train their militants who fight in kashmir.t's a very delicate area. not an area where americans are normally allowed. and it's very, very surprising that osama bin laden would be in this area without ever having been seen by anybody else. >> well, i want to get to that. because given that it is a heavily populated area, how surprised are you that the u.s. is actually able to kill him there? >> they clearly had information, not just from here, but inside pakistan itself, clearly in that town itself. there -- i can't emphasize this enough, that there are two major pakistani military bases there. how in the world could someone who does not speak urdu, the language of that area, a group of arabs, live in that region, in that compound, for so many years, without ever having been seen? very clearly that they had, that is to say the bin laden group there, had help from the outside. where did they get their food? when i was a prisoner of the taliban, we had to be very careful about them -- or our jailers did, about the amount of water

even the solution to the kashmir solution would not change.there's no solution for kashmir in the time frame that would prove relevant. it's taking more resources of every sort than it warrants. $120 billion annual price tag, one out of every six or seven dollars the country now spends on defense is unjustifiable given the budget crisis that we face and the need for air and naval modernization. the history of the 21st century is far more likely to be determined in the land areas of borders of asia and pacific than it is on the planes and mountains of afghanistan. we need to be better prepared for a number of future counterterrorist interventions elsewhere in the greater middle east and africa. we could also make sure we have adequate resources on the korean peninsula and iran. it's a strategic distraction. sure and simple. all of this is not an argument. but it is an argument for doing considerably less than we are doing by transitioning rapidly over the next year or year and a half to a relatively small, sustainable, strategically warranted d

it has been been traditionally as a kashmiri separatist movement in something focused on finding kashmir and the truth was never a kashmiri separatist movement. he was always an islamist militant movement sharing a common ideology with al qaeda and in some cases it chose to focus on kashmir when that seemed appropriate, but it has always harbored larger ambitions than not, including ambitions that set the entire subcontinent on fire is carried out, which they nearly did and ambitions to strike as directly as well. i think the threat from lashkar-e-taiba is extremely significant and unfortunately one of the pakistanis. a clear rest were detained senior members of lashkar-e-taiba is fundamentally pakistan has taken no real action against this group that has had the mexican cement is a matter of concern. the taliban and pakistan is another group where understanding is essential because the ttp was formed to serve as an impeachable organization that approves musharraf's complicity with tyson fighting against islamist. and i have details in my testimony about how the ttp has broken down into

i don't know what they're doing this in kashmir. democracies do a lot of dumb things. look at american foreign policy and we make a lot of mistakes in the world as well. the other thing is just because the country is a democracy doesn't mean that it puts the promotion of democratic values first and foremost in all aspects of its policy. we support saudi arabia because they have got oil, not because they're a democracy. that is a fact of life. it is interesting that a lot of newer democracies like india, turkey, brazil are different from the united states because they don't regard the projection of democratic mao use around the world as it thevalues around th world as it the same imperative americans do. [inaudible] >> we have to come to an end. everyone who is in line -- >> this is a volume iii question. given the supernational organizations like the un and world trade organization and world court and a bunch of regional organizations can i coax you into commenting on the prospects of a world state? >> sure. i think the prospect is zero. i just think if you look at a p

the kashmir conflict where it remains forbidden would be difficult for l.e.t. to regenerate insurgency, its members continue to integrate further into the afghan insurgency but unlike the taliban, doesn't have a major constituent be in afghanistan. the death could create space for a political solution in its outcome of l.e.t. may find it up and act evoked in front for the first time in two decades. this will impact behavior and group cohesion and may lead some to seek other opportunities, particularly terrorist attacks against india, pakistan or the u.s. however, might provide others to demobilize. if i may, a few brief recommendations that offers this event to l.e.t. that being said, fully dismantling the group must be a gradual process in order to avoid a backlash and will require a paradigm shift is in the army and the isi and one in india-pakistan relations. first, actions necessary for a global take donatelli t. continue to pursue counterterrorism cooperation for support to india and bangladesh and increase with nepal, sri lanka were l.e.t. networks are ex

