>> ros welcome to the oadcast. as presint obama meets in washington with advisors tryg to help him dede on a strategy r afghanistan, we talkith three people ver filiar withç the regio they are already already a, chief foren affairs correspondent for cbs news. >> counterinsurgency works in a untry like colombia where you have a stableovernment and the u.s. has ge in and th 've assisted the colombians in extending threach of their gornment and in training their forces. that's a classic counterinsurgency campai. infghanistan,ou try to go in have a war, install a gernment create government out of nothing, and fht a counterinsurgenccampaign and a counterterrorism campaign the same te when the truth is that you're stillt war. and that's a real problem. rose: david ignatius, "whington post" columst in whwasecently pakistan. >> the big issue here is pakistan. if things are going a little bit better in pakistan-- and my ow repoing tells me that they are certainly comparison with last aprilhen i was last there-- then i thinkthat ought to affect how we look at this. weç don't wt...whatever decion we make abouttroop vels in afghanistan, don't want to do anying that will verse the progress that's gun in pakistan. >> rose: and we conclude in an interviewaped during the united nations genal assemblyç meings with the foreign minist of paktan, mmoud qureshi. e present administration more engaging. when they ce intoffice, they accepted the fact that they did not kw all the answers. and ey had to consult people from the regio so wt the review was taking place, we were involved. i was in washington fhe coultations and for the first time it was therilateral between afghanistan, pakistan, and the u.s. i air, look athe devopments on the gund and the presidt's options for afghanistan whene continue. captioning sponsored by rose communication from our studiosn new york ci, this is charlie rose. rose: the united states is marking iteighth and deadliest year in theç ahan war. in washington, predent obama is about to make pivot decision ports they his top commander on the ground, general stanley mcchrystal, has aske for up to 40,000 more troops. othersn the administration are pushing r a mgrd limited fort directed against al qaeda. defee secretary robertates said on cnn that t united stes will not be pulling ou any time soon. >>e are not leaving afghanistan. this discussion is about nt steps forward a the president has some moments decions to make and while there maybe some short rm unceainty on the part of our allies in ter of those next stethere is should be no uncertaty in terms of ouretermination to remain in afghistan and to continu to build aelationip ofç partnership and trust wi the pakistan. that's long rm. th's a strategic objective of the united stas. >> rose: as the debate in the white house continues, we will lo at the cices fo esident for from three distinct perspectives. lara logan isç chief foreign fairs correspondent for cbs news, she has reported extensely on the war sincethe beginning. here a look at som of her rerts. >> we scrambled f cover and another camera captured this footage as sergeant story ordered his men to open fire. he kw the mine could have been denated by remote control and suspecd we were being ambushed. the soun you're hearing now a a caliber machine gun being fired from the vehicles at the front of the patrol. backup is comingrom the humvee behind us which are fing grenades launched on the vehicles.ç their ssion here for oneear is to proct this road. the only direct lk between the east a theapital kabul. >> the road is tlivelihood r everybody. it's a line that connectshe rest of afghanistan, theçblood line and opportunity for all of afghanistan to kin of develop. >> rose: partof that devepment is a planned $122 million projt to rebuild the road, pd for by u.s. taxpayers the aim was to get the taliban out in time for people to vote, but the town is still not secure. nior marine officers tolcbs news they believe the taliban is trying t launch a counterattk. >> they will assess ourtrength they will assess our posture, they will assess our security measures, d they will probe untithey have found a weaknessç >> the pol have just closed, voting has now ended and the marines ven't found a single erican this part of lmand provinceho actually voted. >> wh's up? >> they did fin curious young boys in the villagesho played alonas theçarines tried to pass on a few very american customs. but there was sense by the end of the day near a milestone in afghan histo had passe these peop by, leang this troubled part of the cntry more alienated from thr governmen than er. here, commanderame-'s fighters are abouto blow up a u.s. convoy. this mainhighway is fertil ground for thettacks. supply convs like this one don'make ithrough. seven fuel trucksorched. a massive blaze. anotheshow of talib force.