assistance in pakistan. in addition to requiring the president to develop a real security strategy and regularly report back to congress on the effectiveness of our military assistance, the act prohibits such assistance until pakistan demonstrates its commitment to shared security goals. there are also strong oversights and ordered requirements for the state department and usaid and the requirement for the u.s. comptroller general to report inddentently on the effectiveness of our security asince. this bill is a tremendous step forward for us and/or efforts to bring peace and stability to south asia. i would hope that every member would support this legislation. i thank the chairman. i thank the speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time of the the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'm pleased to yield five mi

we need to make sure that pakistan is fighting for pakistan and that pakistan doesn't think it's only fighting for american dollars. that's what we need to do. as once more a united states marine that saw state department ineptness and cowardice, while i was in afghanistan, it's almost personally insummitting we're going to pull the money and fund from general the reus and give it to state department cronies. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida has 1 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 3 and a quarter minutes remaining and is recognized. mr. berman: yes, mr. chairman, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman who has made a significant contribution to this legislative effort, the gentlewoman from wisconsin, ms. moore. two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. moore: mr. speaker, i want to thank chairman berman for working with me so closely to include provisions in h.r. 1886 to ensure that the empowerment and protection of -- and human rights of women are

pakistan is a valued ally. this will enable us to give them the resources so that we can count on that ally to do the right thing. and continue the same blank check policy which has made matters worse rather than better, i think is a terrible mistake. i urge defeat of the amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you. mr. speaker, i'd like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. hoekstra, the ranking member on the house permanent select committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. mr. hoekstra: i'd like to thank my colleague for yielding the time. pakistan, afghanistan is a very difficult part of the world. as we develop the strategies, i think many of us all have the same goals and objectives in mind. but we need to take a look at exactly what we are doing today. i'm proud to support the republican amendment to the pakistan enduring assistance and cooperation ac

she chairs the pakistan caucus. she joined our congressional delegation in pakistan last -- in the month of april and speaks with great knowledge and experience on this subject. the gentlelady from texas, ms. sheila jackson lee, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank very much the distinguished chairman of the full committee for both his insight and his leadership. and my good friend the subcommittee chairman, mr. ackerman, and my doubly good friend mr. burton, who was just on the floor of the house who shares with me this commitment to pakistan. mr. speaker, the reason why we must go forward today is for the very reason that our colleagues have been addressing themselves to our colleagues, you will. we have a crisis, a dire crisis in pakistan. there is no time for us to quarrel over what really are minimal differences if you will. right now as we speak, 2.5 million people are homeless. they are fleeing the conflicts in an area that -- are

i was kicked out of pakistan once, chased out of pakistan again. so unfortunately as long as i still -- i'm obviously to some extend threatening to the security of the establishment there i have no idea while. it's a self-agranddiesing thing but i pushed pakistan aside for a bit. i was in the mdise last month. if have done some stuff in north africa. i'm really interested in how the economic crisis will -- what are the political instabilities the result of political instability robbed the world as the result of the economic crisis and how will this recalibrate the political center around the world as various right wing and left wing groups pop up to use the crisis to their advantage. >> host: during the two years with the pakistan that is captured so marvelously, you were did get to india. india didn't capture your? >> guest: to some extent. india is very ecclectic and very -- it is enchanting, but i went india to actually vacation. >> host: not enough trouble for now? >> guest: i feel very comfort enable muslim countries. i was in minneapolis and

but first, nick, i would like you to talk about pakistan itself because with pakistan so much in the headlines and obviously a timely book "to live or to perish forever." but do you think americans don't know about pakistan? can you give a feel for the country? >> guest: i feel good americans don't understand is the dynamism of the country. the title was written by a muslim 14 years before the creation of pakistan. >> host: "to live or to perish forever"? >> guest: "to live or to perish forever." the title was now or never are we to live or perish for ever and this young man proposed it's time for the northwest provinces of the united india to come join into a single muslim state along with bangladesh on the eastern wing of india, and in the same he proposed that these five provinces, the afghani province also west, they become pakistan and so this was the acronym, this was the basis. >> host: pakistan meaning? >> guest: it's the pakistan and also means urdo land of the pure. it was an amalgamation to bring people united by one thing and one thing only and that was islam. >> host: an