this is the 12th talk since 1984 where they began their standoff at the site located in northern kashmir. talks were suspended after attacks in mumbai in 2008. the two countries' prime ministers agreed to carry forward the dialogue when they met last year. >>> police in iran have arrested members of a major international drug-smuggling group in tehran. the head of iran's anti-drug police said in tehran monday they had been gathering information about the group for the past four months. he added that the police have seized more than 270 kilograms of narcotics and arrested several smuggers in operations over the past 24 hours. the officials said the group produced industrial narcotics in home laboratories and sent them to malaysia, indonesia and thailand hidden in milk shipments. >>> time for your weather update. across eastern asia still looking windy across japan this morning. the remnant low of typhoon songa caused flooding problems in quake-affected regions and continues to bring windy conditions along the east coast of japan here. high wind warnings posted now. we will look at calmer

launching atcks kashmir and elsewher they noway the location of bin laden's i dbt, ose a mitary traing schl, proves once and for all that their nuclear armed nehbors not to be trusted. -- they say th location of bin laden's hideout. >> th showshatilitants have found sanctuary in pakistan. as longas they contie to operate freel on pakistani il, how can i s that e thre of terror hasome to end? >> the indians fe is anothemove by -- anothe mumbai. gunmen ttack hotels, a trn station, and this restaunt. peopemember and th a still ary. >> hope thatakistan undetands that the state cannot stay very long with this poly onot pporting rrorm. the indis ha been suffering aot. >>arli this year, th two governments agreed to restart e peace talks thathe gornme broke off. pakianecently promised to lp the indian investigors. many thi thatndia has no oice b to engagwithhe rival. >> w have factored the reality of the pakistani military. they arenable to cut o their tiesith e kind of terrorists that iia. >> there iso dot that bin laden's esen when he was ale just overhe bordein pakistan w a hugy th stabilin

i believe that a solution to kashmir is a long, long way off.hat i think is possible is, and here perhaps i'm looking more at the european/soviet reunion than the american/soviet in the past. but the leader of detente, the phrase detente interests me when it comes to pakistan and india. because what we saw during the cold war between the united states and europe, nato and the soviet union was that, of course, the structural hostility lasted from the late 1940s to 1989 or so. indeed, to some extent you could say with america it lasts to this day. but even during the cold war that did not prevent either limited agreements between the soviet union and america to reduce tension, either generally as in detente or in particular areas, and, of course, between the european union and the soviet union. it didn't prevent the creation of a massive infrastructure project of tremendous potential importance to india and pakistan, namely russian gas exports to the e.u.. now, that is something which interests me very much because that's happened even as the cold

how does india's policy in kashmir fit it with democracy? 75,000 deaths unaccounted for in the past two decades. >> i'm not going to act as a spokesmen. i don't know why they are doing this in kashmir. you know, democracies do a lot of dumb things. look at american foreign policy, and you see we make a lot of mistakes in the world as realm. just because a country is a democracy doesn't mean they put the promotion of democratic values first and foremost in policies. we support saudi arabia because they have oil, not democracy. that's a fact of life. i think, you know, and it's interesting actually that a lot of newer democracies like india, turkey, brazil are also different from the united states because they actually don't regard the projection of democratic values around the world, you know, with the same -- as the same imperative that americans do, and it's interesting why that's the case. >> going to take everyone who's in line to the questions, and then we'll have to come to an end. everyone who is in line gets to ask. >> i think this is

launching attacks in kashmir and elsewhere. they now say the location of bin laden's i doubt, close to a military training school, proves once and for all that their nuclear armed neighbor is not to be trusted. -- they say the location of bin laden's hideout. >> this shows that militants have found sanctuary in pakistan. as long as they continue to operate freely on pakistani soil, how can i say that the threat of terror has come to an end? >> the indians fear is of another move by -- another mumbai. gunmen attack hotels, a train station, and this restaurant. people remember and they are still angry. >> i hope that pakistan understands that the state cannot stay very long with this policy of not supporting terrorism. the indians have been suffering a lot. >> earlier this year, the two governments agreed to restart the peace talks that the government broke off. pakistan recently promised to help the indian investigators. many think that india has no choice but to engage with the arrival. >> we have factored in the reality of the