ç >> rose: i'm pleasedo have lara lan here for t first time. welcome, welme, welcome. >> thank you very much. >> rose: you mention a number of things and i'll go tough them as we were watchg this. the first ece was 2003. >> that's right. >> rose:ç andt was the forgot war. that's what we called it. and we were blown up the afgh/pakistan border onhe 23rd of nomber, 2003. and the piece gs on toake e commanding general the time to task on the issueof kistan. >> rose:akistan in terms of their offering a safe haven to... yes >> yes, and i terms ofhe fact that u.s. troops wer being killed on the border by the pakistanis, e pakistanis ding the taliban andl qae even back then, but nobody wanted to talk about it publly. rose: where is at today? i mean, u were just there. well, the frustrating part is th year after year after year as it continçed to get worse you ill couldn't get anybody to talk about it untilbout the last, i would say, two years. and w people are willing to admit that kistan is a oblem but we really still have not det with it. yes, there' been progress,çhe pakistanis are doi more. but at the end ofthe day i think was summed up best by the chieff afghan inteigence who told me the taliban we ki in this country are eendable, it means nothing, because the leadership are aoss the border. and that really summe it up f becauset sho that no matter how much you pour into afghanistan, if you dot deal with pakistan, you're wasti ur time. >> rose: and do you tnk a that's doable? >> ihas to be doable. i don't think e u.s. has any choice. look at the cop qes. there's a lo of comparins with oth wars but i don't believe there'sany otherwar li this in histo where the consequences for the security of the u.s. homeland are so clear.ç go backo 1996. osama binaden is very very clear on this. al qaeda will ctinue to puue d attackthe u.s. until ty succeed. and that ]uans theyave to be defeated. the u.s. is still at war he. you can't pretd that by lling out of afghanist and chasg al qaeda somewhere else that you're somehow ing to change the dynamic of the war. the other side has a vot and they'v expressed tir vote ry clearly. their voice is loud and clear. they are at war withhe u.s. and this has to be addressed. you don't have choice. >> rose: you want to talk about a couple pieces. one, we d a piece the about the voting. you found nobody that had voted. >> not a single personand we we to village aer villa after village. >> rose: because... not because i asked ask y because they were fearful you said no, because they didt care. >> they didn't ce because the afghan goverfmd, theolution being offered tohem, th are pashtuns, they're part of afghanistan's biggest tre in the south. and, again, the u.s. is ignoring the ideological nationalistic component of t iurgency orç the war that they'reighting. the taliban behalf the pashtunsant power back. they wancontrol of their untry and that's what they're fightingor. so this nonsense abo 80% of the insurgencyare people that you pay $10o, are those the kind of people that a overrub nning u.s. combat outsts and killing eigh nine soldrs in one battle? th're not. these are traine dedicated fighters with an ideogical motive and that has be complely ignored. >> rose: suppose in your opinion the oval officand the president said "you've been there. yove been longer tn most any visor i have. tell me what my choices are. tell me what the soldis on the ground wouldike to do. ll me what the afghan people woullike me to do. ll me what thealiban would not like r me to d." >> well,ç the afghan peoe, for a start, are very divided. the bigge problem sufcient that the pashtuns don' want to share power th th other ethnic groups, the uzbeks, the tajiks they rely don't. the otrs are so sma they haveo share powe, there is no way fward for tm. so theirst thing that the u.s. has to cide is what they're going to dobout pasun natialistic aspirations. >> rose: and whatre the options the? >> wl, the oions are first addressing it. you have t face up tohe fact that the only rson the pashtuns agreed to share power in the first place was because they were dimated. i don't seethat th're ever any other rcumstances. theyave to be decimated again. this nonnse about moderate talibaand doing talks and negotiations, the truth ishose talks have been going on for years. >> rose: a the other aument is made that you can peaps at least peel offome byç buying them off. >> i don't believethat's true. i thinthe ones that you can buy off are irrelevan they areot the dving force behind t inrgency. they really don't matter the ople that mater are acro the borderinside pakisn. and at the endf the day, they have to be kill. i mean, there's jt no way around i you can't kill erybody. ofourse you can't kl everybody. that's noensical argent, but if you don't get rid of the core, tn you have no chance because the grouwill just ke generating, as 's done. >> rose: and how strong is their asceancy, the taliban? well, it's very strong because, for emple, the taliban is vy divided. in the st of the country you're talking aboutç