the people do not want to go back to a taliban environment. they were on the fence for a while because they were not sure how this would turn out. but as local governance continues to gain traction, as economic opportunity becomes more widespread throughout afghanistan, what you find is the people, the people who might have accepted the taliban at some point in the past, see that there now is a future that could be different than the taliban darkness, a future that could be in fact an afghanistan that is aligned with the west, an afghanistan that is aligned with the united states. and they see the improvement in the quality of their lives. >> rose: general allen for the hour next. he is in washington for meetings at the pentagon and congressional testimony. allen was questioned about the current u.s. mission in afghanistan and the impending draw-down in testimony before congress. >> the campaign has been long will no longer be terrorized by the taliban. second, as a coalition, the largest in recent history, we are well along in our progress to

>> the taliban... the united states worked with the taliban in the 1990s. we invited the taliban to use on the, unocal did. this began as a war against al qaeda. this has morphed into a war against the taliban. i do think we can work with the taliban and the big elephant here-- this is a cliche-- in the room is that the pakistanis did not create haqqani and omar and themselves, we were an integral part of that and every afghan on the ground knows very well we were a part of that. >> rose: so they're motivated to produce them? >> pakistan? >> rose: yes. >> of course. >> rose: if informs in fact the united states said we're going to reduce... they'll ask you this. the united states is going to dramatically reduce its aid both military and economic aid to pakistan. would the pakistanis then do all these things we would like for them to do having to do with conflict in afghanistan or not? >> no, because in my view their ultimate goal is to control... pakistan's ultimate goal is to control afghanistan. >> rose: or have somebody they think is favorable to them. >

that's an important move. >> have you seen any change in the isi relationship with the taliban -- in the haqqani network? >> i have not sir. >> general, as you know, the american people are war weary. public opinion polls show that most americans want out of afghanistan and an end to this decade-long conflict, more than a decade. and more than 1,000 lives. if you had a chance to speak to the american people about what's at stake here and your view of this conflict, what would you say to them? >> first thing i would do is to thank them for their incredible support to the men and women and to the campaign and to our services who have come together in afghanistan to accomplish the mission which is to deny al qaeda safe havens and to deny al qaeda the opportunity or taliban, the opportunity to overthrow the government of afghanistan. i would thank them for that. that's the first thing i would say. i would say to them that the investment in this campaign by the united states and its 49 coalition partners has been to shape that insjtcy and build an afghan security force capability which cou

and the darkness of the taliban for the ten years plus of this conflict. and i have gotten to know the mall quite well. so from those experiences i can tell you unequivocally three things. first we remain on track to ensure that afghanistan will no longer be a safe haven for al qaeda and will no longer be terrorized by the taliban. second as the coalition the largest in recent history, we are well along in our progress to meet our 2010 lisbon summit commitments to transition security to the afghan national security forces by december of 2014. and third our troops know the difference they are making every day and the enemy feels that difference every day. to be sure, last couple months have been trying. in the wake of the revelations that american troops have mishandled religious texts to include the core and protests, some of them violent, occurred in several but only a few of the regions across afghanistan. 32 afghans lost their lives in these riots and even more were hurt. just since the first of january the coalition has lost 61 brave troops in action f

we have pushed the taliban back particularly in the south. those of us who traveled there can tangibly see the improvements, villages we're able to walk through that were major combat zones a few months before, is evidence of the hard work and progress being made. perhaps as important as the security gains, you are seeing on the district and the provinciale level significant improvement in governance. one of the things i was impressed with last time i was there, i saw a great deal more u.s. aid, state department, people on the judiciary side. the base exes building blocks of governoran governor erns put in place. we've made enormous progress towards giving the afghan government and people the chance to have a stable and lasting government. now, progress should not be -- should not underestimate the challenge that remains. afghanistan is a very difficult country. it's very poor. its economy is very difficult. they have a history of well over 30 years of civil war and the insurgent groups are still present. we can't imagine we're ever going to