how does india's policy in kashmir fit in with its image of a democracy?like 75,000 as unaccounted in the past few decades. >> i'm not going to act as a spokesman for the indian government. i don't know what you're doing this in kashmir. democracies do a lot of dumb things. look at american foreign policy, and you see that we make a lot of mistakes in the world as well. the other thing is that just because a country's democracy doesn't mean it puts the promotion of democratic values first and foremost in all aspects of its policy. we support saudi arabia because they've got oil. not because they're a democracy. just a fact of life. so, you know, i think -- and it's interesting actually that a lot of newer democracies like india, turkey, brazil, are also different from the united states because they don't regard rejection of democratic fund around the world the same, as the same imperative that americans do. it's interesting, why not that's the case. >> everyone who is in line gets to ask a question. >> this is a volume three question. given the super natio

it may not be a legitimate worry but it is very true that they do worry about the kashmir area. that's a problem. we have to work with them and recognize the complexity. >> schieffer: all right. mr. secretary, it's fun to have you back on the broadcast today. thank you so much. i'll be back in a moment. with some final thoughts. >> thank you, bob. >> schieffer: finally this month we begin my 21st year as the moderator of face the nation. as i was looking over our broadcast for the past ten years i was struck by how much time we've devoted to 9/11 and its after math. from that sunday when we heard these chilling words from the president.... >> we're at war. >> schieffer: we have devoted more time this story and its after math than any other single story. we spent 50% of our time on this one. the bush administration told us early on what was coming. >> we're coming i think to the end of the diplomatic phase, if you will. >> schieffer: we saw a build-up of american forces in iraq, afghanistan. the in's and out's of policy. the things we did right and the things we did wrong. we nev

it may not be a legitimate worry but it is very true that they do worry about the kashmir area.that's a problem. we have to work with them and recognize the complexity. >> schieffer: all right. mr. secretary, it's fun to have you back on the broadcast today. thank you so much. i'll be back in a moment. with some final thoughts. >> thank you, bob. your advertising mail campaign is paying off! business is good! it must be if you're doing all that overnight shipping. that must cost a fortune. it sure does. well, if it doesn't have to get there overnight, you can save a lot with priority mail flat rate envelopes. one flat rate to any state, just $4.95. that's cool and all... but it ain't my money. i seriously do not care... so, you don't care what anyone says, you want to save this company money! that's exactly what i was saying. hmmm... priority mail flat rate envelopes, just $4.95 only from the postal service. a simpler way to ship. >> schieffer: finally this month we begin my 21st year as the moderator of face the nation. as i was looking over our broadcast for the past ten years

even the solution to the kashmir solution would not change. there's no solution for kashmir in the time frame that would prove relevant. it's taking more resources of every sort than it warrants. $120 billion annual price tag, one out of every six or seven dollars the country now spends on defense is unjustifiable given the budget crisis that we face and the need for air and naval modernization. the history of the 21st century is far more likely to be determined in the land areas of borders of asia and pacific than it is on the planes and mountains of afghanistan. we need to be better prepared for a number of future counterterrorist interventions elsewhere in the greater middle east and africa. we could also make sure we have adequate resources on the korean peninsula and iran. it's a strategic distraction. sure and simple. all of this is not an argument. but it is an argument for doing considerably less than we are doing by transitioning rapidly over the next year or year and a half to a relatively small, sustainable, strategically warranted

so there is a war going on in kashmir. it's a difficult problem. >> good afternoon, ma'am, gentlemen. i'm a senior here. many mischiefs warning and for the past semester i've been working on my senior seminar project at university history. i've been interviewing him like food served in iraq and afghanistan one of those alumni is stationed there right now. lieutenant colonel r. curry in mazar-e-sharif and she is in charge of a whole bunch of engineering projects. she recently told me and my most recent interview is any project, you believe the number she gave me was under $4 million is given to ask any contractors said they can build their own infrastructure. to me this seems like a really great idea and am curious what you think about that and how do you think we can expand from that so they can take over with the more expensive projects as well? >> it is part of our program and all of our expenditures we have a buy afghan been possible policy and it's not as simple as it sounds because companies really are there are compa

