Extensive efforts to recruit from the provinces of the south. Some of these efforts are successful. As you can imagine if you put yourself as chairman in afghanistan, if you enlist as an afghan, you face Different Levels of [inaudible] the province is quiet. The taliban are not operating. Theres less threat against you and your family. Therefore despite the inferences being made, we still have challenges to recruit a member members of the Security Forces from those provinces. We purposely go and try to recruit students from the south or places [indiscernible] since the School System was not to this standard, i does not matter. Were not successful to bring them as much as we want. Do you want to talk about these issues . In terms of who revises the Afghan National army, in 2001, we had a plethora of offers. The pakistani, the indian, and the iranian fradkin to me and said it wanted to collaborate. I thought that we ought to try to devise some arrangement in which i and some limited aspects, countries could participate. Others in the administration were opposed to any iranian role. Relations between pakistan and india were at a nadir. Coins and with 9 11 and the subsequent bond process, a pakistani base terrorist group had conducted a large scale terrorist attack on the indian parliament. The countries were close to war. Very close to war. The idea that they would collaborate in some joint venture in afghanistan was more difficult to conceive then that might be now. Relations have to some degree improved. I do not think that india and pakistan between them would be able to substitute for the kind of assistance [indiscernible] for some time to come. To the extent the countrys countries could agree on some form of joint collaboration, i would not oppose it. But neither would i look to it to shoulder much of the load in the short to medium term. From rote. Front row. I write the mitchell reports and also councilmember. Fassel i wanted to ask the ambassador about his observations about cost and risk. And to do that in the context of american domestic political setting, just to say that 2014 is not just another year. It is midterms. I wonder if there is a way, if you have done this or could articulate what the risks that you talk about are, and to the extent that it is doable. Some sense of risk investment ratioso that people can get some more specificity than saying there is this relationship between risk and cost. It is to delineate what those risks might be and i in round numbers investments on our resources could be to deal with those. Longerl one is were no able to mount operations that suppress terrorist activity in pakistan or afghanistan. Employing drones and other forms of Counter Terrorist strikes. That we can do that only as long as we have a complaint government that is prepared to for that purpose it is not something we can do from aircraft carriers in the indian ocean. It is not something we will do from uzbekistan. If we do not have a government in kabul is cooperative, those kinds of activities will go way and the abilities ability to suppress groups that are prepared and would like to target the United States and American Allies around the world would be degraded. That is a risk one. The second level of risk is if you could return to a situation in which those kinds of terrorists were able to operate not clandestinely within a state which has weak capacity to suppress them but in a state that is actively collaborating and is prepared to put its facilities at their disposal. Before 9 11, al qaeda hijacked a state. They hijacked afghanistan. Afghanistan was alive. That is different from its relationship with pakistan or yemen or somalia. Where they operate essentially either in an area with no state or in a state that is hostile to them. But isnt capable of suppressing them to the degree we would like. Operating within a state that is actively compliant, obviously, considerably expands their capacity to plan and mount largescale terrorist operations as we found in september 2001. The worst of all situations is the taliban remain linked to al qaeda and they come back and govern the country. That is something the risk of that i do not put that very high. I do not put the cost of reducing that risk further very high, either. If there is as 5 but you could reduce it by spending 4 billion a year, i would argue that is worth 4 billion. Other people i would argue what did 9 11 cost us . We could lose a couple of buildings every decade. And a few thousand citizens rather than losing much larger amounts of money. They will come to a different risk calculations. I do not know if you can reduce this to x risk and a certain amount of dollars. I want to make one comment. There is this concern that a Television Type might [indiscernible] to my mind there is no such possibility. Afghanistan has changed and the investor had mentioned how the preoccupations have changed. I have not been a frequent visitor but i have seen them in the taliban days and i was last year in afghanistan. The activity that is going on, there is a resilience now. Which will not allow the taliban to return. The taliban, the country was hijacked by al qaeda. The government was completely ostracized. There was not a single government except pakistan. It was living in a time warp. Therefore, it was possible for al qaeda to be the master of taliban leadership [indiscernible] i do not think that kind of situation is able to return. Now that the world is focused on afghanistan. I would prepare to spend a few billion dollars to make sure. Thank you. I work for voice of america. Thanks for the discussion and insight. The first question is the presence of the u. S. Troops. There is a possibility that came out yesterday, how will be perceived in pakistan and youre trying to reject the taliban government. Where did you see them, on the mountains or on the streets of kabul . We do not see a better political setup in afghanistan from that side. Where do you see them, then . Thank you. The first