everyone in pakistan, many people in pakistan or in love with the taliban idea. the romance, the guys that are righteous, simple, basic muslims just trying to implement all and yet no one really wants to live under the same guys. they don't want the streets to be patrolled, they certainly don't want to be lashed buy then so this is a major difference and up until very recently when the time of an advanced within 60 miles of islam a lot and conquered the district of buneir mirrors what i don't think they realized that younkins was becoming a real and was on their doorstep in many ways. >> host: nick i know from what you said today in your book you believe pakistan will model three and yet you know the scenario you describe, the situation you detailed in your book sound severely like the situation in the mid-1970s. >> guest: you're right and i find myself going back and forth. i find myself adopting the position of pakistan will muddle through, and then there's been certain people of course over the past year and a half have said what is in place to really prevent

is pakistan's patron.partly because you asked, in the at held back in a remarkable display of self retrained which was in indiana's interest. often states do things for political reasons that may not be in their interest, but it was the smart thing to do. but it becomes a convenient and very understandable politically to blame somebody else that you have been counting on if something like this @@@@@@@ @ @ >> i think we may be heading towards a confrontation with iran, that the states that would be more important in that area are russia and china and the united states would be more angry at them and we would at india. i think the expectations of india are relatively lower, but i think the issue is the one i would worry about. india are relatively lower. >> i would add one note to that, what they're writing about is the kind of strike and air force capabilities they want, this is not about striking china, they want the capability to strike back and retaliate if they i hit again, i am not talking about next y

my own time and pakistan and when you cross the river that by sects pakistan north and south you transition between two civilization spread of the west is the look of a shove even the bland taste of food then you cross but in islamabad but to say nothing of lahore that culture is more vivid but does pakistan work? >> it does. i am not of the chicken little school that thinks it is always on the verge of collapse. is somehow has persevered negative 1971 that it lost half of it but it was geographically 10 untenable to begin with but it works as far as it moves ahead. it is still grappling with for you travel around pakistan and it does divide the civilizations but u.s. the pakistani and various parts how did they identify themselves? rarely if ever as pakistani first. it is their ethnic identity or tribal identity then muslim than pakistani. so they are tears of identity so in that sense b.a.t of pakistan has never really taken root among the population. >> host: and get bangladesh and spun off in 71 but if you look at india which just finished one month of on thence location eight -- electi

i think the road to success is through the government of pakistan and did the pakistan military and police. it gives to the kinds of activities we have done with pakistan and hopefully we will do them with more effectiveness in the gears to come. everything we can do to share intelligence and that sort of thing to coordinate operations and there had been at another of the things established and they are still growing in size and scope so i think everything we can do to in power and increase the capacity is really the road we have to go down. >> i agree with general mcchrystal completely. >> another comment was the military operations in pakistan and the number of the internally displaced people and it was #two 0.4 million while we were there. i was wondering about any of the humanitarian needs and aspects that are taking place right now within pakistan to help those huge numbers of people. can you give me an update? are you aware of any activity going on from a humanitarian aspect? >> we were working to provide what ever they needed. they did request some support. i think that is key. the

just back to pakistan again. you have as the president said last week, al-qaeda is mostly in pakistan, not in afghanistan. you have taliban and al-qaeda leadership in big cities. and yet you cannot have american boots on the ground and you have a pakistani army which seems incapable of tackling them. so in practical terms, how do you tackle them? and secondly, what threat do the tribal areas in the northwest of pakistan pose to the rather fraile civilian government? -- fragile civilian government? >> i think there are two keys to getting progress in the current situation in pakistan. one is to strengthen the rule of law in accountability, the judiciary, those sorts of elements to the government and improve the authority of this elected civilian leaders. the other is the pakistani police. pakistani military and isi are externally focused. they're worried about the threat of india. there's only one element in the pakistani national security establishment whose matter concern is state collapse and extremist takeover