a comprehensive solution governing kashmir and so on is a long ways off, and that, to me, has been the basic problem on at least, not too familiar with the indian side, but with the pakistani side, that has been the problem. whenever you talk about improved relations with india, you rush off to what we economists call a solution where you have to solve all the problems in, you know, you have to have a comprehensive solution. we've heard that in the case of israel and pal stein as well, a -- palestine as well. you have to race to the final. i have argued that you have to start somewhere, and you can start with baby steps, even in this, and i think the best place, as an economist i argue, the best place to start is trade between to two country, and in this context i would argue that pakistan's reluctance to be seen as sort of being appeasing in this, india has to make the concessional and be the first mover on this, and as it can increase economic trade and integration between the two neighbors. the potential gains from economic integration between india and pakistan are incredibly large

you before has tight relations with a number of terrorist groups the terrorist groups operating in kashmir for instance or lashkar e tayyiba which it targets india and staged a big raid against mumbai no suggestion that these terrorist groups had any designs on the united states or view the united states with hostility but there probably is a basis to link them to the taliban and al qaida so under this revised version of the authorization for the use of military for fours rushed r e tayyiba and the kashmiri groups could be enemies and could be targeted as part of an expanded agenda this is terrorism creep. but you know to be fair here you say that this is a very clear difference between the bush administration line of thinking and the obama administration line of thinking no matter what a violin may have said during a campaign season we have to look at the obama administration's actions so far that's far he has greatly expanded the role of the executive branch he's placed american citizens on assassination lists he in fact tried to take out. in yemen the other week with a drone strike and

they are not just focused on helping oppressed muslims in kashmir, or trying to fight the nato and the americans in afghanistan. they see themselves as part of a global struggle, and therefore are a much broader threat than they were previously. so, in a sense, yes, we have helped to bring about the situation that we most fear. >> smith: on sunday, us special forces flew across the border to kill the leader of that global jihad. it will be some time before we know what effect osama bin laden's death will have on the movement he inspired, and whether the pakistani authorities knew all along that america's number one enemy was hiding in their midst. >> where you surprised? >> no, i sort of always imagined him in a big walled compound, i hadn't quite visualized him being a thousand yards from the pakistan military academy and the extent of proximity to the pakistani state. >> what does that tell us? >> certainly presents circumstantial evidence that the pakistani state had within it significant leaders, generals, or others who knew that he was there. i think the circumstantial evidence su

howard is india's policy in kashmir fit in? 75,000 deaths and accounted? >> i will not act as the spokesperson for the indian government i don't know why they are doing this democracies do a lot of dumb things if you look at american foreign policy and you see we make a lot of mistakes in the world as well but just because the country is a democracy doesn't mean it puts the promotion of democratic values first and foremost we support saudi arabia because they have will not because they are a democracy. and it is interesting and other democracies like india turkey and brazil are different because they don't regard the democratic values as the same imperative that americans do. >> we will take everyone who is in line and then we have to come to an end. >> this maybe volume three but given the supranational organizations of the wind and world trade and the world court and regionals can i coach you into commenting on the prospects of the world's eight? >> sure. [laughter] the prospect is zero. [laughter] i just think if you look at a political system it has to

trouble arose with kashmir, which was an independent state, and under the rules of independence, all the states were supposed to decide to go with one country or the other. they couldn't become independent themselves. the interesting thing about kashmir being that it was majority muslim population ruled by a hindu rural and when he delayed a decision, a group of officers in the pakistan military took matters into their own hands, lower ranking officers, without the knowledge of their british superiors, and took the tribesmen that are now in the border region with afghanistan and invaded kashmir and a car ensued and then at some point u.n.-imposed cease fire occurred which divided that territory. that's really at the heart of the india-pakistan trouble. what the caller reflected is a very strong pakistani narrative, which is, a long historical that remains in pakistani minds, about the rollercoaster relationship as i call it between the u.s. and pakistan. but the problem with this relationship has always been that we've always talked about long term and acted in the short run. and dom

