tv Capital News Today CSPAN November 10, 2010 11:00pm-2:00am EST
>> the question was, to what extent is there direct disruption and to what extent public financing will help with that and small donors and the ability to support small candidates were not part of a large donor system. do you want to try that? >> sure. one of the big fights that we will have immediately this year is preserving the office of congressional ethics, which is the only independent watchdog that we have on the hill, and clearly any time you see the amount of money spent on elections that we saw this time, the opportunities for correction are ripe. who knows what k street and
others are going to want to call in for the spending, and it is important to have an independent watchdog look into that. just on public financing, the fair elections act, i think if we want the government to be accountable to the people, then the fund needs to come from the people in from the voters. that is the only way that you get rid of that conflict of interests. i>> other questions in the back? >> i am wondering what the panel thinks realistically [inaudible] being passed between now and the 2012 election? and second, with the chipping away of campaign finance laws, how much effect does this have? >> the realistic prospect for
disclosure laws before 2012 and what impact they could have. >> i am all for disclosure law, but i don't think that is the answer to the question because the folks out there are not paying that close attention, frankly, and i think the answer is, as i said earlier in my remarks, is public financing. i think disclosure is good, and i support it, but i don't think it comes anywhere near close to what we need. >> you think it will happen? >> our best shot at it is clearly in the lame-duck. we have majorities in both chambers that supported it before. we did not win it because of the filibuster by the republicans. we have the incoming senator from illinois who will be seated this fall who supports disclosure. i have sat in the past with senator olympia snowe and talked
about these issues and she has been a strong proponent of campaign finance reform and the past and feels that the system has gotten out of control. i think our best prospect would be for a stripped-down version of this disclosure bill to pass before the end of this year. i have not done the math on the prpects for next year. but it is challenging. >> ok, in the back. >> [inaudible] >> the question was the impact on state disclosure laws and court cases about citizens
united being applied at the state level for disclosure in water the prospects there -- and what are the prospects there. >> i think it will have a positive effect. the last question before this, i n't think the lame duck session is going to do a darn thing. i think the last about a week, and i will tell you why. because the democrats have had, as the president said, a shellacking. they are uneasy about who they are and so forth, and you'll like it anything positive out of it. it -- and you will not get anything positive out of it. >> citizens united not only over turned out the law but spending in 24 states.
others have had a very concerted long-term plan to dismantle our campaign finance laws and have set their sights on disclosure. bob has filed suits in probably 10-plus states, challenging disclosure laws. he has not gotten much traction on that yet, and i think of any of the areas, this is where we have the most support on the current supreme court. so what will be a big fight and will be a big fight to improve the disclosure laws in the states to keep pace with the new realities of spending. >> yes, and the front? >> [inaudible]
question is, what about the president? doesn't he have a role to do some corrective action? >> the question was what role does the press play in combating the misinformation that may be out there? >> there has been the health care reform legislation, in particular, incredibly complex, and there is a lot of effort on the part of the media to distill it for people, but there have also been efforts by groups like factcheck.org that have tried to do very factual, hard- hitting, truth telling to a lot of the misinformation about health care reform or about financial reform or the stimulus or the bat out, but --
or the bailout, to inform the voters. when an organization is outright lying. there have been a number of efforts. i don't know if it has risen to a level of notice of the voters, particularly in the din of information about the races by these groups. >> last question. >> i was wondering if you thought there would be in the interest in the next congress to focus on the appropriations process? it has something that has been discussed and it picks up on some of the concerns of the conservatives who have been swept into office and who have talked about trying to control earmarks. there is a story recently about group contributions.
>> is there any likelihood of reform on earmark legislation in the next congress? >> i think there will be. the new speaker of the house has been there i don't know how many years, 20, 22 years, and he has never gotten an earmark as i understand it and he is adamantly opposed to them. i think whether it will be legislation passed or what not, i think this will be part of it. i think in the senate, jim dement it was having a bay got row in south carolina about getting an earmark for the port of charleston, whether i agree with him or not, he is consistent. i think you will see quite a decrease in earmarks. >> ok, thank you.
unfortunately, we have reached the end of our time. please join me in thanking our panel. [applause] thank you all for joining us for the conversation, and thank you to common cause for putting this event on. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> up next on c-span, the department of health and human services introduces new initiatives to reduce tobacco use. secretary of state clinton announces a new aid package for the palestinian authority. and. as musharraf discusses foreign policy. >> in one of his first live td
but appearances since the publication, george w. bush on his memoirs, and he discusses the critical decisions of his administration and his personal life, live from miami dade college sunday on c-span2. >> in an ideal world, the fact there were people shorting the mortgage market may have signaled everybody, wow, there must be smart investors who think this will crash and burn, but the method was opaque enough that he could not see it the way that you can see it in the stock market. and because of the way these instruments were, you not betting on a real mortgages but on the casino version on a mortgage. >> in 2003, bethany mclean bethany mcleanenron. this week she talks about the current financial crisis in her new book, sunday night at 8:00
eastern. >> today, the health and human services department presented designs for new warnings on cigarette packs. these new designs are required by federal law passed last year. hhs secretary kathleen sebelius and head of the food and drug administration spoke at this event at george washington university. this is 50 minutes. >> good morning, everybody. i want to start by thanking the president and the dean for inviting us here today to george washington. so pleased to be joined by two of our department's. health leaders, my assistant secretary of health, dr. howard koh and are fda commissioner,
dr. peggy hamburg, to announce new steps that we're taking against tobacco use. for years, we have watched tobacco rates fall in the country. in 1965, we were at a situation where over 42% of americans smoked. by 2004, the good news is it had fallen to just under 21%, fairly significant drop. the bad news is that in recent years, the spike to well-known health rests, youth and adult smoking rates have been flat. they had been dropping for decades and have stalled at about 20%. every day in america, about 4000 kids under the age of 18 try their first cigarette. about 1000 of those americans become lifetime smokers.
we have just under 450,000 americans who die every year prematurely from smoking and secondhand smoke exposure, making it our country's leading cause of preventable death. it also costs the health-care system almost $100 billion per year. so we lose lives, we lose money, and we are not making any progress. when this administration took office, we decided these numbers were not changing, so our actions had to change. over the last two years, with accelerated our efforts to reduce tobacco use, taking a coordinated approach that uses the many tools available to help tobacco users stop and keep others from starting. the first that was historic legislation enacted last june. for the first time ever, the law gave the fda the power to regulate tobacco products. the law includes a number of
vital provisions, but some of the most important prohibit marketing practices aimed at children. tobacco companies have actually been pretty clever of finding ways to market their products to use, giving out free samples and advertising in youth oriented magazines, sponsoring various productions that are aimed at younger americans. under the new tobacco control law, we're bringing those practices to an end. we have banned misleading terms like "light," "low," and "mild." as part of the tobacco act in 2009, we're funding some of the most promising state and local programs around the country for reducing tobacco use. altogether, we are investing about $225 million in programs
like and i a while when they're using evidence-based -- like in iowa, where they are using evident-based programs. eventually, these communities in places around the country will become models for what really works, and we will use them to promote best practices in and around the country. the third step was part of the affordable care act, which produces a new opportunity to transform our nation addresses tobacco use through a new $15 billion prevention and public health fund. it that law is also giving americans and private and public health plans access to recommended preventive care is, like tobacco use cessation, at no additional cost. for the first time, medicare will actually cover tobacco cessation for all beneficiaries. previously, medicare
beneficiaries actually had to demonstrate that they had one disease in order to -- they had to demonstrate they had one disease in order to be able to get the cessation efforts. we think it is smarter to help people before they get the disease. that is part of the medicare beneficiary package. using this approach, we are using many tools at our disposal, for me dilatory power to state and local investments to -- from regulatory power to state and local investments. today, we're very excited to announce new initiatives that help bring us all the strategies together and achieve our tobacco control goals. we are unveiling the department's first ever comprehensive tobacco control strategic action plan, entitled and in tobacco epidemic. you'll hear more about that in a few minutes from our wonderful assistant secretary of health,
dr. howard koh. it lays out strategic actions based on science and world experience that served as road maps for reaching are healthy people target of reducing adult smoking to 12% by 2020. this follows the administration's goals of coordinated and commit it response to tobacco control. to that end, along with dr. koh, we will hear from our fda commissioner, dr. peggy hamburg. today the fda is announcing a proposed rule to drastically change the look and a message on a pack of cigarettes. the new graphic warning labels will replace the old warning phase with a picture showing the negative consequences of smoking. you will see some examples from dr. hamburg, but this rule becomes final, we want to make sure that every person who picks up a pack of cigarettes is going
to know exactly what the risk is they are taking. because of the progress we have made in the last two years and the strategic action plan we are unveiling today, i am here today with a renewed sense of hope and momentum. going forward, our department has charted a clear path to ending tobacco use in our country. we have a long way to go, but we will not rest until we have eliminated tobacco-related disease and suffering. the prosperity and health of our country depends on it. now i would like to turn over the microphone to the assistant secretary of health, who has been a terrific leader h hhs to coordinate our efforts on tobacco control, dr. howard koh. [applause]
>> thank you so much, madame secretary, for your leadership on so many fronts. it is a great honor to be here today. we are truly at an unprecedented time and our nation's public health history. while the country has made great progress in reducing tobacco dependence, this devastating challenge remains far from solved. tobacco use remains the leading cause of premature and preventable death in our society. worldwide, the tobacco academic -- the tobacco epidemic is protected to kill 1 billion people in the 21st century. in the united states, smoking causes almost half a million deaths per year, over 1000 people per day over 8 million in the united states suffer from chronic illness related to smoking.