question about how well pakistan will pakistan see the continued u. S. Presence, there is one Pakistan Government and my anticipation is there will except the agreement at the u. S. Government. This is basically a problem between these two governments. Pakistan is not a monolith. There is all kinds of spectrums in pakistan. I think also who believe the presence of foreign troops is also the sustaining argument of the militants. They must continue as long as the Foreign Forces are there. And therefore as i had said, there would be this perception that the continuation may also mean the continuation of these kinds of activities. The counter argument that these activities must stop may be weakened. These are various groups, various parties who have those kinds of views. I anticipate that the government will be accepting. The other thing is where the taliban if theyre not here . Do not say that theyre only in pakistan. In paris there has been a taliban representation. The taliban as part of the political landscape. This is basically something that should be done by the peace council. Pakistan gets involved and your will say that theres a classic but, i read it a long time ago. I off and on read it. To remind myself how intertwined is the history and culture and tradition and demographic of these countries. Sometimes our problems become your problems and your problems become our problems. Do you want to comment on that . On the question i think in the contacts that take place between the Pakistani Army and the government, the Army Position is [indiscernible] they have bigger plans and other intentions. In the private meeting that is where the position is. The smaller u. S. Presence probably will come. There might be concerned. As the ambassador indicated, there are many other forces in pakistan that may have concern about the impact of the duration of security in afghanistan which leads into [indiscernible] in pakistan. In the past in the private meetings, the idea was were not sure when the attention is focused on afghanistan and pakistan started out with themselves and help to get the americans out of here. My question is for the ambassador. It is the followup to the previous question. In your remarks, pakistan still pursues a policy of strategic [indiscernible] in afghanistan. With that in mind, you also mentioned there is some Unrealistic Expectations from afghanistan and the United States with respect to pakistans future role in reaching out to some of the taliban, especially the taliban leadership. It props up against u. S. And Afghan Forces in afghanistan. You said there are some limitations. What are those limitations . The limitation is what i had mentioned. We should not be expected to deliver the taliban leadership to a position that maybe will you may be wanting them to take. That would not be possible for us. I said that we have quite an experience of interacting with [indiscernible] and they never agreed to pakistans point of view. This applied to the leadership and the taliban themselves. When they were rolling afghanistan. To expect that pakistan should be able to make them except, for example, the renne constitution, we will not be able to do that. This will be between the harpies council and the taliban and how the taliban are dealt with. This is for iran. They are debilitated and this is the way to proceed toward reconciliation. [indiscernible] that is for the renne leadership. Pakistan should not be expected we encourage them to be part of the process. We are trying to do probably now, we should do that. The other thing he mentioned about this strategy . Depth, they have no chance of getting in a government controlling of afghanistan. In the even in the 1990s when they were strong. Now the relationship has completely changed. How can there be it does not work out and this was never a policy. We never saw them. We did not go after them. We did not count them likely how did al qaeda. Almost all the Guantanamo Bay detainees were captured in pakistan with the help of the pakistani. We treated them differently. As we mentioned, we wanted them to be part of the process in beginning. The strategy depth, it was in nonsensical idea. He did not explain it. Afterward there had been a retreat but there has never been this phrase has never been part of the policy statement ever. This has been very catchy and all that has come about, pakistan is seeking strategy dabs. How can we seek a strategy depth when the Security Threat is through india. My question relates to any joke. Apart from the regular discussion nato has on withdrawal, the new mission post 2014, there is a great deal of effort into trying to push Regional Cooperation post2014. This has proven to be rather difficult, engaging central asians and figuring out a role for russia. I was wondering from the three panelists whether you see some role for nato, some value added to push the Regional Cooperation through partnership policies. Whether that is something that would be useful. Thank you. There have been a number of summits and highlevel meetings over the last couple of years that have established a rhetorical from work and also a framework for support for conciliation. I think that is helpful. I think it is worth continuing to push in this regard. There has been some improvement in relations between india and pakistan. The border has been open to commerce in a way it was not before. These are fairly important elements. Nato is a political role is of somewhat limited importance in terms of its influence. It certainly is worth pursuing. Would pakistan sea of positive role . [indiscernible] what is the role that neda sees for itself . Is that military when we talk about nato . Is it economic . Is it political . Nato does not appear to wear so many hats. When we talk about nato, were talking about military. That has already been discussed but certainly other organizations, everyone has an important political and economic role. I think nato can also help support the iraq army to do a better