our only means of keeping inld yeah on edge is to use these militant groups as proxies to go into kashmireep afghanistan on edge the same way. that's their world view. they say ewe'll shut down the bd guys who kill afghannys. . >> so sounds at every turn is a nuanced balancing game where nebraska is aligned with anybody unconditional unconditionally. it's always, we only go a little bit this way and then pull back. >> exactly. it's not actually in pakistan's interest to think like this. i think it's foolish. they want to have strategic depth in afghanistan. what does this mean in the 21st century. what pakistan needs is to raise the standards of the living of its people to build more schools, build more infrastructure, to hook itself to the indian growth machine that is growing at 8% a year. but unfortunately, that's not the way the pakistani military think. they're stuck in a kind of 19th century real politic world view where they'll trying to keep india on edge, keep afghanistan down. it doesn't get them anything. but they do it. >> it sounds like beneath the public hysteria, there is,

and you added kashmir to the picture. india has 16 consulates in afghanistan, and you would ask why? and the pakistanis would have no doubt about why. the -- order, the indians -- on the other hand, the indians would say that their ministry has been attacked three times, every time by a pakistanny. so there's a war going on through proxy in afghanistan. it's a difficult problem. >> yes, sir. >> good afternoon, ma'am, gentlemen. i'm a senior here, my name's jeff morning, and for the past semester i've been working on my senior seminar project. i've been interviewing alumni that have served in iraq and afghanistan, and one of those is currently stationed there right now, lieutenant colonel arcari. she is in charge of a whole bunch of engineering projects over there, and she recently told me in my most recent interview with her that any project -- i believe the number she gave me was under $4 million -- is given to afghani contractors that way they can build their own infrastructure. to me, seems like a really great cd, and

it's up towards kashmir, where a lot of militant groups have had a presence. i and other people have said, would it be possible that bin laden may be up in this area and it's one thing i do want to say, wolf, adding to what you said about the dangerousness of this situation. abbottabad is far away from -- >> there are about 200 u.s. forces in pakistan as of february. >> in islamabad? >> not necessarily in islamabad but around the country. >> with helicopters? >> yes. these would have had to have come from helicopters. >> hold on a minute. i want to bring gloria borger in. what are you learning? >> well, first of all, i want to give you some reporting from dana bash. she is reporting that a source familiar with the operation confirms that indeed osama bin laden was shot in the head during the u.s. raid. according to a briefing that this source received, the source would not go into the details of the other were killed except to say that the operation was conducted very carefully not to harm women and children. so that we do know indeed he was shot in the head.

the bottom line is pakistan is so obsessed with india gaining something either in afghanistan or in kashmir in that part of the region they do things we cannot comprehend or understand. >> when it comes to the military action over the weekend, i mean, foreign policy, much larger topic and an article of associated press today on what they call the quote compare bring scant foreign policy experience of the potential 2012 field for republicans to be elected president. is that experience a really powerful tool and how effectively can it be used on the campaign trail especially if the economy stays the way it is? >> i'm in the foreign policy business so i would like to think that the next president is going to have good experience in foreign policy but having observed these elections over the years, face it, president obama did not have much experience compared to john mccain, his opponent who had been chairman of major committees for decades and as we can see from this weekend he's done a perfectly fine job as commander in chief so i think we have to be realistic those of us in the foreign poli

even the solution to the kashmir solution would not change. there's no solution for kashmir in the time frame that would prove relevant. it's taking more resources of every sort than it warrants. $120 billion annual price tag, one out of every six or seven dollars the country now spends on defense is unjustifiable given the budget crisis that we face and the need for air and naval modernization. the history of the 21st century is far more likely to be determined in the land areas of borders of asia and pacific than it is on the planes and mountains of afghanistan. we need to be better prepared for a number of future counterterrorist interventions elsewhere in the greater middle east and africa. we could also make sure we have adequate resources on the korean peninsula and iran. it's a strategic distraction. sure and simple. all of this is not an argument. but it is an argument for doing considerably less than we are doing by transitioning rapidly over the next year or year and a half to a relatively small, sustainable, strategically warranted