and at long cancer should be an uncommon disease in this country -- and lung cancer should be uncommon disease in this country, but it is tragically the nation's leading cause of cancer deaths among men and women. this is all preventable. for too long, the nation has had to suffer preventable suffering caused by this epidemic. for too long, the nation has been forced to tolerate the intolerable and accept the unacceptable. we have the evidence and the science to end the tobacco epidemic. we know what works. we know that the more states spend on comprehensive tobacco control programs and the longer they invest, the larger the impact. we know that most smokers want to quit and that cessation programs can help.
we know that aggressive media campaigns to prevent initiation, improved cessation, to change the social norm. we know that comprehensive smoke-free policies reduce exposure to secondhand smoke and improve health, reducing heart attacks, improving long health. and we know that every 10% increase in tobacco price decreases consumption by about 4%, and this has an even greater effect among the youth, low income, and other price sensitive populations. but it will take more than knowledge to end at the tobacco epidemic. it will take renewed commitment from every sector of society to move us forward a vision of a nation free from tobacco-related suffering and illness. in this context, early in her
tenure, the secretary identified tobacco control as one of her strategic priorities and charge the department with creating a plan for moving forward. it has been a great privilege as the assistance occurred of health to chair the working group that created this plan, and i want to take this opportunity today to recognize the substantial and unprecedented commitment of public health experts from across the department who have stepped forward to help create this for a more. i am very pleased that this document represents the first ever comprehensive strategic action plan for tobacco control for the department. it will align our efforts both internally and also externally with partners from around the country to achieve our helping people objective of reducin the adult smoking rate, currently around 20%, to 12% by 2020.
there are four pillars to the plan. the first is to engage the public to change social norms around tobacco use. this action is sorely needed because the major u.s. cigarette manufacturers spend approximately $12.5 billion per year, more than $34 million every day, to attract new users, retain current users, increased consumption, and in general generate physical attitudes toward smoking and tobacco use. to counter this, the department haalready begun investing in media efforts to support state and local tobacco control, and these will lay the groundwork for future mass media campaig. in addition, the fda has started to conduct public education efforts to discourage public perception that any tobacco product is safe, and you'll be
hearing more about such efforts from commissioner hamburg in just a couple of minutes. the second pillar is to improve the public health by supporting states and communities in the implementation of evidence- based tobacco control and prevention. in the past 18 months, through the recovery act, and the affordable care act funding, the department has invested nearly $250 million to support proven tobacco control activities in states and communities. these are essential one states have had to make severe cutbacks to their programs -- when states have had to make severe cutbacks to their programs. the goal is to expand comprehensive cessation activities to make it as easy to quit as it is to purchase a pack of cigarettes. most smokers want to quit and can call 1-800-quit-now to get the assistance they need and
deserve. another goal is to prevent such enhancement for americans in collaboration with state and community efforts, and in that regard we recognize the people of south dakota for overwhelmingly approving a comprehensive statewide smoke- free law, which takes effect today. the third pillar is for the department to lead by example and leverage every possible resource. one example, as noted already by the secretary, was to have medicare expand the smoking cessation coverage to users of tobacco and not just those with diseased, and we look forward to other prevention announcements by the centers for medicare and medicaid services going forward. in addition, the department will work toward reducing tobacco- related disparities by providing services for high-risk populations at community health
centers, or health facilities, public housing, and other settings. the fourth and final public is to advance knowledge and accelerate research and expand the science base. this is especially critical given the fda posset authority to regulate tobacco -- given the fda's authority to regulate tobacco. the department's export to working with partners around the country to make this vision come alive. we're also very grateful for the tremendous update that are in the affordable care act. we are committed to reinvigorating national momentum towards tobacco prevention and control that move us toward a healthier society. it together, we can achieve a vision of society free from preventable tobacco-related suffering. thank you very much. [applause]
and now it is my great honor to welcome my very good friend and colleague, the fda commissioner dr. peggy hamburg. [applause] >> thank the. thank you very much, howard. it is really a pleasure to be here. thank you, george washington university, for welcoming us here, and think the madame secretary and dr. koh for your leadership on this public health issue. as has already been so eloquently pointed out, the strategic plan has won over arching objective, to make the suffering, the disease, and the death caused by tobacco use part of america's past, not part of america's future. that is why congress passed and president obama signed a family smoking prevention and tobacco
control act, and why the fda has been working so i hard so it. many of you are familiar with the tax we have taken to date, and the secretary mentioned some of the important ones. we banned the sale of candy and fruit flavored cigarettes. we have prevented cigarette advertising with misleading terms. we are required the tobacco industry to provide us with lists of product ingredients. this past summer, the fda issued a number of restrictions to limit both the access and marketing of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products to young people. and has been a very busy first year. it today, we are pleased to announce a new historic initiative, consistent with the fda's mandate under the contract under the tobacco control act, with new health warnings on
cigarette packages and advertising. the warnings which you are now seeing are examples of the kind that will replace those that are not printed on the narrow side of cigarette packages. these warnings have not been changed for 25 years. the new warnings will be much larger and more prominently placed on the pact, and they will contain graphic images, as you are now seeing. we believe that there will be much more effective. under the proposal, as required in the law, health warnings will cover 50% of the front and back panels of every pack of cigarettes. for advertising, these warnings will occupy 20% of the top part of that have had. but it is not only the size and position of the ones that will be changed. so will the messages be changed. for the first time ever, they
will say that tobacco products are addictive and they will say in the most plain terms that tobacco can kill. the fda proposal will also require the use of graphic images that depict the negative consequences of smoking. obviously, some of the images are very powerful. that is the point. we need to make sure that anyone who was considering smoking fully appreciates the consequences of cigarette use. that means presenting the facts directly and bluntly. our objective is to raise public awareness of the profound health risks of smoking, encourage current smokers to quit, and discourage young people from ever starting. that is our goal, and what these health warnings will help achieve. the fda is currently considering 36 different images
that will be coupled with nine different warning statements. the images vary in style and design. some are illustrations, others are photographic. the type, size is, stiles, and layoffs ferry. they're designed to elicit a reaction from the audience, including youth, young adults, and adult smokers and potential smokers at. our plan is to identify a combination of images that best resonate with americans from all walks of life. they will be available to the public, including all of you, too few and, on -- to view and commwent on. you'll find world of information about this initiative on the website. the fda is also conducting a
study to assess the relative effectiveness of these images. this will evaluate all the images with the proposed rule. that research at the proposed comments will help us select nine graphic images that will be used, one to accompany each of the required health warning statements and this is what will appear on cigarette packages and in advertising. the final rule with these nine images will be published in june of next year, and tobacco companies will then have until sept. 2012 to begin displaying them on cigarette packs and in their ads. once that happens, every single pack of cigarettes in our country will affect become a miniature billboards that tells the truth about smoking. we are convinced that not only will these warnings helped
discourage nonsmokers, particularly kids, from ever trying cigarettes, but the will also help strengthen the resolve of current smokers who want to. break to. the proposal is consistent with the approach embraced by canada, australia, and the european union, among other countries, and supported by every major health organizations, including the world health organization itself. as you have heard this morning, our effort to educate consumers about the dangers of tobacco use will be executed on many different fronts. underlying all of these efforts is the understanding that the best single strategy to reduce smoking among young adults is to prevent kids from ever starting in the first place. when the new labels take effect in september, 2012, secretary sebelius and i believe that these warnings will help discourage nonsmokers, particularly kids, from ever trying cigarettes. there will also help strengthen
-- they will also help strengthen the ability and commitment of current smokers who try to quit, and both are terribly important to our nation's efforts to. stop the to. -- to stop the devastating epidemic. we'd want to get the real message across about smoking whenever they see an ad for cigarettes or pick up a pack, that is exactly what these health warnings will do. at fda, we're proud to be up to provide tools that will support the efforts of millions of americans working for healthier futures. it but me close by recognizing that there are still -- there is still a long way to go to reduce the enormous burden caused by tobacco products. but we can make progress. progress that will be marked by many steps taken by many people across the country -- doctors, nurses, community leaders,
teachers, students, and parents. many of you in this room have been leaders in this effort over many, many years. thank you for your emcor work in this area and thank you for your support that you have given to the fda and hhs as we pursue our import activities in this area -- are important activities in this area to once and for raw stop the epidemic of tobacco use in this country, and to also help affect tobacco use around the world. there is a lot to be done. i think today's announcements represent an important step forward, and we are really excited by the opportunity that it represents for public health in our nation. thank you. i think we will do questions and answers now. [applause] >> thank you so much, dr.
