this, for today, is really to try to look at the future relation between the u.s. and pakistan beyond 2014. that there is a longer-term interest in this relationship. i think it's also important that we have a balanced and realistic view in this relationship and i think that was buried, just what we heard from ambassador dobbins. i think talking about many of the gains but also acknowledging there's a very

ambassador dobbins. [applause] >> thank you very much, steve. thanks to usip and the alliance for organizing this event and for inviting me to join you today. to the extent that afghanistan has impeded on the american consciousness over the past year , it has largely been the security transition that has dominated. most have focused on the u.s. and nato drawdown, the increasing role of afghan forces in conducting and leading the fight, and looking forward, on the fate of the bilateral security agreement and the continued uncertainty about whether the united states and ino will be staying or going 2015. in afghanistan, increasing attention is being paid to another transition that has been put in train. from one elected leader to another. if the security transition goes badly, it may not make any difference who is governing afghanistan next year. the reverse is also true. if this political transition does not take place successfully, nothing achieved in the security sphere is likely to endure. thatf the bad news is uncertainty about the conclusion

more with agree ambassador grossman and ambassador dobbins that the region is so important. if there is to be peace and stability, it is as much about regional politics, of countries committing to letting the afghans have a chance at building the future that they have so desperately worked for and need. the question of the rules of the , at the heart of the suspend to be the foreign policy of the next afghan administration towards its neighbors. together, these elements, the internal consensus building and the regional process of are probably the keys to peace and stability. perhaps we need an adjustment in the way that we conceptualize the way we conceive the peace process. it may not be that a good deal, that cutting of a deal that will lead to stability, it will be and carefulins processes of building consensus and trust between countries, between peoples and within the country that will deliver the enduring peace and stability. that it isy much also the rules of the game that governance of the economy will be so important. understandably, taxpayers in the u.s. and europe

institute for peace at the end of february, ambassador dobbins dobbins said "enthusiasm for elections is on the rise." despite what the ambassador said, however, success is dependent on president karzai, his administration, and the candidates respecting the elect -- the electoral process and the independence of the iec. we should hold them to the commitments made in the tokyo mutual accountability framework in 2012 when the afghan government agreed to conduct "credible, inclusive, and transparent elections" in which all afghans could participate. afghanistan's checkered electoral history tells us this is all easier said than done. we need to be, i believe, clearer about the limits of what is possible with this year's elections. afghanistan's democracy is not the jeffersonian model we would like it to be. it is young and imperfect. our own history, our own electoral history in the united states provides plenty of examples of how difficult and long the road to electoral reform can be. we must continue to be forceful in our calls for a transparent and credible process. the probability is

and first rescuers with me were my wife, jan mcclellan and a very good family friends, sheila dobbins was us three for approximately two hours trying to get to as many survivors and people calling for help as possible. some of them it took us an hour and a half to get through just 600 feet through all the logs and mud and trees and all the debris from all the houses that were smashed. >> you're also walking through people's lives. you're seeing their personal possessions, the momentos, the things that bind us all together. it's a very intimate and personal search you're doing as well. >> yes, it is. we see things that belong to people. i found records that were -- 45 records, some of us are old enough to remember those. and they were elvis. and nat king cole. and stuff like that. but some of the hardest stuff is when we come across children toys and children books and children clothes. that's tough. that's hard on us. >> how do you keep going? you keep coming back there every day. >> how we keep going is that we have a belief. you'll find this in every responder across our nation. is

but first these air craft were going to dobbins in georgia. the air force aban donned them. -- abandoned them and then send them to pope, north carolina. now that wing is going to be deactivated. and we are newly reactivating an airlift group in little rock, and sending these c130js from keesler to little rock air force base to this newly activated group. the taxpayers have spent million of dollars to provide keesler air force base with state state-of-the-art modern hangars and facilities. they have enough space to house two squadrons, yet the air force continues to propose to spend millions of dollars to move these aircraftway and i just want you to hips understand at the committee level the rope for this. of course, the move would also cause serious disrunnings -- disruptions to the unit's personnel and their families. i want to ask you three direct questions. how much will this move cost? >> senator, my understanding is that the move itself is cost neutral to little rock. the savings are on the order of 600 manpower billets across the air f