denying the taliban the ability to overthrow the government. can you update us in terms of what you are seeing now to plug that hole? >> it continues to be a threat to the campaign. as you know, it's the nature of the taliban in those safe havens differs, varies according to where they are geographically. i believe in the south the southern taliban elements have been successfully -- their momentum has thwarted by the forces of the ansf. it is in the east where i spend a great deal of my time focusing on the network. and on the taliban pakistan and other taliban elements, the commander group. i spend a lot of my time dealing with that. as i said before, with respect to the numbers associated with the ansf, in the end, it's less of function or factor of what the numbers will be of the ansf. it will be their posture over the long term. if we don't see some political outcome from reconciliation, which can have the effect of effectiveness and safe havns, if we don't see pakistani action to address the safe havens, we are going to have to thicken the

. >> the taliban suspends talks with the u.s. as anti-american sentiment harbors in afghanistan after the murder of 15 civilians. the soldier's client is not -- to align the lawyer of -- the lawyer for the soldiers said they did not expect him to be charged for several weeks. >> there is an attack near a base in southern france. >> broadcasting to america on pbs and around the world, this is "newsday." >> the nato's military mission in afghanistan has suffered two setbacks. the taliban is suspending peace talks with the americans almost before they started. the object to the involvement of hamid karzai's government. hamid karzai has called on nato forces to end patrols in villages after the killing of 15 civilians by an american soldier last weekend. apparently there will be no change in strategy. >> it all began here, almost 7,000 miles from afghanistan. a place where once a twin towers stood. now, a memorial to the 2983 who died on a single day. david and some at the camera and remember 9/11. she was in new york, he was in lond

the taliban is suspending peace talks with the americans almost before they started. the group objects to the involvement of hamid karzai's government. and president karzai has called on forces to end patrols in afghan villages. that's because of the killing of 16 villagers. but there will be no change in strategy. >> it all began here. almost 7,000 miles from afghanistan, a place where once twin towers stood. now a memorial to the 2,983 who died on a single day. david and samantha cameron remember 9/11. she was in new york. he, in london. for hours he had no idea whether she was save. katherine wolf was not. her death and all the others remembered today triggered a war a decade old and not yet over. >> do you understand why some people seeing you here may say so much has been sacrificed apparently for so little. of course, we made big sacrifices and britain in particular losing over 400 of our soldiers. it is worth remembering why we're there. and it is the right place to remember, including 67 british nationals died right here on 9/11. that terrorism was coming stra

strike eye deal with the taliban, karachi port is the main port of exit for u.s. containers and et cetera. pakistan needs a relationship with the u.s. the last five months, we've had no relationship, and all the indicators have swung down-- aid flows have stopped. development aid has stopped. nobody will talk to us because nobody-- everybody wants us to have a relationship with the united states. so i hope now it will get back on track. >> jon: you said something very interesting-- we desperately need pakistan not just for the strategic implications because the leadership of the taliban live in pakistan. and that's the thing for americans i think we go, "wait, say that again? what?" after reading the book it became clear. there are two talibans-- an afghan taliban and a pakistani taliban. the pakistanis are cooperating with the afghan taliban but not their own taliban. is that correct? >> the pakistani-- after 9/11, after the we're ended, most of the taliban who survived the american invasion escaped into pakistan and set up shop there and then relaunched their at

and the taliban let alone the karzai government and the taliban so if we were able to somehow patch this back up and get the taliban involved again and get karzai government involved and i'm sure that there's a lot of people in the state department working on that right now my conservative warhawks here in the united states are lower if you go she is just as easily and then go on to argue particular as we go into november that the president's making deals with terrorists. it certainly is possible but i think in terms of the shifting political winds in the united states we're seeing conservatives and republicans starting to call for a withdrawal as well you know newt gingrich was making sounds earlier this week about that we aren't going to fix afghanistan rick santorum has made similar comments recent polling done earlier this week was showing that for the very first time republicans are evenly split on whether the war in afghanistan has actually been worth both the financial and human costs so although it's assumed that this is a bit of a partisan issue i think what we're seeing now is