my two keywords come at what has there is, i will skip promiscuity although kashmir for another day. i would say not just innovation, not just new platforms, not just facebook and twitter, conclusion is going to be what takes public me into its next phase. >> thank you, jessica. [applause] >> and the next we're going to go to another form of inclusion, and that's to talk about the public insight network which was hard at minnesota public media and minnesota public radio and american public media. and hear details about public insight network is its director, linda fantin. >> it's great to be here for many reasons, but one is that you hear all this wonderful work and collaboration and transmission and all of us. and the public insight network basically enjoys the position of being kind of the connective tissues that is built into the other projects that you just heard, and basically allows some of this collaboration to take place. my own background, i piggyback ride in newspapers, managing small weeklies in places like medicine bow and pine bill white on. and 13 or so plus years doing

brothers from eastern afghanistan and the militant group formed by pakistan to fight against india over kashmir these groups that are responsible. if you walk in arlington cemetery past the fresh graves of american soldiers coming back from the field over there, pakistan has some of the blood on its hands. they need to answer for that. for too long, the u.s. has stood back saying we fear the breakup of pakistan. pakistan is doing everything they can. clearly they're not doing everything they can. and, more importantly, they're not doing the things that count. president zardari and others, of course, they are going to say this. they have been caught with their pants down. they are in hot water. know know it. as diplomatic as the u.s. has been publicly, you can bet it's been a different story behind the scenes. >> lara logan in washington for us. thank you. >>> switching gears, marisol castro joins us with weather on this tuesday morning. >>> good morning, chris, good morning to you at home. we want to show you some thunderstorms that folks can expect today as the storm system continues to move i

even the solution to the kashmir solution would not change. there's no solution for kashmir in the time frame that would prove relevant. it's taking more resources of every sort than it warrants. $120 billion annual price tag, one out of every six or seven dollars the country now spends on defense is unjustifiable given the budget crisis that we face and the need for air and naval modernization. the history of the 21st century is far more likely to be determined in the land areas of borders of asia and pacific than it is on the planes and mountains of afghanistan. we need to be better prepared for a number of future counterterrorist interventions elsewhere in the greater middle east and africa. we could also make sure we have adequate resources on the korean peninsula and iran. it's a strategic distraction. sure and simple. all of this is not an argument. but it is an argument for doing considerably less than we are doing by transitioning rapidly over the next year or year and a half to a relatively small, sustainable, strategically warranted

pakistanis see india as their chief rival, their chief enemy, if you will, over the contested areas of kashmirplicated part of the world, but in this -- in this particular case, the president of the united states and all of his top national security advisers agree the u.s. would have to get the job done, couldn't -- couldn't rely on the pakistanis doing it. >> a complicated part of the world, wolf. and one you've traveled to many, many times. and you know, i mean, for the past ten years as reporters, this fight on terror has defined our professional lives. i think none more in particular than you who have talked to all these people. what was your reaction or when did you learn that osama bin laden was killed. and what were your personal thoughts? >> you know, it was really a weird situation for me last night. i was home. i was watching the washington capitals in the third period, ovechkin had just tied the game 2-2 against tampa bay. and as a washington capitals fan i was excited, looking forward to the overtime. when i got a call, it was around 9:40 p.m. eastern from sam feist, our political

so there is a war going on in kashmir. >> and a senior. for the past semester i have been working on my senior seminar project. i have been interviewing alumni that have served in iraq and afghanistan. one of those currently stationed they're right now, stations, a barrier reef. she is in charge of a whole bunch of engineering and recently told me in my most recent interview that any projects under $4 million given to afghani contractors. they can build their own infrastructure. to me this seems like a great idea, and i'm curious what you think about that and i do think we can expand so that they can take over the more expensive product. >> it is part of our program in all of our's been ditchers. we have by afghan one possible strategy policy. it is not as simple as it sounds because you have companies that really aren't there are companies that really can deliver. there was a shipping contracts given to an individual for 100 to $5 million. turn that he owned the trucks. that said, he was the son of a government minister. so the contract s

it is not just kashmir-directed.f it were, your argue but would be the proverbial slam dunk. -- your argument would be the proverbial slam dunk. all of these extremist groups -- it's almost hard to fathom accept when viewed through that understanding of thinking about control of other territory. help understand that for a moment. >> i will be brief on this -- having talked to enough people inside pakistan and within up military establishment, there is debate going on with this issue. i do not think it is a monolithic view that pakistan needs surrogates, but they are looking at from a posture and prism. -- from a poshtoon prism. hakani has never ruled afghanistan and no one would allow them to gain that power. i think you have to be realistic. i am not sure we have seen the last position on this and i would hope there is some active introspection going on now in light of what happened recently to take a fresher approach to the relationship with afghanistan. since we know there have been meetings with president kaezai