again, most of it is being smuggled out through pakistan.pakistan is always the linchpin in these situations. >> when i started looking into how the money functions in the insurgent system, again, this was what takes me back to my sopranos model. even though some of these groups, some of these, the various groups that operate in the border regions they only be very loosely affiliated with each other. a guy at the district level always have to kick a percentage up stairs to whoever his commander is. and everybody pays in, so it sort of like a peer may. i guess an upside down peer may. the money goes towards the top, which would indicate that the top leaders of all of these movements are making huge amounts of money off of all of this criminal activity in the region. we heard numerous reports of financial representatives from each of these groups, from al qaeda, from the imu, from the taliban, rum that haqqani group, from the hig which operates in eastern afghanistan. they routinely meet usually in pakistan often and the city of in the southwe

policy toward pakistan. in a letter to the armed services committee, secretary of defense gates and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff mullen wrote that the degree of condition alt and limitations on security assistance to pakistan in the legislation, and i quote, severely constrains the flexibility necessary for the exec branch and the department of defense given the fluid and dynamic environment that exists in pakistan, end quote. this rule bringing forth two pieces of legislation, limits the number of amendments the house will be allowed to debate. out of the 85 amendments submitted to the rules committee, the majority decided to make 27 amendments in order. i understand the majority has the responsibility to move legislation and manage the time on the floor. but if we look at the amendments the majority made in order, they do not fully address the scope,er the range of issues of concern to house members. for example, amendments that would prohibit funds from being used by the state department to encou

within pakistan. it is the strongest element of pakistan historically and is the element of government upon which the people depend. i think we have to be very careful in if recognizing that we can't take actions to cause the military to be to the pakistani people to be an extension of ours. we can only help them in a way that truly helps them and they are much more expert in that than we are. so i think the best thing we can do is develop who -- relationships and help the pakistani people understand our interest is theirs and that our commitment is long term, commitment for the good of pakistan and the stability of the region. but it will require us to work very carefully and very wisely with the pakistan government, with the pakistan military and the frontier corps. regarding afghanistan, i would highlight that afghanistan is a uniquely complex environment, counterinsurgency in afghanistan is very different than it has been anywhere else where we have operated. it is really a village by village, val

the pakistan army. we have seen these operations in recent years, but i think there is some interesting and important changes to what is going on this year. in the first place, for the first time, the pakistan army operations in that part of the world have support of the government and of the public. there was a parliamentary solution, which occurs. defences takes place. there been statements of support by the government, and more public support and this is really different from the past when the army went up and there was little backing from the public come a little backing from the government. as we all know who served in the armed forces, when you are up there making sacrifices and nobody back, seems to be caring or supporting you, it is not something that you push hard. it is not something that maintains that intensity. another difference now is that, and this is something the leaders of pakistan talked about when i was there, is realizing that the key to stability is not so much military operations

if we did it for india we had to do it for pakistan and if we did it for pakistan we have to do it for india. india has become a little bit of a after-thought and we have talked to afpa, which but at least in my mind it's highly regrettable. now, before we talk about some of the national security challenges. i just wonder on this hyphenated question how you feel we can sort of get past that, whether it's a perception in india as well and perhaps, you know, as you think about it, last week the -- last week the senate passed a kerry-lugar bill that has $1.5 billion in assistance per annum with very few restrictions to pakistan. i don't think that it's necessary for you to make a criticism of that or a comment on it, but i think it's interesting to see how the -- how it reflects american priorities. think a little bit about that for us. >> certainly, i think the india-u.s. relationship in the last few years has developed largely and it is a very important relationship for india, certainly. which we feel is essential for meeting our development aspirations as well as for enhancing global p