a ha can and his son. they are a facti, if you le, of the taliban, but there more like the afghan qaeda and very clely allied to al qaeda. you ve someone up in the north. buwhat the taliban is doingç so successful is for example in kunduz where the germans are, which has been veryeaceful until last recentl, last spring mullah omar decided i'm sending shadow governo to kunduz a he sets up a shadow sta and th govern kunduz and most of the revue comes fm siphoning bribesff aidrojects, becaus no o can do an aid proje in kunduz without paying offhe taliban, it won't survive, it wille attacked and destroye and their ople will be killed. so that that's how effective taliban now s now in seading themlves and their influence around the coury. that's a real danger for the u.s. >> rose: but you are suesting and poiing t-)ç as many have-- that ey can send 100,000 troops there buts long as as the taliban has a safe haven in pakistan, it's nev going toork. >> that's ght. >> rose: even though theyay beç able to oupy aignificant amou of afghan land anduild up the popularitwith the o locale populations as well as tting the afgn security forces to become more competent. all that is necessary you can't succeed without dng that but at t same time you can do that until you're blue in the face and if you don't deal wh pastan, it means nothing. >> rose: andealing with pakistan means have athe leadersh of the taliban. mullah omar an whoever else is th him. >> that's ght. and the ibal areas c no longer ba safe haven for al qaeda and the taliban. because they're safeaven for both of them. >> rose: but thas... is that... that iat the option of the pakistani goverent. they are doingç more. ha they eliminated the corrupon or at least the mixed loyalties within the i.s.i.? >> no, absolutely not. i don't even know e paktani government has the ability t do that. beuse, you know, the diffentç factions within the i.s.i. that are allied to different faction inside the goverent and the very weak leadersp at the top of the pazny government, i mean, those are huge issues to deal with. >> do wehave a capable partner thearzai government? >> you have partner that just olen a electn. >> re: okay, but so why should we be there i support of a governmenthat just stolen a ection and is rife with corruption allegations against the predent's brother? >> well, this is exacy part of the problem. this is theproblem with havin a counterinsurgency approach in these circumstances. cause you cat extendhe reach of a government th is not seen as lei]imate. counterinsurgentsy worksn a country like colombia where you have a stable governme and the u.s. has gon in and they've assisted the colombians in extending the reach of their government and in trning their forces that's a classic counterinsurgenccampaign.ç infghanistan,ou try to go in have a w, install agovernment create government out o nothing, and fight a counterinsurgency campaign a a counterterrorism camign at the same time when the truth is that you're still at wa d that's a rl problem. but wean't turn arod now and say "oh, well the kari government's corru, why should we bthere eending u.s. bod d treasure supporting them?" well, there not thenly problem. the corrtion of that government is only part of the problem. thcorruption of the western aid syst and the wayhat internatnal aid money has been spent in afghastan is absolutely and fundamental the responbility of the internional community. and itç just as corrupt as the karzai government. so both of those things.... >>ose: billions of dollars th went to the pakistani government und musrraf. >> (laughs) well, i mean theu.s.as bought intoakistan's óáuju)qz for a very long time. and even in the fac of overwhelming evidence the contrary. we onlknow the tip of the iceberg. i mean, the u.s. had intelligence ptographs of bombaking factories on the pakistani side of the borde that were igred for years. e u.s. chose not to do anything abo them. u.s. soldiers have beenilled as a rult. u.s. soldiersre being killed now in afghastan as a result ofran's increasing involvement. >> rose: are tre any incursions into pakist? >> of course. at's black, black operations and none talks aboutt. >> rose: but they're insufficnt. >> they are insufficient, yes. >> rose: and what would it take? at would it take to what you suggested is essenti to stop the taliban >> at the.... >> rose: troop how would you have tchange the pracce by the pakistas? >> you have to have more troops inside the afghanistan. snupl how? 100,000? 