hamburg. we will now open for questions. >> since we know that restricting smoking, banning smoking is probably the most effective way to get people to quit, i like to ask the secretary of the department would require that any institution that its grants or holds conferences or anything else were you have contact would have to be smoke-free to qualify for grants and support. i think i would be at least as effective as everything you've presented this morning, with all due respect. >> i certainly appreciate the idea. i don't know that has been a discussion, certainly the building that we have our workers in our smoke-free. we engageties ouwhere
in dialogue are smoke-free. we're working closely with states around the country. i was pleased lasear, after years of effort, my home state of kansas passed a very comprehensive smoke-free law that will be incredibly effective. i think we are working in that direction and that is an idea that we will check back and continue to discuss, . >> good morning. i just want to congratulate you on a strong plan that it will make a lot of difference in this country. i especially want to thank you, dr. koh, to make it as easy to quit as to pick up a pack of cigarettes. but this one to ask in putting together the warning labels, i know my organization and many others in the room have asked to have 800-quit-now put on a
warning label. we think it would help smokers quit not only to have the graphic picture but to have a way to get services to quit. we're wondering why that was not put on the warnings. >> that is probably a question to me, and that is a very important question to raise. the 1-800 line was not one of the requirements of what was in the graphic warnings, but it is very much under consideration. as we collect comments on the proposed rule making, we hope people like yourself and others will goes important input on the value and role that such an addition to the warning label could have because those decisions are still under consideration. >> in looking at the international experience, countries that combine these graphic health warnings with
resources for smokers to access, such as a phone number or web site, show more efficacy in terms of reaching smokers and help them make a decision to quit. that is a suggestion we're taking it under consideration. >> hello, i am a reporter. i'm wondering if he could discuss where the fda is with an electronic cigarettes and if there is any concern these graphic warnings may move people to try electronic support instead. >> electronics cigarettes are a different activity, and we are here to discuss the graphic warnings. electronic cigarettes are an area of public health concern. we have been examining very carefully, and there is also the vacation around the future of electronic cigarettes, and we are continuing to really take a
very hard look at electronic cigarettes and the role they play in recruiting and encouraging people to smoke versus the issue that has been raised, is it a tool to help people quit. but i think we don't know that these graphic warnings will have any impact on the use of electronic cigarettes, and i think the graphic warnings have enormous importance and value in helping people that are either smoking or considering smoking to get a very powerful visual and message reminder about the negative consequences of smoking, and that is why it is very important we are going forward today to begin the process of getting those graphic warnings on cigarette packages and part of cigarette advertising. i>> good morning. images are selected,
will the companies be able to choose which images the what to put on the packages? >> no, the ones that are selected they will be required to use, and there will be a mandate for them to mix them up. so when you go to the store, there will be the combination of the different nine pictures and warnings. i should also say that over time, there will be changed. a part of what is important getting people's attention is novelty, and we know that we're going to need to keep updating the pictures. we will have continuing research efforts to deepen our understanding about what kind of graphic images and messages have the most impact on people, and over time, in addition to
changing the graphic images, if we feel there is a reason to do so, we can also modified the specific warning messages used. >> i want to say a great job. i think we're all very appreciative that this is happening. my question is the parent. i have three kids. the 12-year-old started smoking despite the level of education and the home and by type of work. i love the pillar about changing social norms, but mass media is one way to affect teenagers faster. that is challenging to find any curriculum at the elementary school level that addresses this successfully. i'm wondering if there's any thought of collaborating with the department of education or to bring this into the school system? >> i could take that, were if
you would like to? i can provide some perspective. that is an excellent question. these are issues that require a partnership at the state and local level between health officials and education officials, but is really tremendous that you in your kids want to raise your voice. i think having young people be champions for smoke-free environments, smoke-free society as a wonderful way to get the next generation involved and have them demand a smoke-free future and work with the educational system. i think this is a theme that is part of our action plan and complements the pillars that we have described. >> i would just thesay that thee
is a group assembled that includes a prevention council representing government. every department representative is coming to the table with an eye towards what kind of contributions that can make. the discussion so far has been very exciting. there is discussion about curricula and updating curriculum, both nutrition efforts and tobacco cessation issues. the department of housing and urban development is already moving ahead with some very exciting projects about smoke- free public housing and consumer education. there is a move underway with a lot of parks and open spaces to have a promotion of smoke-free areas, to make sure that when people a try to access the beautiful outdoors, they are not
subjected to second-hand smoke. i think those kinds of discussions with education, with hud, with the department of transportation, with the department of the interior are very much part of this plan moving forward and tried to asset -- trying to leverage the assets going forward, so it is not just the fta, but a variety of agencies putting their lands to bear on what we can all do to reduce this preventable death. when we are losing almost 450,000 people per year in the united states, it is clearly an effort that needs a government- wide response. >> good morning, i am richard windsor. my question relates to organizations. to the extent there is the discussion about new mothers,
infants, it seems in the context of populations -- and i appreciate the population approach -- i would be interested in a special focus on pregnant women and infants and children. >> i think, again, one of the efforts that is under way is preparation of a rule that will provide medicaid benefits for pregnant women to make sure that can access smoking cessation treatment, the same kind of effort that is under way in medicare and has been promoted. that should be announced in the not too distant future, and that will highlight in the discussion of the affordable care act. howard, you may talk and little about what healthy people is recommending in terms of pregnant women and children.
>> the secretary has very appropriately sited one of the many provisions in the affordable care act which will make cessation services more affordable to pregnant moms, in medicaid and new smokers and health plans, and also to smokers and medicare. this is part of the ongoing conversation to make our country healthier over the next 10 years and beyond. when we unveil healthy people 2020, we will hear much more about targets for women and youth on tobacco and many other areas where prevention plays a key role. that is a very import question. thank you for asking. >> i am susan campbell, the national coalition for women with heart disease. in the beginning you mentioned that there had been a change in the rights of women who smoke and have long cancer, and that
is reflected as well with heart disease. i am very pleased to see some of the statements specifically referring to heart disease, because i think people really don't understand that smoking -- you might die of heart disease before you die of cancer. when you select the final nine warnings, don't forget about heart disease. >> very important point. i just want to underscore, and 9 warnings are definite. those are set in law, in terms of what will be going forward. it is the graphic pictures that the company those warnings that are currently under study. as i mentioned before, the nine warnings can be modified overtime as is appropriate, based on our a valuation of the impact the warnings are having,
and also perhaps our understanding about the patterns and changes in smoking as well. >> i think that is a great point. smoking underlies not just cancer but a series of chronic diseases which kill people, which shortened lives, which have serious impact not only on health and longevity but on medical costs. so we need to make sure that message is not just about cancer, it is about the effect of smoking and the impact it has on a whole series of health conditions. >> in some ways your question circles back to another question about the importance of educational messages and quality information being available in all kinds of settings. whenever we do, through whatever mechanisms we are involved in, to reinforce some of those critical public health message
is that people need to really hear and understand and act on. >> i am carolyn sparks, with the school of public health. i wanted to ask, ought to these warnings appear on all tobacco promotions, like on the internet? as you may know, there are thousands of internet sites that are promoting tobacco. and also to ask if he had ans to redistrict -- if you had plans to restrict youth access to these internet sites. >> the internet issues are complex. the specific set of activities has to do with cigarette packages and print ads, but there are activities underway to address how to provide appropriate oversight as well as appropriate warnings on internet advertising sites.
it is a key area, especially talking about youth and how to get information, but it is a much harder. to provide oversight and control -- it is a much harder area to provide oversight and control and it extends across the government and the ftc and other components of government. >> there was an initiative. but this summer with p.a.c.t., where there are provisions to block illegal sales of tobacco through the internet. that was a public health advance as well, but you are right, this is another avenue where kids get access and we need to make sure that kids state tobacco-free, so that initiative starts is down the right road. >> wen name asdy. wendy.ame is
i was wondering if the talk about the methodology behind the images and if there are certain demographics and if they will be aligned with the majority of people who purchase them. in addition to educating children about the detrimental effects of smoking, if you are also showing them the images and allowing younger populations to say what would be effective for them. i was also curious what cost this would be to cigarette companies? it was paying for everything? -- who is paying for everything? >> we have been undertaking what i believe is the largest consumer research initiative around consumer understanding,
graphic warnings, and 18,000 individuals have been involved in this activity using, what i overstand, are the cutting edge approaches to consumer surveys. and the results of that data will be used as we select the graphic images for the first round of graphic warning labels on cigarette packs. >> those 18,000 people are broken into various age groups. there is a definite outreach to young -- >> absolutely, we're looking very much at the summer population of youth who are not smoking -- at the sub population of you who are not smoking and younger adults. we're also looking at gender,
geography, smoking status, race, ethnicity, a range of demographics that we know are related to smoking behavior and patterns of smoking, and we will continue our research and hopefully in reaching our own research activities as these products go into the marketplace. we will also be working with colleagues in the academic community and colleagues and regulatory authorities around the world to deepen our understanding. this will be a dynamic process, but one that is very important will truly inform our decision making and the graphic warnings that will appear on advertising and on cigarette packs. with respect to the cost issues, the tobacco program at fta is supported by user fees from the tobacco industry -- the
tobacco program at fta is supported by user fees from the tobacco industry. >> we have time for one more question. >> good morning. -- iwhat the nationallatino am with the national latino tobacco control network. i was wondering on that area where minorities are disproportionately affected and poor communities, to ensure that the implementation of these efforts are really hitting the community and to be sure we are building the capacity in the community so the committee is engaged in this process. i would like to see if you have considered how you will do specific outreach in minority communities on the implementation of these new
regulations. >> i would say that part of the funding for the outreach and treatment programs began as a pipeline and recovery act, and there were specific resources given to every state in the country to expand quit lines, to ramp up their efforts, and then we have 57 of the is community projects in various regions across the country to try to examine this. it a lot of them are in minority or underserved areas, looking at what really works, how the out reaches. that is a portion of the plan. i think one of the strategies also will be as we look across the department, the expansion of community health centers can
play a very key role in this, and that is going to double the footprint of providers in often- underserved areas. certainly, school curricula could help. i think the out reach with our other government partners in areas, such as public housing and the effort to move into more smoke-free environments, that people choose to live then. so it is not only smoking cessation directly, but making sure people are protected from secondhand smoke, regardless of where they're living. so i think those efforts are very much underway and have to be part of the outreach, because of the disproportionate impact of smoking and the effects of tobacco on populations. another population that we have to pay very careful attention to, and i think my expert
colleagues will be spending a lot of time and energy, are americans with mental health issues. because the behavioral health committee -- health community, about half of our deaths are folks who have some kind of serious mental illness. spending time and attention on a particularly out reach a net population, where often still to this day, cigarettes are still looked at as a reward system in too many environments. we're getting very mixed messages. we know the impact is hugely important in different communities, so looking at this strategy as a nuanced strategy is very important, but everybody who buys a pack of cigarettes will now, i think, have an opportunity to be faced with
some dramatic warnings and it dramatically billing that has not -- and dramatic labeling that has not ever existed before. >> it is so germaneand one of tp the people goals for the next 10 years and beyond. it is a perfect thing to include today. they you, everyone, for coming. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]
>> tonight, secretary of state clinton announces a new aid package for the palestinian authority. the former pakistani president discusses u.s. foreign policy. later, a discussion about campaign finance and the role of money in politics. on tomorrows "washington journal," a look at the deficit reduction commission recommendations with dean baker. former congressman duncan hunter has a new book about the war in iraq. i will talk with the american legion executive director about issues affecting veterans. "washington journal "is live beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this year's documentary competition is in full swing. make a five to eight minutes video on the theme washington, d.c. through my lens.