fighting for kabul and did pakistan they are always having a separatist movement. yet any number going on. i can see a way out of the afghan problem nation-building has become a dirty word in washington basically all of these committees need lot and order if we could establish governance we certainly would not get rid of the taliban and al qaeda to kill them all it is like the doritos ad they just keep making more. [laughter] but if we actually make them irrelevant by giving people a good alternative, i think that is the exit strategy for the reason. people talk about that being expensive, complex, taking years and i do not disagree but we're already spending $2 billion per month on our military operation alone and surely that is not sustainable either. even the nation-building is a dirty word it is one that i will keep saying because i think it is the only way out of that region. for me the bigger concern is the speed with which the insurgents are moving across pakistan which i do see a tremendous risk for splitting into different parts and there is then all state

this is affecting pakistan as well. there was some testimony about this with a good summary, the strikes are actually well thought of because the people living there have been dealing with these violent people who have been in their community, this is in pakistan itself, where the civilian population sees this as a threat and is less likely to be supportive. pakistan needs to learn counter insurgency, and i will not go through the challenge is there, because you know them well. we have to be able to help them and at the same time, we have to play a limited role, the sovereignty is very important, it is incredibly important to give them support for the government. my questions are, what can we do to better help pakistan get to the counterinsurgency level where they need to be, to be successful in swat -- this what valley -- the swat valley. how do we do this and by the people that we need to fight, -- fight the people that we need to fight? >> as the general said in a his hearing a couple of days ago, if i can go to paki

inside pakistan in this what two bally -- in this what valley to face challenges that pakistan faces and we're also infers that those steps have won popular support among the pakistan people. because we believe that that support will provide the basis for continued action to ensure that the soil of pakistan is not used as a base from which militants and extremists can attack neighboring countries. >> can i ask a question? >> sure. >> you don't have to identify yourself. >> once again, you didn't mention although the administration has made clear that there the treaty will be on their front burner perhaps after starts but certainly on the front burner. and this is traditionally been an object of some disagreement between us and the indians. in light of the fact that the likelihood of this cdbg entry into force as is quite low given other countries that need to end will not sign it, i wonder whether, how you see the prospects for it and whether you think it is a possible problem and i also wonder if you in that same vein or just expand on the question of the convention supplementary co

so as a co-chair of the pakistan caucus, i am grateful that we made a first step. i want the american people to know that your neighbors are pakistani-americans, they are doctors, they are lawyers, they are entrepreneurs, they are retailers, they love this country and they want to help their country as well. i am glad we made this first step. let me move quickly to a domestic issue and put an exclamation point on what we did right for pakistan and say that i stand here today and support a restoration and bailout for automobile dealers. we missed the boat and we have dealerships who have gotten these ugly letters saying that even though you are a pillar of the community, you're in good financial shape, you can sell the cars, you must close. mr. speaker, i stand against it and i believe that as we move forward we must have a car voucher for our automobile dealers who can in fact maintain their independence, can sell cars, whether or not it is by fiat or whether or not it is someone else, chrysler and g.m. cannot close by caveat, despite the bankruptcy structuring, th

this pakistan bill is a good attempt to guide our engagement in pakistan in a way that gives us the best chance to see that our aid is spent in a constructive and responsible fashion which hasn't been the case. i commend its author, chairman berman. as to the rule, i think it is problematic. the state department authorization bill quite simply spends money we don't have, over a third increase at the time when we're borrowing money from china and elsewhere. amendments to cut this amount were not made in order. i think that was a mistake. i am very disappointed, let me add, though, at the addition done by the rules committee of a flawed trade provision. don't get me wrong. trade can do far, far more than aid for pakistan's economic development and social stability, which is in our interest. the problem is that this provision is far too restrictive and burdensome as to do any good. in fact, it may be harmful to trade. at a time when pakistan is perhaps the greatest threat facing us, this is no time for window dressing and business as usual. this preferencial trade provision as it -- this pr