first, these aircraft were going to go to dobbins in georgia. the air force abandoned that and then they were going to send them to hope field to the 44th airlift wing in north carolina. that wing will be d activate. -- d activate it. --de activated. we are newly reactivating a group in little rock and sending these c-130j's from keesler to little rock air force base, to this newly reactivated group. taxpayers have spent millions of dollars to provide keesler air force base with state-of-the-art , modern hangars and facilities. as a matter of fact, keesler has enough space to house two squadrons. yet the air force continues to propose to spend millions of dollars to move these aircraft away and i want you to help us understand at the committee level the reason for this. alsourse, the move would cause serious disruptions to the units arsenal and their families and that happens every time there is a move. i want to ask you three direct questions, general -- how much will this move cost? >> my understanding is that the move itself is cost neutral t

first, these aircraft were going to go to dobbins in georgia. the air force abandoned that and then they were going to send them to hope field to the 44th airlift wing in north carolina. that wing will be d activate. -- d activate it. --de activated. we are newly reactivating a group in little rock and sending these c-130j's from keesler to little rock air force base, to this newly reactivated group. taxpayers have spent millions of dollars to provide keesler air force base with state-of-the-art , modern hangars and facilities. as a matter of fact, keesler has enough space to house two squadrons. yet the air force continues to propose to spend millions of dollars to move these aircraft away and i want you to help us understand at the committee level the reason for this. alsourse, the move would cause serious disruptions to the units arsenal and their families and that happens every time there is a move. i want to ask you three direct questions, general -- how much will this move cost? >> my understanding is that the move itself is cost neutral t

i don't care how much it was going to cost to move them to dobbins. i want to know how much it will cost and actual dollars, fuel, other relocation costs, manpower downtime for these planes the move to little rock air force base. i have been asking for cost justification for these movements for over two years and i have yet to see an answer that shows me any cost savers. we are running short on time so i request you provide the full cost justification to my office in writing as soon as possible. i will be anxiously awaiting it. can i get your commitment that you will provide that information? >> yes. >> thank you for being here. to answer my questions and i look forward to hearing from you. i would like to personally extend an invitation to you both to come and see the base firsthand. the community that loves them very much and the great work they are doing. did you know when you may have an opportunity to do that? >> i don't have a date but i promise i will come. >> thank you very much. i recognize mr. gallego. >> thank you. welcome to the committee.

and then another member of our department, sheila dobbins, arrived, they were both swiftwater techs along. so we all geared up, we headed out. we found two patients that weren't what we call their walking green -- they could walk out if we could get them out of where they were. they couldn't get extricated because they were surrounded by a muddy, swampy -- it's like pea soup with logs and trees and torn-up houses. and we found that there was one patient that seemed to be about 600 feet away that we needed to get to because he said his arm was just hanging by a piece of skin. so we considered him critical. so we put together a rope system and the four of us took approximately -- maybe an hour and 15 minutes. i'm not sure on times. you get lost in that. and all three of us traversed out there over a real danger area and got to the patient, packaged him up and got him out. >> jan, how much of the wreckage area, how much of the area have you guys been able to access? >> well, the day after the incident happened, i was up searching and was able to go through a lot of the -- even through the mi

but also ambassador dobbins and the panelists, thank you very much. i think it was a good session. i think the challenge is, i'm not arguing, let's not be pollyannaish but let's also have a realistic and balanced assessment of what's been achieved. as well as the real challenges and threats moving forward because if we only focused on the failure and have a narrative of defeat, that i think really fuels the sentiment that we should give up and leave. as alex pointed out, we have paid a very heavy price when we did that 20 years ago. let's not repeat that mistake. thank you very much a plo. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everyone. is very much for coming to this important discussion about afghanistan at about the united states relationship with afghanistan. i'm david ensor, the director of the voice of america and i will be moderating the second and which will be a little bit looser because i'm a tv guide site like to walk around with a microphone and things like that. we have a very distinguished delegate eleanor just an intimate by what is it a couple things