>> they have operated primarily or worked with the taliban elements in the west. that is the only area in which we have seen the presence of support to the taliban. our sense is that iran could do more, if they chose to, but they have not. we watch the activity and the relationships very closely. there's an ancient relationship between the persian people of iran and the afghan people. in fact, today is the beginning of the persian new year. there is real potential common ground between our objectives and iranian objectives with respect to counternarcotics, arms, smuggling, human trafficking. there are a large number of afghan refugees in iran. interest the there is the potential to cooperate in iran, or afghanistan, excuse me. i know they have a long relationship. it's a national relationship that president karzai pointed to on a number of occasions that could benefit afghanistan over the long term. the troubling part right now is the fact there is some assistance that is going to the taliban from iran and we seek to check that. >> again, i appreciate both your se

it also give the taliban a strong propaganda argument that government is a prop for a foreign-occupying force and that, too, will fuel the insurgency. we have to balance that out. also we have to understand having well over 130,000 foreign troops in a country does cause destabilizing effects. imagine in your own community if ever day you had foreign troops rolling down the streets as if they own the place. we need to get to the point to turning this over to the afghan people as soon as we responsibly can and the progress we made gives us the opportunity to do that. to say we're going to stay forever if something goes wrong undermines that very plan. it is my hope, general allen, dr. miller, you will lay out how we are making progress and as we go forward, how we are going to make that responsible transition that everybody in this room wants. we want our troops home. we want the afghan people back in charge of their own security, their own government. that's where we want to get. the path is not easy but one we must go down. i commend both of you for the progress that we've made. i look

seek reconciliation with the taliban. of that action on the part of the administration is to offer up five bit mode detainees who are taliban and who have been -- gitmo detainees who are members of the taliban to show that the united states is serious about negotiations regarding reconciliation. personally, i am 0 offended by any negotiations with terrorist -- offended by any negotiations with terrorists who are killing our men and women. conversations about releasing five of the meanest man in the world and to have them house in a country where our experience has not been good. they are retaining the individuals that have been previously released to them. i understand the negotiations now have moved to the -- -- to the department of defense from the state department. comment made by secretary of defense panetta yesterday noted that these transfers were on hold. the administration does not have confidence that the government will be able to live up to -- qatar government will not be able to live up to the conditions we ar

and the afghan local police deny the human terrain to the taliban. we're only about halfway through in the fielding of the force. we're at about 12,000 now. the force will grow to an envisioned strength of 30,000. and once we reach that point, then we'll need to make some hard decisions about whether we retain that force, continue it in its existence, or even expand that force. we would do that obviously with the afghans in the lead on that decisionmaki decisionmaking. >> all right. time has expired, but two final comments. power of this concept i think is very significant. it works within the tribal structure in afghanistan. it's not compared in a sense to the sunni awakening in iraq, but there are elements of this that engage the local population and fit, again, a tribal world view. so count me in as somebody who wants to support this going forward. >> thank you, sir. >> secondly, again, i just want to underline the need for post-2014 contingency planning to we don't see ourself involved in a long irregular war in the next decade. we'll have a conti

was this child the taliban? believe me i have not seen a two-year-old taliban yet. >> suarez: afghan officials said the soldier left a nato base in canned half late saturday and walked more than a mile to the village. they said he burst into three homes shooting as he went. according to villagers, the man then gathered up some of the bodies and set fire to them. then he walked another mile to another village, killing four more afghans before returning to the base where he surrendered and remains in custody. he was identified as a 38-year-old staff sergeant from joint base lewis mccord in washington state who had served three tours in iraq. his name was withheld until charges are filed. meanwhile u.s. officials condemn the attack. at the u.n. today secretary of state hillary clinton called the shootings inexplicable. >> a full investigation is underway. a suspect is in custody, and we will hold anyone found responsible fully accountable. this terrible incident does not change our steadfast dedication to protectin