could you talk about what success might look like in afghanistan and in pakistan? the city hoped to see progress in 18 to 24 months. >> i think it would have several components. it would be a reduction or a complete elimination of al qaeda in pakistan where they mostly are now. they would be reducing their ability to operate transnational lee or to cooperate with taliban. i think it is a return to stability in their victory against their internal insurgency. they do have a functioning government with a strong history. if they continue twith their counter insurgency campaign, it will look like that. afghanistan has much further to go. their infrastructure is fifth worst in the world. there is not much to build on physically. i think we achieved a level of security that allows each of the areas to include those currently challenged by the taliban to bring in government that might be locally based but is linked to the national government so when they think of the change they might think locally, and it may be tribal or in a village, but when it goes up the chain is re

there is no clear recognition by the pakistan is -- pakistan is. the recent offensive was an encouraging first step. also encouraging is the support afghanistan has received from other nations including members of the gulf committee. we are grateful for that, but we urge you to do more. to improve governance, economic development and security capacity, the application of more resources and improved cooperation, better integrated civil, military and diplomatic strategy and the benefit of lessons learned, both in country and in iraq present a historic a fleeting opportunity to turn the situation in afghanistan around. i hope you will help us take that opportunity. in closing, i would like to strike a note of optimism about the state of affairs in the gulf region. i think it is warranted because many of the problems in the middle east have a long history. we should also stop and recognize the elements of the overall picture that has changed, include in iraq slowly but surely fighting its way out of the darkness of the recent decade, a positive politic

flash points such as kashmir or another pakistan-based attack or as the type of military aid to pakistan. or tension on other issues. so these are major countries, each have their own national security interest and how those develop is hard to predict and could slow deepening in the national security area. there's also historical concerns about indian sovereignty versus the united states. india will not want to simply follow the united states' lead. india has to be concerned about protecting its sovereignty. and we've seen that in the slow progress in the end use monitoring agreement. i think in the end, that will get done but it reflects the historical importance of sovereignty in india. the indian defense industry has historical ties to other employers such as russia, israel and france most notably. there's a complicated budget process in india and challenging offset requirements. so those will be issues. there's also -- and i can say this as a former administrator of the u.s. export control system, there's a burdensome u.s. export control system. and while it may be less burdensome th

this is an example from pakistan. a year or two years ago we went to the leadership of pakistan and said we need your help to hold people accountable in the eradication program and get the job finished and he asked for a map showing where the problem was and somebody handed a map but it was all green and what a show was over 95 percent of children were getting vaccinated in every district of pakistan and he said i don't understand the problem so we obviously were not properly managing the program. we went back and said it doesn't count if you say you were vaccinated -- you have to have a purple martin your figure, every single campaign we mark the figures and then we look at that to see whether or not there are truly being vaccinated and a very different picture when we brought him and put in place to objective measures as to whether or not children were being vaccinated. by february of this year the prime minister announced his action plan to hold a leadership of its district accountable to reaching the children with

they'll also help to protect drug refineries that exist along the pakistan border. literally providing protectionism as many of the refineries and also taxing the output as much as $250 per kilo produced. increasingly as the years have gone on we have even seen some taliban commanders begin to run their own hair when refineries. -- heroin refineries of the local researchers who have worked with me they are increasing their involvement is very similar to what happened with the far -- farc and columbia. and also officials and the ruling council of the taliban. these donations can be to the tune of several million dollars per year from the big cartel operates from pakistan that moves the enormous amount of heroin and opium out of the region. al qaeda and other extremist groups one of the things that is so confusing when you try to explain this situation there is so many different groups operating along the border in some areas people who are involved in the drug trade are just local thugs and local criminals and in a lot of cases they are referred to as the taliban by

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

. >> can you update us on pakistan? and osama bin laden is still at large. >> obviously, we would like to see osama bin laden captioned and brought to justice. i think, as i have said before, the policy is broader than one person, one individual. general jones visited afghanistan, pakistan, and india during the course of the past week and spent time talking with the president about that issue. i think we have seen some progress. there seems to be, the event that happened in pakistan over the past couple of weeks have united many in the cause against extremism. we have a long way to go. i think the administration believes that we are making important progress. thank you. >> coming up later today admiral. timothy e. keating speaking at the atlantic council. the topics include north korea's most recent missile testing. live coverage at 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. earlier today the supreme court released its opinion in the connecticut firefighters case. it involved a promotion exam for firefighters that was rejected becaus