apply by january 20 for a chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. for all the information, go online to studentcam.org. >> learn more about veterans day and the men and women who served in the military with the c-span video library. oral histories, authors on the nation's wars, and veterans day commemorations through the years. searchable and free on your computer and the time. -- any time. >> secretary of state hillary clinton today announced aid to the palestinian authority. it is intended to close their budget deficit, strengthen the economy, and help build infrastructure in palestinian authority-ruled areas. she is joined by the
palestinian prime minister in video conference. it includes comments on israel's recent decision to authorize new settlement construction in eastern jerusalem. this is 20 minutes. >> in the asia region, one sector we will talk about underscores the ongoing significant commitment to the palestinian authority and to helping build the institutions of the palestinian authority as we continue to press the parties for direct negotiations. >> thank you so much, and good morning, everybody. are we going to have the prime minister on the screen? [laughter] there he is. [laughter] hello. well, i am delighted to see prime minister fayyad, and this
link-up is the next best thing to being together in person. and i welcome our guests here in washington and say hello to everyone in ramallah. before i address the subject of my announcement today, i want to also address what i know is on the minds of many of you. the united states was deeply disappointed by the announcement of advanced planning for new housing units in sensitive areas of east jerusalem. this announcement was counterproductive to our efforts to resume negotiations between the parties. we have long urged both parties to avoid actions which could dermine trust, including in jerusalem. we will continue to work to resume negotiations to address this and other final status issues. we, along with many others, are working every day, indeed every
hour, to help create the conditions for negotiations to succeed. we still believe that a positive outcome is both possible and necessary. i will be seeing prime minister netanyahu tomorrow in new york and consultations continue on all sides and we will persevere. now, as prime minister fayyad understands so well, we have to move forward together simultaneously, and mutually reinforcing on two tracks the hard work of negotiations and the hard work of building institutions and capacities. we need to work with the palestinian authority to support their efforts to build toward a future palestinian state that is able to govern itself, uphold its responsibilities to provide for
its own people, and ensure security. progress on this second track gives confidence to negotiators, removes excuses for delay, and underscores that the palestinian authority has become a credible partner for peace. now, earlier this fall, i was able to visit ramallah and see firsthand the continuing progress that the palestinian authority is making under president abbas and prime minister fayyad. thanks to their hard work, the palestinian authority is reversing a history of corruption and producing results that actually matter and improve the lives of palestinians. as a result, new businesses are opening, taxes are being collected, services are being delivered, security is much improved and the economy is growing. when you look around ramallah and other palestinian communities today, you see new buildings going up,
professional police officers on the streets, and a sense of opportunity and purpose. in fact, the world bank recently concluded that if the palestinian authority maintains its momentum in building institutions and delivering public services, it is, and i quote, "well positioned for the establishment of a state at any point in the near future." so i want to congratulate president abbas and you, prime minister, on everything that your government has accomplished. it is a testament to your leadership and skill as well as to the talents and determination of the palestinian people themselves. now, of course, the prime minister would be the first to say that all this progress remains tenuous and there is much more work to be done, and he would be right. unemployment remains high, especially among young people. smaller communities have yet to see the benefits of greater prosperity despite the increase in new businesses, the rise in
tax receipts, and the generous contributions from the international community. the palestinian authority still faces a serious budget shortfall. but the united states and our international partners are committed to supporting the palestinian authority as it works to overcome these challenges. so today, i am pleased to announce that the united states has transferred an additional $150 million in direct assistance to the palestinian authority. this brings our direct budget assistance to a total of $225 million for the year and our overall support and investment to nearly $600 million this year. this figure underscores the strong determination of the american people and this administration to stand with our palestinian friends even during difficult economic times, as we have here at home. this new funding will help the palestinian authority pay down its debt, continue to deliver
rvices and security to its people, and keep the progress going. it will support our work together to expand palestinians' access to schools, clinics, and clean drinking water in both the west bank and gaza. and it will allow prime minister fayyad's government to build and modernize courthouses and police stations, train judges and prosecutors, and launch new economic development initiatives. strict safeguards are in place to ensure the money will be used responsibly. the united states, the world bank, and the international monetary fund all carefully monitor the use of donor funds and we have great confidence in prime minister fayyad and his ability to provide accountability and transparency. i am pleased that a number of our other partners have stepped forward recently and also increased their support for the palestinian authority. saudi arabia recently transferred an additional $100 million.
the united arab emirates provided a funding infusion in september and the european union also announced major new funding. on my recent trip to asia, i was encouraged to hear widespread support for the palestinian authority's state building efforts underscoring, again, the global resonance of this issue. the united states will step up our work with partners like japan, malaysia, australia, and others to find new ways to increase financial support for the palestinian authority. now, unfortunately the palestinian people still have some friends who prefer to support their aspirations with words rather than deeds. but that won't put food on the table, create jobs, build credible institutions, or help speed the creation of a new state. palestinians need results, not rhetoric. and they need partners willing to invest in their future. and that is exactly what the united states is doing. and together we are moving forward despite the challenges, and there are many. we take confidence from the
steady leadership and bold vision of president abbas and prime minister fayyad. so let me thank the prime minister for his tireless efforts to realize the dreams of the palestinian people and for being a consistent voice for progress and common sense. so now, mr. prime minister, it's your turn to say a few words. and we hope that our connection works better than it did the last time we tried this. >> i sure hope so. thank you very much. >> very good. >> we tested it. let me first introduce my party here i have with me. first, consul general of the united states daniel rubinstein, head of director of usaid mission, here mr. michael harvey. i have also with me my colleague in government, dr. ali jarbawi, our minister of planning. documentation that pertains to the transfer has just been signed and concluded. so let me now begin, madam
secretary, by once again thanking you for taking the time to be with us this morning your time, evening ours, to announce the transfer that you just announced of $150 million in support of the palestinian authority budget. we really appreciate this assistance because it is highly responsive to our needs in two ways. first, in terms of the type of assistance, it being of the form of budget support is the kind of assistance that we need the most, as it helps us deal with the needs that we have to deal with and actually meet the duties, obligations, the responsibilities that we have to discharge in the course of doing the best we can in the interest of bringing about better life for our people. it also is highly responsive to our needs in the sense of its timeliness. as you well know, madam secretary, and we have talked about this a number of times, we have faced quite serious
financial difficulty for the past few months that made our life extremely difficult in terms of meeting those obligations that we have in a timely fashion. so the money and the substantial amount it is, the transfer, that is, of $150 million and the timeliness of it, could not really be better. we thank you very much for the responsiveness and also for splendid staff work on your part both in washington as well as here to make this happen -- actually happen. it's an opportunity for me to once again reiterate the palestinian authority's deep appreciation for the longstanding support of the united states of our common development and adjustment and -- our economic development and adjustment and reform efforts. as a matter of fact, over a period since the inception of palestinian authority, the united states has actually
extended assistance in the total amount of about $3.5 billion over the period 1994 through 2010. about half of this money actually was made available over the past three years plus a few months. half of that is in the form of budget support. and to be exact, $800 million of this total assistance has been over the past three years in the form of direct budgetary support. and this brings me to the second point. apart from the volume, the magnitude of this generous transfer, the form in which it was delivered, the modality of its delivery, meaning directly to our budget, underscores the confidence which once again the united states government congress also have in the integrity of our public finance system. we palestinians take this as a matter of pride, immense pride, in fact. and in fact, it reflects the kind of progress that we have been able to make over the past few years in trying to get our institutions in the state of being in the shape of being
state ready. readiness for statehood is, in fact, the key objective of the program that we launched, madame secretary, in august of 2009 with the aim of completing the task of capacity building and also amass a critical mass of positive change on the ground in the form of maturing governance processes but also infrastructure of state. we are well on our way, also judging by that statement which you were kind to, as a matter of fact, read out today again by the world bank about the expectation of us being ready for statehood at any point in the near future on the strength of what we have been able to accomplish over the first half of this three-year program. so we are well on track. we are determined to stay the course despite the difficulties and obstacles that we continue to have to contend with every day. nevertheless, we, as i said,
remain hopeful that we are actually going to be state ready come summer of 2011. it's a goal that we are doing our best, in fact, to meet. i said what i said about the u.s. assistance that has been made available in support of our budget, the direct budgetary assistance, but that is in addition, of course, to other forms of assistance that you have mentioned, madam secretary, that went a long way toward supporting the palestinian authority in various spheres of government and also infrastructure. i can tell you for sure without much difficulty that there is hardly any sign of visible progress on the ground in palestine today that does not have the caring fingerprints of usaid on it. i'm talking to you, madam secretary, and to your colleagues in washington about, for example, physical infrastructure, including water, electricity, road networks. i'm talking to you also about