the taliban said that the u.s. had introduced unacceptable demands contradicting an earlier agreement. the peace talks will remain on hold until the u.s. makes its position clear and shows a willingness to fulfill its promises. it did not provide further details of the talks. the taliban demanded the release of five of their fighters from guantanamo bay. they say the u.s. demand they be transferred to cutter under surveillance. the americans demanded that the taliban cut off all ties with al qaeda and end its armed struggle. >>> that wraps up this edition of "news line." due stay with us. >>> hello. i'm with nhk world tv. our choices of the week begin with a documentary examining the great east japan earthquake. many smaller businesses were damaged on march 11th. for 200 days we followed a team that continued to lend money to support the recovery of a local fishing village despite their bad depth. next is a program on cambodia and efforts to become an august churl company. under the rice policy campaign, cambodia i

>> i agree with that, sir. >> and pakistan needs to quit betting on the taliban because they are losers? >> it will stabilize afghanistan, which is good for pakistan. >> tell me how the people of afghanistan view the taliban as a whole? do they miss them? >> there is no love lost there, sir. >> they hate them. don't they? >> they considered that period what they called the darkness. >> what is the feeling on the ground in afghanistan of the 85% of the people who want to live free of the taliban about what we play or may not do? how do they feel right now? >> i think they, they're deeply concerned that we may not conclude a strategic partnership agreement. >> i am telling everybody in this committee that if we get this right, not only will they feel better but i will feel better and we will win this thing. killing bin laden. congratulations to the administration and to our military. did the killing of bin laden affect the taliban much at all? >> i believe it affected al qaeda at a network. the taliban have not register registered -- there's no registry of this. >> to those who believe yo

alliance and the taliban, what are the odds of the northern alliance to defeat the taliban and what kindo-government with the no. -- what kind of government with the no. alliance put together. the leader of the northern alliance was assassinated 10 years ago just as the war was picking up. host: could you take a step back and explain what is the taliban? guest: the taliban -- talib means a student or seeker. taliban is the plural. they are anyone who attends a across the college is arabic for school. many religious school in our case. that is in many cases. they became in 1994 when afghanistan, as a result of the 1980's wore between the mujahedin and the soviet union, after the united states and soviet union pulled back its support, chaos ruled in afghanistan. out of which, former members of the mujahedin in the southern part of the country, trying to eradicate the violence, chaos and anarchy began to try to clear the roads and formed a group to bring peace and at some point, this is disputed by great many people, but it is clear that pakistan came in and began to back the taliban and it

if the taliban can operate with impunity in and out of pakistan. eally provides, you know, a weakness in terms of accomplishing the goal of denying the taliban and the ability to overthrow the afghan government. i was wondering if you could update us in terms of what you are seeing right now in terms of trying to plug that hole. >> it continues to be a threat to the campaign. as you know, the nature of the taliban and those safe havens dippers varies according to where they are geographically. i believe in the south the southern taliban elements have been successfully -- their momentum has been successfully thwarted by forces and forces of the ansi. it is in the east where i spent a great deal of my time focusing on the hook on a network and onto the taliban elements, the commander of the air group. the constant network in the north. i spent a lot of my time dealing with that. as i said before, with respect to the numbers associated of the ansi, i think it is less of a function or then it will be their posture over the long-term >> if we don't see p

as a result of the surge launched in 2009, we have broken and reversed the taliban's momentum. and the afghan national security forces are increasingly capable and increasingly in the lead. mr. chairman, our forces are performing extremely well as i saw first-hand in a trip to afghanistan that i took two weeks ago. we are well into a process of transition to ansf leadership as we agreed at the 2010 summit. in fact, today almost 50% of afghans live in areas that have begun the transition process to ansf lead. as you noted as an interim milestone at some point in 2013 the ansf will be in the lead for providing security across afghanistan. u.s. and sports in a support role which will take a number of forms including u.s. and coalition forces partnered with afghan units as is already occurring in a number of places today, and it will also include for example the smaller foot print in a trained advise and assist role. by the end of 2014 the ansf will be responsible for the security of their country. by that time u.s. and coalition forces will have moved to a much smaller presence foc