job. Were in favor of that. There was one mention about india and the transit train. That will come at a certain point. There are some things if only the conflict situation gets resolved in afghanistan. Your question was on the role in northern afghanistan. This is a key important way of connecting afghanistan to the rest of the world. That is important for us to reduce dependency on other transit trials that are becoming important in afghanistan. Definitely nato countries have a more Important Role to play then nato as an organization. A lot of activity about nato activity is an organization in central asia. They do if the rules are conducted like a government of france or germany, or other allies, it is more effective. The vehicle should be different because they have influence and they can help out by connecting afghanistan to the rest of the world. When the route was to terman, the call that the no. Distribution network. My favorite term as the silk road. This is reviving its traditional role. I am with the embassy here. I have a question to the ambassador regarding Economic Development. It seems to be extremely important. Fighting [indiscernible] in afghanistan and in the region. This aspect will affect the economic transition for and development and the eventual successful outcome. Could you talk about what is the current state of affairs as far as what tools are being employed and how do you see this as being successfully battled for the future Economic Development in afghanistan . Thank you. The interment of the environment of the narcotrafficker forces in uncertainty. When they raise an orchard or vineyard and turns it into a poppy field when he is not sure what is learned happened to him or his family, they turn to narcotics. It takes three months to grow it. It does not need refrigeration or economic integration, nothing. If we see an increased degree of uncertainty, we would probably see more poppy cultivation. It would be listed economic activities. Illicit economic activities. The leadership [indiscernible] in the areas where the economy is thriving, we have seen a reduction of narcotics and cultivation of the poppy. In areas where we see most of the fighting, that is where most of the poppies are grown. Let me close with a final question. Jim used a number of statistics. One that struck me is i have the right to a 52 of the afghan population thought the country is going on in the right direction. My question to each of you, what is your view . Is the country going in the right direction and are you optimistic or pessimistic as we look forward for the next two years and after 2014 . If you do not know where you are going, any road will take you there. The country is going in the right direction compared to where we started certainly. People feel more confident about the way their life is conducted. Also as i mentioned, there has to be a bit of a relation [indiscernible] in the region. I also agree and the statistics were new to me. It is heartening that 52 of people in afghanistan feel the country is going in the right direction. I do not know the figures for pakistan. One other thing. Some of the preoccupations in terms of thinking and concerns which the investor mentioned, what is the future of the country . Where does it stand with the International Community . These are common questions which are asked in any other normal society especially in the region. This is a very positive sign. The situation may be floated, there are definite positive signs and i experienced them when i visited last year. It was a different afghanistan that i visited five or six years ago. Most of the trend lines are positive. The ones that you can detect using empirical data. Im not sure that the trend lines of american policy are quite so positive. There is an interaction between the two. To end with a few other statistics, the situation has changed since 2001. Today 4 5 of afghan households have [indiscernible] threelf have tvs and quarters of afghan households have telephones. The statistics, for radius they may have been fairly high. For tvs and telephones they would have been zero. There connected with each other and with the rest of the world in ways that are completely different from where they were 10 years ago. On balance that is positive. M. E. Thank the panel, each of whom has been positive in terms of a thoughtful and useful presentation. We appreciate it. Thank you for coming and were concluded. Thank you very much. [applause] afghanistan President Hamid karzai is in washington beginning today for meetings at the pentagon, the state department, on capitol hill, and at the white house. A joint News Conference is likely. On friday he will be speaking at Georgetown University about u. S. Afghan relations. We will have coverage of his comments at 5 03 p. M. Eastern. In washington, hilda solis resigned say she plans to return to california. She is expected to run for a seat on the Los Angeles County board of supervisors. The president put out a statement saying over the last four years, she has been a critical member of my Economic Team and we have work to recover from the worst economic downturn since the great depression. Part of the statement from president obama on the resignation of hilda solis as labor secretary. We have been covering a number of state of the state addresses. Another one this evening, virginia gov. Bob mcdonnell and his state of the commonwealth address. He announced a plan that would provide 3. 10 billion in transportation funding, replacing the state gasoline tax with a sales tax increase. That is live in an houranda half. Tonight, the 100th birthday Anniversary Gala taking place in washington for former president richard nixon. We will hear remarks from his daughters as well as former Nixon Administration secretary of state, henry kissinger. That will be live tonight at 8 30 p. M. Eastern and over and cspan2. Next, todays White House Briefing with chick party who talked about the debt ceiling. He did not confirm news repo