ties that would lead to peace between the two countries, granted that it is almost a given that the kashmir dispute is there, therefore co, -- are tolerated by the pakistanis, that, as you suggested, afghanistan is a ground in which both india and pakistan might play against each other, and therefore, not be conceded very readily. you mentioned because of this business with india a lot of the pakistan armed forces feel necessarily that that has to be the major influence in this is where their efforts, expenditures,,. is this an area in which the united states can play any role in terms of encouragement of peace with we keep going back and forth with israel and palestinians, sort of a cardinal situation in that area. but india and pakistan, clearly, is the heart of the problem. >> senator, you have put your finger exactly on one of the things that is the most vexing of dishes. we have tried to play a role, not an indirect role, but a direct role in defusing tensions, encouraging foreign ministers to meet. as i said earlier, i think prime minister singh deserves a lot of credit for taking a p

nine-state actors in support of pakistani security and political interests, whether you are talking about kashmirghanistan. pakistan has to have a reckoning of their support for these violent and on state actors. this is a great time for the united states to really take it to the pakistanis. when the cia contractor raymond davis was convicted in pakistan and arrested for killing two pakistanis in an apparent robbery attempt, pakistan use that as leverage to try to extract concessions from the united states with respect to our drone program, with respect to intelligence personnel within pakistan. now is the time that the tables have turned, and the united states at this moment needs to make it clear to the pakistanis that things cannot go on as they have. i really do think this is a moment where the nine states as an almost unprecedented degree of leverage -- where the united states has an almost unprecedented degree of leverage. when the details came out about how a somewhat belated was living a mile away from the military academy in -- how osama bin laden was living at a mile away from the milit

reason why we should care whether the afghan government was with india or pakistan on the issue of kashmir, the other bilateral issue between those countries. we now have a difficult circumstance of trying to have a government and, -- in kabul that is relatively secure, and is not seen as a terrorist organization. the large embassy that india has and kabul scarce some of the pakistanis. if you have had wars with a country with nuclear weapons and a billion people, there is a lot of planning that goes into that. host: do you believe the taliban needs to renounce al qaeda, and ordered to be brought into some sort of government deal between the taliban and karzai's government? guest: i hope we are only bringing in elements of the taliban, not the organization, omar, etc. we could have a different approach to afghanistan, one that i have advocated, where we simply maintain bases there to fight terrorism, but we are not focused on, are we bringing good government to afghanistan? but if we are going to have 100,000 troops, the engaged in nation-building, you will have to see only anti-al qaeda e

where in order kashmir because as we know, they have constantly redirected that towards the united states so, i'm asking really, is that not a third indicator which is i think going to be critical, particularly the other two? [inaudible] >> i wanted to ask a question -- [inaudible] a couple of reasons for anti-americanism and pakistan. you're one of the few and one from journalists and commentat commentator. how much of a role does the media play in shaping public perception as far as the fostering conservative theories who were in the best states in relation to what was said, in relation to policies, really buy that much of a role where the media can go blow that off. [inaudible] >> thank you. >> i would like to start by addressing the professors question. i thank you for the clarification. the history of the sanctions as you know better than i come is a bit more complicated and neither you nor i have time for just now. i mean, i mentioned the lifting in 1995 and another thing again in 2001. i did mention the nuclear test in 1998, and the sanctions that followed that. and i would recomme

they have expanded beyond targeting india and kashmir.i mentioned earlier, there is a trial going on in chicago rendell of individuals accused of playing roles supporting that terrorist attack in mumbai, including an individual with the pakistan the intelligence service. the connection is one of the most troubled and interesting is that we have to deal with. in a relatively short time, words like "al-qaeda" will not be a part of our vocabulary. "terrorism" will be. designating these groups is going to be a lot but it is not going to take us as far as we need to go. a lot more has to be done with pakistan. host: how much help or assistance does the american effort needed from a government like pakistan or the afghanistan government when you are talking about freezing access? guest: we can designate these groups without their okay but their money will not be frozen back home. pakistan should be freezing the groups' money because those entities are designated by the united nations. there is an element of not only ability but willingness as w