social services, importantly, education, health, social assistance. i'm talking to you also about the assistance that you have so generously provided to help us with capacity building in all spheres of government, including security. i can go on, but as i said, there's hardly a sign of visible progress that does not have a contribution of the united states government associated with it. we thank you very much. that has helped our effort, as a matter of fact. and over the past nearly three years now, just under three years, we've been able to implement some 1,700 small community development programs that have contributed remarkably to bringing about better living conditions for our people in spite of the occupation and its adversity. as you mentioned, unemployment remains high. it has trended downward over this time period. it is lower than it was a couple of years ago, but it still remains high. it's a challenge and we're working very hard to reduce it further. poverty has declined by nearly
one-third over the period 2007- 2009, so there are, as a matter of fact, signs of progress, signs that are strongly suggestive of this effort being on track. and if, in fact, we were to continue with it, as we fully intend to do, we believe that we are actually going to see the tangible results that our people started to feel throughout the country. i'm talking about not only dwellers of urban areas, but i'm talking especially about people in rural areas, refugee camps throughout, areas that have been long marginalized and areas that have been so adversely affected by the construction of the separation wall as well as settlement activity. so we appreciate the assistance. we appreciate the vote of confidence that comes with that. let me also add, madam secretary, that we are doing this in addition to it being done in the context of this reform effort and adjustment effort and state-building effort, it also is important to
happening in a context of declining need for external assistance. this is a key objective of ours and it defines very much the kind of thinking that we have insofar as economic viability is concerned, financial viability is concerned. i can tell you for sure that our need for exceptional financial support has already declined substantially from about $1.8 billion in 2008 to about $1.2 billion this year. that is a decline of about one- third in our reliance on external assistance and aid money. the prospect is for further reduction in 2011. in fact, we look to 2011 as the year in which we expect to make decisive towards attaining -- progress towards attaining financial viability by end 2013, at which point we will no longer, we expect, need any
mbe the kind of assistance that we are getting from you today in the form of direct budgetary assistance, which we hope will also be seen as a sign of maturity, maturing institutions of state, governments -- the kind of accomplishment and progress that you and delivery that you expect countries that have been around a long time to be able to do but without considerable difficulty. so here we are, madam secretary. we are well on our way trying to do the best we can in a highly challenging environment. the context is very difficult. i alluded to some of the difficulties that we have. i very much appreciate the statement that you made at the outset in relation to further announcement of yet another expansion of settlement activity in the jerusalem area this time around, as it happened before. that remains a very serious challenge and a problem for all of us. so therefore, madam secretary, in the period ahead we certainly will continue to look to you for continued strong leadership as you continue to try hard to put together elements that are necessary to have a strong political process,
a credible political process, one that is capable of delivering that which we all want to see happen, an end to the israeli occupation. and of course, the day will come when that state of palestine will be born so our people can live in freedom and dignity in a country of our own. that's what this is about, and we look to you again for continued strong leadership as we move forward down this path which has witnessed a great deal of difficulty. nevertheless, we are determined and we remain hopeful on the strength of what we've been able to accomplish here and the hope and expectation that those -- along the path of state building and getting ready for statehood, on the strength of what that is expected to do by reinforcing the effort on the political process. once again, madam secretary, on behalf of the palestinian people, on behalf of president abbas, palestinian national authority, my colleagues in government, i thank you
personally for the effort that you have made to support us and for your continued and longstanding support, for the efforts of your colleagues. i thank president obama, u.s. congress, and of course, the american people for this largesse. thank you so very much. >> thank you very much, prime minister. we greatly appreciate your efforts and your very gracious words about our country and our support for you. now i think i'm going to take a question here. is that what's happening? >> you've got the meeting with the vice president coming up. >> right. well, i can probably take one question maybe. ok. >> madam secretary, we've seen all the controversy develop this week on settlements between the israeli government, the palestinians, and the administration. so what do you think you can achieve on that front by talking to prime minister netanyahu tomorrow? and how do you assess the hope
of resuming the peace talks at all? >> well, i believe strongly that negotiations are the only means by which the parties will be able to conclude an agreement that will lead to a palestinian state and israel living in security with its neighbors. that is our view. that is our commitment. and i'm going to be speaking with the prime minister tomorrow once again about the way forward. i remain convinced that both prime minister netanyahu and president abbas want to realize the two-state solution. like any very difficult political challenge, it is often hard to find the path forward. but we are absolutely committed
to doing everything we can to assist the parties in doing so. thank you all. >> thank you very much. >> secretary of state clinton mentioned she will meet with israeli prime minister netanyahu in new york tomorrow. they are expected to discuss jerusalem settlements and stalled middle east peace talks. two egyptian on boys have also been sent to the u.s. to help revive talks between israel and the palestinians. tomorrow on c-span, live coverage of veterans day observances. at 11:00 eastern, we'll replay the ceremony at arlington national cemetery.
vice-president biden will be there. at 12:50 eastern, the ceremony at the vietnam veterans memorial at the national. signatories include interior secretary ken salazar. live coverage on c-span and c- span.org. >> in an ideal world, the fact that there were people shorten the mortgage market -- what does that signal? everybody is saying there are the smart investors who think things are going to crash and burn. but the market is opaque enough that you could not see that the way you can see it in the stock market. because of the way these instruments work, you are basically not betting on real mortgages. rather, you are betting on the casino version of a mortgage. >> in 2003, bethany mclean wrote enron in "the smartest
guys in the room." she will talk about the economy. >> the former pakistan president, pervez mharraf, criticized u.s. foreign policy in southern asia at this event hosted by the atlantic council in washington, d.c. he talked about support for the comet karzai government in afghanistan and obama's decision not to visit pakistan during his current trip. pervez musharraf announced he intends to form a new political party in pakistan and run for office again in 2013. this is an hour and a half. this is an hour and a half. >> thank you all, and welcome to the atlantic council.
i am pervez musharraf. -- i am frederick kempe. pervez musharraf, it is a pleasure to see you again. before i left "the wall street journal," where i was editor for the middle east, to run the atlantic council, was in january, 2006. i will give a couple of lines from this interview to illustrate how much we have changed, and how little can change in eight. of time. -- in a period of time. what had not made the news was a gas pipeline that would run and the game changing. one of the things we are working on at the aquatic council and south asia center is how does one drive this kind of regional cooperation. how does one wage peace in the region? talked about drones.
they're just been an attack on a village where al qaeda leaders were expected to a head dinner that killed pakistani women and children and set off street protests in pakistani cities. you talked in the interview of how you had not been informed in advance and the pakistan -- and told the u.s., "we do not want anyone to operate in pakistan, even if that meant a slow response to intelligence." mr. president, we established a seouth asia center two years ago because we recognize the centrality of these sorts of questions and the centrality of the bilateral relationship with pakistan in its regional context. you are an unusual man, talent that understands both the region and washington.
and we have picked a leader for our center who is probably the most unique person in understanding, he is an insider in both societies and an outsider, which is a frightening bit of schizophrenia to bring to the leadership of any organization. he knows how washington and pakistan works, and it gives us a leadership that has a position where the south asia center is not an american center. it is a global center talking about a region and bringing us real expertise that has put us at the center of this debate after just two years, less than two years in operation. only by understanding that the relationship with pakistan, with this kind of sophistication, can we move forward. there may be no more important
bilateral relationship in 2011 for the u.s. than this one, president obama's trip to india, notwithstanding. so, we want to talk about the geographic subcontinent in the center -- afghanistan, central asia, iran. we think this the lives -- a solution to the problems we look at will only come from this link. john kerry has called our work on u.s.-pakistan relations seminal. since the center's launch, we have published an updated report. the first report we did was in 2009. we did an updated report on the tenuous relationship, and we remain committed to our mission of waging peace. let me quote the first sentence from that report. "perhaps no bilateral relationship in the world matches that of the u.s. and pakistan when it comes to its
combustible combination of strategic importance and perilous instability." so, that context is as important as is our speaker today, a man who understands the context and the challenges as well as anyone on earth. few people in the world have an understanding of the inner workings of pakistan better than president musharraf. he worked his way up through the military and political ranks to become general and army chief of staff in 1998. he took over as president after a bloodless coup in 1999 and led until his resignation in 2009. his life story tracks the history of the country and the region. he is not only a person of history in the region but as we will hear today, he is very much a person also of the present. president musharraf, the floor is yours.