the war in pakistan is one we can and will win. for years, we have been fighting without a strategy, with insufficient resources, and with less than total support with the government of pakistan. now that we have a new strategy, we must follow up with an integrated joint agency, a civil military campaign planned for all of afghanistan, and for the pakistan border area. we also need to ensure that general rodriguez has the staff and resources he will need to conduct operational planning, some moral -- similar to iraq. finally, we must take every possible step to accelerate the growth of the afghan security forces. the afghan army is too small, even with the current projected strengths of 134,000, it will not be big enough to tackle the many security challenges at hand. at a minimum, we need to more than double the current size of the afghan army to 160,000 troops, and consider enlarging it to 200,000. the cost of this increase should not be borne by the u.s. alone, by the international community. i look forward to hearing general mc

but this is an example you see here from the tribal areas of pakistan bordering right on pakistan. as you can see they mapped out here along the different parts of this tribal agency. this is where fm radio reaches, where they had these taliban meetings, announcements, etc. to be able to mobilize and engage the community. so increasing at an increasingly more and more social mapping to figure out where the people are and what they will respond to. the other thing is bringing again professional management, accountability, also to what we are doing an area of communications. this is just an example of using indicators to monitor what's happening in terms of our social mobilization and back. in august, july actually we began investing heavily in terms of community immobilizes in this area of karachi. and you can see how we track over time what happens in terms of refusals. and then finally we need to develop against special strategies for very specific issues. as you can see here, not everyone thought polio eradication was an absolutely wonderful idea and they have to adapt our strat

-- by the taliban and they settled and urban parts of pakistan, and it is quite savage. there were bombs began bashar and locore when i was there, when i was there last week, and i think these are having the effect of driving home to pakistani public the seriousness of the threat coming from that part of the country insofar is solidifying his support for the operations that are taking place there. overall, i think there are new possibilities opening for pakistan-american cooperation in this common fight against the common enemy, but it is true that there is a long legacy of distrust between pakistan and the united states that we have to overcome as we have moved forward, and i think that it can be done. those i talked to were optimistic about their ability to handle the situation. they seem willing to work with the united states in ways that had not been previously possible, so i think there are signs there that point us in a positive direction. in afghanistan, it is no secret that the trends have been going in the wrong direction recently in terms of government loss of

gives us this much trouble, and imagine what we will get from for pakistan's. [laughter] . . >> i am just wondering what the involvement of the pakistani government will there be trials and to them as well? >> that is another aspect of the story that it is quite clear and i trace this in my book from the history chapter write-up to the present, it has been very clear we often talk about corruption, drug corruption in the afghan government but pakistani government in my opinion has been just as corrupt if not more so by the drug trade. and nobody more than the isi. it was very well known during the soviet resistance isa -- isi officers were profiting that continued while the taliban was in power and many people believe it still goes on today. i wish shown intelligence documents that indicate for example, the isi eight station cheese in the western city that most drugs leave through as they go through afghanistan he was paid $2 million every year just to make sure the shipments got through. that gives you the idea of the amounts of money you are talking about. it

host: the report deals with pakistan. they write that the next president should write a comprehensive policy for pakistan, 11 east terror -- eliminate terrorist activities and secure nuclear and biological materials. how does this alter this scenario there? guest: i don't think it changed at all. i think it is on boss spot on. this is a country that teeters back and forth on the edge. they also have a significant nuclear arsenal. most people say that if we are ever going to see another nucleate earth -- nuclear change it would probably be india and pakistan. host: what do we know about how safe the pakistan nuclear arsenal is? guest: pakistan tells us that is safe, that is under the control of the military. if the government were to collapse, we are not sure if they wouldn't fall into the wrong hands. the idea is not to get it into the wrong hands. caller: with regard to your comment, the previous caller alleging -- you need to educate yourself. get the dvd called killer flew. --killer flu. our country is getting ready to