that is almost a given that the kashmir dispute would be there. they are tolerated by the pakistanis because they have some value as anti-india. afghanistan is a ground on which both india and pakistan might play against each other and are not to be cheated readily. you mentioned because of this business with india, a lot of the pakistani armed forces feel that this has to be a major influence. the expenditures fall on their economy. is this an area in which the united states plays a major role in terms of encouragement and peace. we are going back and forth with the israelis and palestinians. india and pakistan, as a part of what we're talking about today, is a part of the problem. >> senator, you put your finger on exactly one of the things that is most vexing of issues. we have tried to play a role. not a direct role, but an indirect role, in diffusing tensions and carrying messages back and forth, and encouraging foreign ministers to meet. as i said earlier, i think the prime minister deserved a lot of credit for taking a political risk in his

work with the united states, one that might one day be willing for reconciliation with india over kashmir, and a country that would really want to see its systems -- its citizens economically upwardly mobile. i think some military assistance can be much more important than military assistance at this stage. we have and bards on this release 1.5 years. >> critics of the bush administration. >> what i said is that to the best of our knowledge, based on none of it came as the result of harsh interrogation practices. >> the original evidence. do you personally have any concerns about where the original tip came from? >> not precisely, no. i mean, we are going to find out all there is to find out about it, but at the present time, i think it was a good intelligence, a piece here, a piece there, and then this man coming in and out of the compound, boeing 90 miles away, using a telephone, taking out the batteries and destroying the phone, that kind of thing. >> any reason to believe that u.s. intelligence knew about this before they tracked the courier back to it? >> i believe, based on what i k

united states, one that what -- that might one day be willing for a reconciliation with india over kashmir, and a country that would want to see it citizens economically upwardly mobile. i think humanitarian assistance is much more important than military assistance. >> [inaudible] >> we have been embarked on a story about a year. -- on it for about a year. >> [inaudible] you do not have any information about being the result of harsh interrogation. >> to the best of our knowledge , none of it came as a result of harsh interrogation practices. >> [inaudible] do you had any concerns about where the original tip came from? >> not precisely, no. we are going to find out all there is to find out about it. but at the present time, i think it was good intelligence, a piece here, appease their put together, plus this man coming in and out of this compound, going 90 miles away, using a phone, taking out the batteries, destroying the fund, that kind of thing. >> adam goldman. any reason to believe that u.s. intelligence was aware of the compound before the track that courier back to it? >> based on

years, represented my hometown which has a very significant south asian population from pakistan, kashmiry are -- and conversations often happen which is a great irony for my jewish community friends where they revered -- but they say why can't we be organized? why are we so pathetic at putting our case? it doesn't feel like it from our side. but they think that they couldn't -- we have a phrase in the north of england, you know, it's very difficult to plat fog and they don't they are very effective but the truth is what they've done they've been very, very good, just like the nonstate actors. they are opportunist. and. and our architecture both in america and in europe is established. it's like super tankers, like governments and that's why israel finds it hard to apply and, you know, the state versus the nonstate actor. and it's very similar to the organized jewish community versus basically the young upstart organizations that are capitalizing on events. and so when in britain, for example, there was a huge stop the war and in spain movements around the iraq war, they realized that the

granted it's a given almost that the kashmir dispute is there. that, as you suggested, afghanistan is a ground in which both india and pakistan might play against each other, and therefore not be conceded very readily. you mentioned that because of the bid with india, a lot of the pakistani armed forces feel necessarily that that has to be the major influence. this is where their efforts and expenditures, the balance on the economy come. is this an area in which the united states could play any role in terms of encouragement of peace? going back and forth with israel and the palestinians. but india and pakistan is clearly a part of what we're talking about today, at h heart of the problem. >> senator, you put your finger exactly on one of the things that is the most vexing of issues. we have tried to play a role. not a direct role, but an incorrect role. in defusing tensions. encouraging foreign ministers to meet. i think prime minister singh deserves a lot of credit for taking a political risk in his own country to show a more reasonable side in