[appuse] >> mr. kemp, president of the atlantic council, members of the council, it is indeed my unique privilege to be talking to all on a very important subject, the subject of our region, what is happening there. it is the happening place today and the strategic focus of the whole world is to our region. therefore, i would like to say that we must understand the region and there is no doubt that the world and indeed the united states coalition forces and pakistan must cooperate fully to be merged successful and what ever they are battling -- to emerge successful in
whatever they are battling. therefore, i am going to talk to you on regional development, on the current situation there in the region, and also the ups and downs of pakistan and the united states relationships. as you said, it's a strategic relationship of great importance, but may i very frankly say that yes, indeed, in words, but in actions, one would expect much more to show or to demonstrate the strategic importance that pakistan enjoys in that region. i will no annunciate debt to whatever i'm going to say. i would like -- i will not enunciate whatever i'm going to say. i will start -- from that, sorry. rings]l phone
[laughter] shut it off. i take the historical perspective, dividing into a certain periods, and with that, i will extract the relationship of pakistan and the united states and why there have been ups and downs. the first period is 1979 to 1989. since 1948, pakistan has been a strategic partner of the united states. and we have been with you all these years for 42 years, right up to 1989, very clearly. we launched a jihad against the
soviet union, the united states and pakistan, because we wanted to withdraw mujahedin from the world, 25,000-30,000 from almost all muslim countries. so this continued as a teacher relationship with the united states, and continued since 1948, especially in these 10 years, we fought a war together in afghanistan. for 10 long years, this jihad was wages. the elites of afghanistan abandoned afghanistan for the united states and europe. it was spearheaded by the militant groups.
in a negative aspect, also, the glue that held afghanistan together, the ethnic groups, translates into a national coventant. this group, after the king was deposed by the soviets, was no more. therefore, when we talk of political revolution, we are talking of a new national covenant, homegrown national covenant, giving the pashtuns the dominant position in government. for this period of 1979-89, ended in a soviet defeat in 1989, but what happened after 1989? the next. period is 12 years of
disaster. firstly, pakistan and afghanistan was totally abandoned by the united states. not only abandoned, there was a strategic shift in the united states towards pakistan -- against pakistan towards india. there were sanctions imposed on pakistan and cozying up of relations with india, starting in 1989, despite of the fact that we were the strategic ally for four years and we fought a war together for 10 years. this led to a sense of betrayal within the people of pakistan. which exists even now. so 1989, the abandonment of the region, was the first great blunder committed by the united states. not only these of the pakistan, but also the 25,000 mujahedin --
not only vis-as-vis pakistan but also the 25,000 a shot had been coalesced into al qaeda. -- the mujahedin coalesced into al qaeda. for six years, battling each other -- even the pashtuns were divided into eight groups -- and they ravaged the country. the fighting was then between al qaeda on one side and the northern allianz, minorities on the other side. this then destroyed afghanistan years.anothehr six afghanistan yeasrrs,
became of ghost country. i visited afghanistan. kabul was worst than somalia. so this was kabul, a ghost city. this is what happened in these 12 years after having won a victory in the soviet union. because the strategic focus was euro-centric because of the cold war, warsaw pact, reunification of germany -- all that gains went into york. what did afghanistan or pakistan get? nothing. for 12 years, pakistan bought 4 million refugees in the process into pakistan. we had to fend for 4 million refugees, warlordism in
afghanistan. pakistan alone to protect its own interest in these 12 years. that was the -- of pakistan- united states relationships. they thought the united states had used pakistan and abandon the spirited and kim 9/11 -- then came 9/11 and the terrible terrorist attack here in the united states. pakistan again becomes important. pakistan is needed again. and therefore, we again become a strategic partner. but then we became strategic partners, the question i was asked all the time, what makes you think the united states will not again use us and abandoned us? it is important, ladies and gentlemen, today when we are trying to take the decision
whether to stay or quit, are we again to be abandoned -- question mark -- in the minds of every pakistani. so now the next blunder that i will talk of which is very significant -- after 9/11. the taliban were defeated with the help of the northern alliance, because the minorities -- taliban dispersed, ran, al qaeda ran into the mountains and cities of pakistan. they were in total disarray -- taliban. afghanistan no was available for the political instrument to be used. [unintelligible]
by giving -- we were forced and the military dominant position in afghanistan. and now a political solution available to be executed in afghanistan. but, unfortunately, the political solution did not come about. what is the political solution? you cannot govern afghanistan with a minority dominating the government. they are only 8%. afghanistan has always been governed by pashtuns, 55% of afghanistan. now, he was the situation early in 2002, where we could have changed policy, taken pashtuns on board and put a pashtun-
dominated government in kabul. unfortunately, we did not do that. the environment was available. we failed to do that. and therefore, the country is governed by the minority, the biggest blunder with which we are persisting even out. now we are trying to talk to moderate taliban or taliman. what we should have done in 2002-273, from a position of strength, now we are trying to do from this position of weakness. that was the next blunder. and now we are in the pro cess of taking a decision whether to stay or quit. ladies and devin, this decision has to be taken very carefully. -- ladies and gentlemen, this decision has to be taken very carefully. we cannot commit a fourth blunder. in afghanistan, a lot of people
ask whether we can win. i would like, my reply is, we must not lose. even if the answer to win in maybe 50-50, but we must not lose. and let me say with 100% conviction, if we should resolve, we will not lose. and we are not losing. so therefore, my food for thought here is, ladies and gentleman, that we must not lose first and then work out the winning strategy. and i have said that pakistan is supposedly a strategic partner. i don't know. the people of pakistan are not to shore whether we are the strategic partnership -- the
people of pakistan are not too share whether we are strategic partners. what are the sensitivities of pakistan? integrity, our world being, of course -- our well being, of course, and the world showing us concern and giving us the importance that is due to us. the other is the kashmir dispute. it is important, not only that it is a dispute in the united nations but today, it is causing a lot of terrorism and extremism. -- within our society. in 1989, when kashmir erupted, dozens of mujahedin groups sprang up within pakistan, and
thousands of people were volunteering to join to go to india, near kashmir, to fight against the indian army. and all these maligned names of -- mujahedin, etc -- are products of the 1990's. now there is another intifada movement by people of the indian -held kashmir, and that is suppressed by the indian army and with the dozens killed. these mujahedin it groupups agan start rising and people give them support. its impact to terrorism and extremism must be understood by the world. and therefore, the significance of resolution of the kashmir dispute, not because pakistan
wants it, it has been necessary for the region, for the world to fight terrorism and extremism. the other sensitivities are nuclear capability. ladies and gentlemen, pakistan is as much as rogue nuclear state, islamic bomb. i don't know why india is not a -- bomb. [unintelligible] pakistan is nuclear as a defensive, existential threat exists on it. our strategy was of defensive military rate from 1948, and we quantified this into army-navy, air force. only conventional type. in 1974, india went nuclear.
so, therefore, the strategy became untenable. therefore, pakistan had to go nuclear. and when india started firing missiles in the early 1990's, pakistan had to make missiles to restore the balance and restore the strategy of defense, which we did. so, therefore, pakistan's nuclear capability is an existential compulsion which is with inida. dia. no pakistani will understand the logic of what pakistan's nuclear assets are disturbing the world. this is a sensitivity. our strategic assets is the pride of every man walking the streets of pakistan.
so any indication of negativism coming from abroad, the threat coming on the strategic capability of pakistan is viewed extremely seriously by every individual pakistani. so this is the compulsion. oto president obama's visit india. i do not want to talk much. i do not believe in caucus and indo-an being centric. i believe in the bilateral importance of relationships. the united states president was to go to india, absolutely. he has all the rights to do everything. but if pakistan is the strategic
partner, pakistan has strategic significance, pakistan is suffering because of so many bomb blasts, hundreds if not thousands of people dead. the army has suffered 2500 dead. isi has suffered 300 dead. and then we had this fod, massive flood, unprecedented. so many casualties. i thought president obama should have shown some concern for this small strategic partner and visited pakistan. no mention of kashmir. i have explained the issue. it is sensitive in fighting terrorism and extremism.
the concern of india is that no third party is to be involved. yes, indeed, it should not be involved, and we should resolve the kashmir dispute bilaterally, which we were doing in my time, and we were near a solution. but certainly from the sole superpower, one expects concern for pakistan being a strategic ally of importance and also sensitivity to terrorism and extremism, because kashmir does contribute negatively toward terrorism and extremism. while there is concern in the united states or interest in the united states, because india wants to purchase $45 billion of arms purchases, yes, it is of commercial and economic interest, but i remember in my
time, pakistan -- there was the question of the european union and united states for a free trade agreement or preferential trade agreement on additional market access. i believe in trade not aid. it means opening of factors, job creation, poverty elimination, unemployment reduction. unfortunate, it was not given. lastly, ladies and gentlemen, i talk of the political scene and pakistan. here in united states, all said, pakistan's strategic significance. therefore, we are to be concerned what is happening in pakistan and what the future holds for pakistan. we must ensure that pakistan's integrity, its solidarity, is
stability is maintained, because we have to fight terrorism and extremism and defeats it. and if we want to do that, we look at the political realities in pakistan. today, pakistan is on a downward turn. its economy, its government, political turmoil, and of course, terrorism and extremism. in this situation, let's look at the future. one has to look at the future. otherwise, -- react when it is too late. we need to see is there light in this darkness that pakistan is facing today? and that light will come through the political alternatives. i do understand that democracy has to be maintained, but
through democratic, to the process of elections, is light visible? we will have elections in 2013, hopefully, when the government completes its tenure. some people are saying midterm elections or whatever. what will be the result of those elections? will we have a government that will deal with -- that will take pakistan forward in this darkness to light, fight terrorism, and sure the solidarity of pakistan? i don't see that light, unfortunately. therefore, ladies and gentlemen, i personally thought that i need to get involved. maybe there is a chance that i will produce an alternative that may be viable for pakistan. and therefore, i joined politics. one has to analyze the future of pakistan. we must insure the stability of
pakistan for the stake of contain further turmoil in the region. i know i have less time. i am open to any questions you may want to ask. [applause] >> thank you, mr. pres ident. as usual, there was a sweeping vision that you reflected in your talks. i'm going to pick up on some of the points you raiasesed, particularly on the u.s.- pakistan relationship. i am reminded of a quote of the ambassador. he said that being friends with america is like living on the
banks of the great river. every four years, it changes course and it leaves you flooded or high and dry. and one could get that flavor from your commentary on the u.s.-pakistan relationship. tepn you took the fateful se of joining the coalition of the course after 9/11, you agreed to provide access to the united states to pakistani territory, to launch the attack on afghanistan. and there is enough evidence that some of the drone attack, which led to public outcry, were launched from pakistani airfield originally. there was no -- taliban in pakistan at that time. resulted largely of -- because
of the army into the border region. looking back, do you think there was too much haste aceding to the u.s. request? >> this is the argument many people have given. i have faced this question many times. first of all, pakistan's decision to join the coalition and the united states. the first question i asked myself before joining -- what is in pist's interest? does pakistan want a talibanized government in pakistan? and do we believe in and the views of islam that the taliban holds? the answer was no. 99% of pakistanis would say no. we do not want that.