prime minister of pakistan and said we need your help in holding people accountable to get the job finished. and he asked for a map showing where the problem was. it was a district map but it was all green. 95% of children were getting vaccinated in every district of pakistan. he said i don't understand a problem, supposed to do anything with this? we obviously were not properly managing the program. we went back and said it doesn't count if you say you were vaccinated. you need to have a purple mark on your finger, we marked the fingers of the children and we look at that and see whether or not they are truly being vaccinated. we brought in and put in place truly objective measures as to whether or not children were being vaccinated. by february this year, the prime minister had announced his action plan to hold of the ship of each district accountable to reaching their children with the most basic of health services, then he put in place, on the bottom you can see the polio control room, they ran a trecker across the bottom of it showing this district leader failed to vaccinate his childr

afghanistan and pakistan, obama is building enormous new embassies and other facilities on the model of the city within a city in baghdad. these are like no embassies anywhere in the world. and they are signs of an intention to be there for a long time. right now in e[giraq, something interesting is happening. obama is pressing the iraqi government not to permit the referendum that's required by the status of forces agreement. agreem forced down the throats of the bush administration which had t war aims in the face of massive iraqi resistance. washington's current objection to the referendum was explained two days ago by a "new york times" correspondent alyssa rubin. obama fears that the iraqi population might reject the provision that delays u.s. troop withdrawal to 2012.&ñ'j they might insist an immediate departure of u.s. forces. iraqi analysts in london -- [applause]o; >> the head of iraqi foundation for democracy of development in london is quite prowestern, he explained this is an election year for iraq. no one wants to appear that he's appeasing the americans, antiism is popu

pakistan. he is making a couple of other stops before he goes back to washington. i hope to get him to come down to the briefing room next week and he can debrief you himself on the current situation. we are obviously aware of the attack today. it is devastating on the one hand, but everything we have seen shows there is progress being made on the ground. the area that the talent that has to operate -- taliban has to operate is shrinking. it would appear that the tide is turning in terms of pakistan the attitudes towards the caliban -- towards the taliban. at the same time, we're obviously recognizing that the current offensive has had an impact on the pakistan population, something between two and a half million -- 2.5000003 million displaced persons -- 2.5 million and 3 million displaced persons. we're going to continue in a variety of ways to assess that and help the pakistan government in any way we can make sure that we care for these people, some of them are in camps and staying with families and family members. is a very dire situation. we're going to do wha

. >> in terms of the pakistan situation -- and here, general, he made reference to this -- would you agree that assistance to pakistan would only be affected if the pakistani government is considered by the people of pakistan as taking the fight to the insurgents because of their own needs as a nation, not because of u.s. pressure? >> yes, sir, i do. >> admiral, do you want to give a quick comment on that? >> yes, sir, i do. >> the general mcchrystal, are you familiar with the national solidarity program in afghanistan? >> yes, sir. >> do you have an opinion of its success? >> i want to learn more when i get on the ground, but from what i've seen here, it is very successful and very positive. >> relative to the question of detainees, and you make brief reference to it, general, we have a letter that we will make part of the record clarifying an answer which provided -- which you provided for the committee in advance of the hearing today. one line in your letter says that we must at all times and here to our obligation to treat detainees to many, -- adhere to our obligation to treat d

you talking about the middle east, and considering where we are in afghanistan and iraq and now pakistan where we should prioritize ourselves in the israeli-palestinian conflict, like when you think. >> a very good question. there has been a sort of orthodoxy that many different people have tried to push including some governments in the middle east, and that is this notion we have to have peace between the israelis and palestinians before we can pursue anything else. when i was at the state department i spent a lot of time working on democracy programs to bring market economics to work on the in power but of women in the mideast and often governments would say those are important things but we can't do anything until we have peace between israelis and palestinians. so i think the issue of peace is critically important. but i think we have to understand how difficult it is now that hamas controls gaza. the road maps were barely mentioned in the president's cairo speech. they have and you are the same place the israelis are asked to stop settlement building. but it says dismantle terroris