bust the taliban suspends peace talks with the u.s. and president karzai says he wants nato out of all the religious after an american soldier and run down sixteen civilians in cold blood from washington and london maintain they'll hand over security responsibility to afghan forces next year before coalition troops pull out in two thousand and fourteen. up next al gore speaks to the russian president's special envoy to afghanistan in a week when nato campaign appears to have faltered even further. oh yeah walk them through spotlight the infant shell colony arts and i'll do an hour of day for the program is said near kabul. the nato forces in afghanistan seem to have a loose straight through koran burning incident at a u.s. service calls a proudest massacre killing at least thirty this week to troops out he said alert after a u.s. soldier sixteen afghan civilians the diplomats are on alert to try to calm down the international scandal it is evident that the coalition is getting less and less popular among the algos but doesn't necessari

a violent retaliation could be coming from the taliban. that is the opinion of dutch ruppersberger. kim dacey joins us with his reaction to the violence. >> the shooting of those 16 people in afghanistan could translate into the deaths of american troops. he said he is not surprised that the taliban is using the shooting spree as a call to seek vengeance on americans. ruppersberger believes that instead of striking stateside, terrorists will target members of the u.s. military serving in afghanistan, just as we saw last month after american servicemen accidentally burned copies of the koran. after the shooting spree by a lone american soldier, anti- american outrage is building in afghanistan, and ruppersberger is fearful that other american soldiers may pay for the actions of a disturbed comrade. >> this really will set us back, because this is the taliban and people don't like us saying, that is what americans are for. they kill women and children. >> congressman ruppersberger doesn't think the taliban will single out targets here in the states as a result of the shooting spree. h

at one point robert-out with the taliban and was a neighbor of osama bin laden and all their of "the world's most dangerous places," and now this police is more dangerous. >>guest: we are on the back foot now because although there are over a quarter million foreigners it only takes when misdeed. >>shepard: a man who served three tours in iraq and now a tour in afghanistan and you wonder. >>guest: well, i cannot apologize or understand why someone would do that but troops have been away from their families for a very long time and we have had severe instances of ptsd, people snap and they go out and this gentleman turned himself in peacefully after he realized what he had done. >>shepard: it almost feels like for the vast majority of americans this is a war that exists in the shadows and it is not part of headlines very often until something like this happens but for 100,000 folks and their families it is real and i am guessing there are enormous concerns now. >>guest: we use the word "war," but there is not a lot of glamour the guys are there for an entire year and they are setting

broke off the talks. >> there were other things that work and i think the taliban have taken a mature attitude because they could have broken off the talks on any one of these incidents that happened. they condemned the incident bus didn't break off the talks. i think what they're complaining about are the delay of promises made by the americans. in the first confidence-building measure which was due three or four months ago and is eecte to be a prisoner exchange in a way and that has been delayed and unless we get over this hurdle it's going to be difficult to get real talks going between the two sides, especially on winding down the violence and the military attacks they launch on each other. what we want is to get over this prisoner exchange issue quickly so that talks can start and the taliban can offer a reduction in some kind of violce like suicide bombing or i.e.d.s, and the americans in turn can offer some kind of reduction also in the attacks. >> suarez: in the book you take us inside the negotiations begun in germany with go-betweens, safe passage for taliban fighters to get

the taliban continues to hedge their bets. all they hear about is withdrawals and the pace of withdrawal. they know what is on the front page of the "new york times" which says the debate within the administration about the pace of the drawdown. not achieving goals and then drawing down, but how rapidly we can draw down. so, i am also interested in the fact that you cannot make a decision on force levels in the year 2013 until the end of the year 2012? is that what you're telling us? >> i am telling you that after withdrawing 23,000 troops, after moving through after conducting operations during the fighting season, in the aftermath of that, i need to be able to evaluate whether that force structure at 68,050 thousand forces will be the kinds of combinations plus the progress that has been made in combination to handle what i think will be the operational environment of 2013. >> you have no opinion at the end of march 2012 as to what our military presence would be in 2013? >> what my opinion at this particular juncture -- >> wh