with all that confidence, it was not in our interest to be supportive towards taliban. notas pakistan's interest, u.s. interest. then i went further. if we did not join, what could happen? and my answer, which i do not want to elaborate, was that it would be dangerous for pakistan. because india was ever prepared to join and certainly the united states would attack afghanistan. how did the attack afghanistan from india? pakistan's sovereignty and aerospace or land. from all points of view, bravado is good at a personal level, but when it nations and states are involved coppe, bravado is not the solution. i took the decision. in hindsight, most of the
pakistan is believe it was the right decision. ttp was not there. there was dnsm. which was more serious. he was the leader. and he is the man who's stronger in this malikahn divison. ion. then there was notheanother leader. these are products because of what has been happening. these are products because we defeated after 9/11, taliban and al qaeda were defeated. then 2003, or in 2004, we had a two year period to execute a political solution in
afghanistan acceptable to the people with pashtun. i coined the term that all taliban are pashtun, but all pashtun are not taliban. --'s get them o noun our side the pashtun. now that was not done, so therefore, taliban emerged in 2004. they are starting out to go towards taliban. they are few in numbers, but taliban have emerged. you cannot put that on mine, that i did something -- and then kashmir, yes, indeed, as i said, kashmir, freedom was -- this at all this dynamics. some religions militancy in
afghanistan, and after 9/11, yes, they turned it towards me. so, therefore, our national establishment -- the extremism went on the rise occurred because of the. so i think we need to heed the history but see the future, the realities of today, and battling in the future and winning. i think we should concentrate on that. back to the drone, s, every single person on the streets and pakistan is opposed to them. then why allow the drone attacks to cross your sovereign boundary?
>> yes. you did ask. now, drones. there's a dilemma here that we share with you. the dilemma is that these drones are militan. t. i know that. at the same time, indiscriminate use of drones causes >> in my time, i never allowed [unintelligible] we needed drums of for giving us information about targets. where is the target? that is the main thing. surveillance is important to spot the militants.
you can send your helicopter gunships, or we have created a force called special operations taskforce for the special services group. there are various methods. i was for the use of armed forces. i think that there were only a few grown attacks in those times. i've always objected to them. the use of drones is causing in- a negative.
that is the dilemma. the pakistan armed forces. united states law comes into play, and these are unusual circumstances. >> this is the element of distrust that prevails between the strategic partners. let me take you back across the border and say something quite important about afghanistan. can we win? your response was, we must not lose. it has been almost 10 years since there were connecticut operations in afghanistan. what, in your mind, is that missing strategy?
>> first, i check the important part. do not lose. when we talk of quitting, it has terrible impact,-on both sides. -- impact, negative on both sides. every partner in the coalition including pakistan would like to evaluate the situation. certainly, i am reminded of 1989. millions of rugees in pakistan, so pakistan will have to think. the sphinx -- must think. negative. the enemy is very clear. if i was a taliban commander,
god forbid, time is on my side. or the -- what a negative thing. ladies and gentrelemt -- gentleman, in tribal culture, chivalry is respected. this is never expected. therefore, stay there. now we have to certainly win. what is the winning strategy. how can we do it? we first have to be in the military dominant position. never speak from the position of weakness. how do we do that?
our forces, the u.s. forces, coalition forces, they are diluted because there is too much space. think of going across the pakistan border, it is increasing space. you will be defeated. you will suffer more casualties. never make that mistake. therefore, how you do away with the dilution of space. do we know that the national army today -- what a blunder. 50%, 55% is ethnic. how can you do this? there has to be a balance in the army. there has to be more.
secondly, is then any other element? i think there is, even now. we should have done it in 2002. if you see a tribal culture, to things that i want to highlight. their confined to their mosques. over the centuries, where are they? they are supressed. but they are tehre. -- there. everyone here is a weapon. each side has its armory. it is a weapon culture, weapons
and good weapons. let us look at tribes that have no ideological affinity with taliban. and tribal maliks that have some -- i don't want to use the four- letter words. [laughter] they are raised, armed, give them their pride. let them fight the taliban. tribal people have always fought with the pakistan army against india. let's create those. this is to gain military dominance, and the political instrument, the military will
never give you a solution. so a political instrument. we have to get them on board. term ofagree with this moderate taliban. do what you can to get them on board. they are not a monolithic. they have good command structure like the army. there are a number of groups operating. in fact, let me tell you [unintelligible] their people hvae -- have clashed with each other. 150 dead, killed by the group.
they ambushed them. there is -- it's very good that there are a number of taliban. managing political affairs. but from opposition. >> thank you. one last question before i share you with the audience. this is picking up on your point regarding the 2013 elections. you said you had decided to join politics, and some said that you joined in 1999 when he took over the government. what has changed from the time that you left pakistan that would allow you to go back? and the obstacle that you face,
the legal challenges. that is a question of the presidency, but the national assembly members voting for the office of the president. it has only just been launched. the think there is any realistic chance? -- do you think there is any realistic chance? in a journey starts with the first step. -- >> any journey starts with the first step. you think of it as too big. you don't have that leadership in new -- you. i presume it's not too big. because, number one, i left not because my popularity was rock bottom. i was the most popular man in
pakistan since 2007. there is no doubt in my mind, i know that. i understand the people and the masses of pakistan. it was in 2007 the political turmoil took place. for which there was a reason and i don't want to get involved in that. it is n that pakistan was going down. the socioeconomic development of pakistan was not going down. it was not that the condition of the people, the welfare and well-being of the people was going down. the poverty in pakistan according to the [unintelligible] the 2008 figures were reduced from 32% to 17%. the people of pakistan no way. -- know it.
now, this is one. my popularity did go down, but it was not rock-bottom. i was popular and a lot of segments of pakistan. the other point is, pakistan is suffering today. is that the reason for the gain? i said, in the darkness, the people of pakistan are not seeing the lights. what is the choice? i don't have to elaborate. everyone knows what is happening in pakistan. the alternative, twice and failed miserably. in 1999, pakistan had $300
million in the foreign-exchange. all our indicators, it might be a little better than the united states today. and it was -- the economy was in a terrible state. people were crying, i was a chieftain. i know how many women and men came to me and asked when i was going to take over. if i gave the names of some of them, even those at this gathering would know them. they told me to take over before pakistan has gone in 1999. this condition now is almost the same. people looking to run away, inflation, people committing
suicide? people in the streets. now they are remembering what they missed. the important items, sugar is one of the sanctioned items. in 2006, the sugar price went from 21 to 23. i called the sugar mill growers, why is this to be increased? today is 115. this is what will happen in two years. it is just one thing. the pakistan people are yearning for deliverance. that is why the first step has a lot of relevance, and i think
there is a chance of success. i cannot be sure, but i believe it is better to try and fail and then to not try at all. >> i will open it up. i will start at the frontier. if you could please wait for the microphone and identify yourself. >> welcome back to washington. very fond memories. also the first meeting that you had with president bush at the united nations, our official residence in new york after 9/11. my question build on what you were jt talking about, the economic situation. i remember the economy was growing. it was something like 7% per year.
i stand corrected. and i recall we were talking about different ways of economic cooperation including trying to create reconstruction opportunities so that we can give preferential treatment to pakistan products that would come to the united states. can you elaborate on what your -- getting pakistan back on its feet economically, given the opportunity? >> a cherished my memory with you, sir. your very frank in your approach and i appreciate that. you also appreciated by frank s. -- my frankness. for the development of the socioeconomic development of the
tribal aras. -- areas. nothing came about. that is the negative. what i want to say is, we have to be fast. we have to be trusting. we have to move fast, delivering and doing something for the people. today, the economy of pakistan is nosediving downward. why is it going down, sir? immediately after 2008 when the elected government came into being, one thing that happened, [unintelligible]
pakistan is running away with their money. the dollar was held at 60 rupees for 8 years. today it is 87 rupees. fbi has gone down considerably. the reduction in fdi. exports have half the effectiveness. revenues have gone down. your balance of payment deficit increased. i don't know the latest figure. these are the negative trends, why? because of lack of trust and confidence in the government. i personally think that if people have trust and confidence
in the government, without doing anything, there will be a reverse flow of money. pakistan wants to invest in its own country. why should they take their money out? halo bring their money back. -- they will bring their money back. i believe that the policy and relations mostly, interstate relationships have to do with interpersonal relations. i am very sure that everyone will be -- could be persuaded. the economy will start doing well. i have no doubt on that. our position today, before an exchange reserves are there.