200,00 >> verdifficult to give number. rose: much more than 40,000. >> i think it's quiteossible u need more than 40 ,000. general mcchrystal isn a very diffult position where he faces a lot of opposition to any more troops so he's probay settling on a number which he thinks he realistically needs to do this job. but that's not goi to make it's eason him. there'having very, very wrong happening here. all these talks abou combat outposts inemote areas that the u.s. is giving up because counterinsurncy means protecng the population. it's exactfully the remote ars where al qaedabuilt its trning camps. actfully those remote areas where 9/11 wqsç planned against the u.s. what will happen in thoseemote eas when the u.s. pull out o them and concentrates on otecting the population? exactly the same thing will happen. it is a tactical defea you e surrenring ground to yourç enemy. and that is ner done in war. it may be donthe counrinsurgency, but we're forgeting we're sll at war. >> rose: can you both protect the population an be extend y out into aariety of areas where you ha the kind of assault you had that left the death of eight marines over the weekend? >> well, you have to if you nt toin. yodon't have a choice. >> rose: butwe don't have th n power to do it in ter of number of bts on theground day to do it. >> that is corre. therare absolutelyot enough troops on thground right now andobviously there are risks associatedith increasing the mber of troops as wl. none of these are simple sotions. but at the end of the d if you just allow the talibannd al qaeda occupy vastemote areas ofç afgnistan from ere they can build bomb maki factors, they can ne the way th have done in e helmand ovince where almost every inch of some parts of that province are mined. >> rose:ut if the pakistanis are not prepared to do it, it's not going happen. >> tlrt, so there ar people.... >> rose: sour objective i to get the pakistanis to whas necessary in order to feat the taliban. and you're saying we'll take care of oural but a be othe guys a not our problems. >> there are least some elents within pakistan that rognizes that other guys ar pakisn's proble of course, theyeed their own form of islamic militanc to counter india and khmir and everything. so there's part o pakistan that doesn'want to let go of this. but, you kw, the arabs ve a sang which is this that if you keep anake in your garden, eventual it will come into your house. and the pakistas are learning that lesson. thp)e is a school of thought in the u.s. tt says that the kistanis aren't going to do it you have to do regardless. the key he is getting the tribes in the tribal areas on board. it's very difficul()sss >> rose: okay, but that's anotr very difficult challenge and how do you do that? the same way t u.s. did in the afghanistan. you go from tribe to tbe to tribend you say "if you're with us, this what wll give you. here's a suitcaseof a milli dollars.". >> rose: but y said getting money would not pu the taliban of >> no,ut that's not just about money. it's about going to teach tribal leaderne by one and sayingif you're with us, this is what we can do for you. if you're not wit us we'll kil you." >> rose: tal about the tops on the gund who have en there not one tour, not t tours, not three tours, in some casefour and going on fe. >> yes. >> ros how much are we sttching the limits of th american m and women who are fighting thear? >> it's an interesting question because in one senseou're sttching them to the absolute limits. mean, familyelationships can only hold up for so long for so maç of these young mennd men. >> rose: andhere was a story where they were suosed to be comingack and they said "no, yourxtension is six more months." >> which is very hard psyclogically,t's a great blow. but at the same time, thiss a voluntary my and i'm constantly amazedy how many of the mares and soldiers that i comeacross understand the commitment that theve made. the probleis that there so limited in what they're able to in the time that they hav d they rlly don't have for the most part the big picture to hand theye just dealing with the tiny patch of gund. but, you know,an afghan minister said to meust recentlyhen i said what is the u.s. doing wng? what do they need to fix?" and he looked ç me and said "the u.ssoldier does hi job with courage and commitmen" he said "the u.s. soldier does hijob with passion." the problem infghanistan will never come fm him. it will never ce from th grou. it comes fm the fact thaç when these sdier look over their shoulders, there nobody applauding. >> rose: the border betwe pastan and afghanist is a long and pous border. we have theapability stop that? >> no. >> rose: we don't? >> no. >> rose: w cannot stop the gog back and forth across the boer. >> no. absolutely n. it impossible. >> rose: do we have the capability to dtroy the talibain pakistan? >> of course. >> rose: and do the pakistas have t capacity todo that and the wi to do thatn their own? >>he question is the ll. it'sot the capacity, it's the will. if the paktanised that will, they could get whatever assistance they need. >> rose: they could find all the talibainç ose mountains. >> ll, they found them in the swat valley. >> rose: they did and at's the beginnin they could duplite that and continue thaand turn this thing aroundf they havehe will. if they have the ll. they absotely can. the problem isç waziristan, w