from $300 million to $18.50 billion. it is there. it is not $300 million. and also, we raise revenue collection to one trillion. it can certainly go down, but not that much. the stock index had gone to 14.5000. 14,500. -- gone to 14,500. what is required is confidence of the people in the government.
i have a simple definition. it is my own definition for any leader or any government. ensure the security, progress, and development of the state. this is the definition i have. it can be ensured. all other things are secondary. i know i am talking to a u.s. audience. democracy, ladies and gentlemen, it is a tool to deliver the progress of the state and the welfare and well- being of its people. it is not in and of itself, it must deliver to the state and to the people. if you have a democratically elected government running people down to the ground, i don't think that kind of democracy is the democracy that any state or once -- wants.
the welfare of the state, the well-being of the people. that must be ensured that pakistan can deliver to the people. >> we have a question there. there is great demand for questions. >> i apologize, i am giving long answers. >> thank you for coming. i agree entirely with your analysis, but where i respectfully disagree is that i don't think we can wait until 2013. i recently returned from another trip from pakistan and i believe the situation is far more dire than the people in this country appreciate. the dialogue only procrastinated the inevitable which will be a collision between the united states and pakistan because of a profound misunderstandings. what, if anything, can the
united states or pakistan do in the short term to turn around what i believe is going to be this collision? >> think you, sir. i am surprised and glad to hear what you say. well, what the united states can do is to help pakistan. helping pakistan, i have been very bluntly indicating that what is happening is not really helping pakistan. we have to help pakistan economically. but concerns of corruption, there is no doubt.
you ask a difficult question, frankly. if i were there, i would have asked for market access so i can create jobs and open factories. i can reduce unemployment, i can reduce poverty. that is certainly a thing that the united states can certainly do. immediately. remaining -- i think pakistan on the law-and-order side, we are being -- a the the term is extremism. the united states needs to develop a better understanding of the army instead of blaming the army for collaborating with
terrorists. i don't understand why this is done. the army has suffered 2500 dead at the hands of them. they are killing the army men, and you're blaming the army? i don't understand. they are killing the personnel, about 300 dead, officers all over pakistan. we are collaborating with -- there is a mismatch. please try to understand. i will leave micromanagement to pakistan. be concerned with their intentions, that they do not want taliban and al qaeda.
be concerned with strategic delivery and don't micromanage for them. they understand who to talk to, how to talk, what enemies to take on. and we will leave this micromanagement to the people of pakistan. the this is the second, i think. we need internal stability in pakistan, political stability. i don't know if the united states can contribute and to bring in political stability. that is the ultimate requirement because the political stability would bring about economic stability and good governance. i don't know if the united states can assist.
>> thank you, mr. president for your very candid presentation. if i might draw you out on what seems to be a tension in your presentation. he spoke to the president's visit of the region and or resentment in regards to depictions of pakistan that your assessed with india. you spoke of the fact that a nuclear capacity of your region is a compulsion, it is an existential come posen. does it have to do with india or something else? how do you reconcile the comments, please? >> if i were to tell you very briefly, and indian forces today are based on 33 infantry divisions. 25 of them are oriented towards
the pakistan border. there are about six armored and mechanized divisions. all six are organized at pakistan's border. they are used for an offensive. the navy, may be oriented towards pakistan's shores. the incidents like the attack on the parliament, the whole army came on to the borders of pakistan. the situation developed. or do you x -- what do you expect pakistan to do? there force is three or four times bigger than pakistan. and when incidents take place, the politicians in india are
crying for punishment, attacking pakistan, it is a trifecta. what can the leadership do? it has an existential threat. the military strategy is of manila and defensive deterrents in the conventional and unconventional. previously, it was conventional with india going nuclear. >> thank you for your frank comments. stepping back from the immediate issues you have been discussing that are very important, those like myself have lived in pakistan, where are very concerned about the educational system there. i have been the many villages where it says that there is a
school there, but there is no school there. you helped initiate a good program, but international measures say that only 40% of kids that are school age are in school. how we get pakistan to head towards those goals that are so crucial. for the long-term benefit of pakistan? >> i could not agree with you more, sir. the long-term strategy. education, poverty, unemployment. this is a knowledge-based economy. that is a long-term strategy. i understand we have to do something. what needs to be done, more allocation of funds for
education, how do we talk about allocation of funds? we increased the budget from 2.9% to 4%. a 1% increase is 170 billion rupees. that is the kind of money that is a 1% increase. the total of pakistan between 88 and 99 used to be about 90 billion rupees for the public sector development project. it was to 520 billion. out of this 1% increase, therefore, the difficulty and money requirement. i agree with you that government has not been performing.
your 100 percent right about those schools. 20% of teachers in pakistan are ghost teachers. it was 1996 or 1997. there is a corps commander in my region. the total survey, 20% schools. teachers are ghosts, only on paper. we have to do something more than the government. and we create -- he was a doctor here, having a very good practice. he gave me this idea of education and helping at the grass-roots level. he gave me the idea that we would have freer schools. the spending of money. we take schools from the
villages. the teachers from that village, girls and boys, and i told him to come to pakistan. he did that. since 2001, its red to many districts of pakistan. thousands of adult literacy centers. there are a lot of philanthropic activities involved in collecting money, donations, and opening schools. they are the best because they do it with a passion. i personally think that the government should reinforce the philanthropists because they do things with passion.
and make them expand. i think it a multipronged strategy to educate the people of pakistan that is so important, not only from economic development, but also fighting off terrorism. i could not agree with you more, sir. >> when you were in power, you came across as a leader that genuinely wanted a solution, and he made many efforts to reopen the debate, think outside the box. it was reported you were very slow to doing an agreement with india. is that true? >> get me elected and i will revise its. [laughter]
the issue, i think you are right. i used to be called a man of war, which i was. i was in uniform. i call myself a man for peace. i say that with conviction because i have seen the ravages of war and all of the confrontations with india. internally against the uprisings. my own best friend has been killed. my son is named after my best friend. nobody understands the ravages of war as much as i do. i am a man for peace. a lot of people ask me if i have a military man, and not everybody understands that. i initiated the process, and i
initiated the process, i'd probably say that i initiated. it is proceeding well. there are three qualities required in a leader. i have said for some agreement. one is sincerity. sincerity to resolve the dispute from the heart. the other is flexibility. accepting someone else's point of view. the third one is called us and courage. why is required, where will we be on an issue -- i don't believe the two sides would be naive enough to give everything. so there has to be a give and
take. india has to give, and pakistan will have to give also. if there is a leader who buckles under pressure, that he will be thinking that his political clout will go down and his popularity will go down and the people, that interferes in that movement. it is reasonably fast in fact. we were drafting an agreement. i think it is a pity that and we can't reach conclusions, fleeting moments come in the lives of leaders, and the key to success is to grasp the fleeting moment and don't let it fly past.
>> we have about 15 minutes left, and we have a number of questions i will try to go through them quickly. the microphone is coming to you. >> you talked about the blunder's made in afghanistan. by the u.s.. i wanted to ask you why you allowed the taliban leadership safe haven? were you really in control of isi? there was an evidence thatisi -- that isi was helping hte tali -- the taliban.
>> i have to be very careful in answering to you unless you write something that disagrees with us. which you live done before. [laughter] i have forgotten your question. [laughter] >> the taliban -- >> if you think that i provided safe haven to caliban -- taliban, what can i say to you? people that attack me, i am providing safe haven to them? --an't answer anything again people talk.
there is an office. have you identified were the of this is? if is a big statement. their refugee camps. the biggest camp is 100,000, about 90,000. i have flown in a helicopter around the camp because i thought maybe one day you would put in the military action, there are lanes inside where men cannot -- is so close and so congested. 90,000 people live like this. it is a nightmare if there is any military operation in this area. now, all of these refugee camps,
there are dozens in pakistan. all of these refugee camps are used for various purposes. and they must be people who are harboring them. but that i am allowing this to happen is not the case. we introduced checks, and germany has thousands of vehicles coming every day. including the isf. we introduced biometric systems there. and the system, so we can control the movement across the
border. on the other side, in spite of my best efforts to introduce a similar system on the other side, nobody has done that. so we have been trying our best to control movements, but on the other side, there is no response. so therefore, i would say that while these refugee camps might be a safe haven for any kind of activity, it is not a government sponsored. there is no safe haven created -- after all, all of the leaders of significance, tell me what has been caught in afghanistan. all have been caught in pakistan.
and by whom? but pakistan law enforcement agencies and intelligence. in cooperation with the cia, yes indeed. these are sensitive materials which really disturbed everyone in pakistan when we put all the blame for movement across the border. i don't understand why. why is pakistan only responsible when the coalition forces are not responsible. can we share the blame? i don't understand. this is what really develops the mistrust and lack of confidence in each other.
gosh let me join the others and welcoming you. i like to ask you about afghanistan and the role of pakistan and india. many people say that the countries are engaged in a proxy war, and since you were just talking about peace, is it possible for india and pakistan to wage a proxy peace? of countries have interests. pakistan has strong security interests. what would you do to move away from proxy war to proxy peace? >> who is initiating a proxy war is the first question. what is happening in afghanistan, i am from pakistan.
please do not think i am saying all of this just to protect pakistan. i know there are many indians who might be sitting here. unless we fight this terrorism with unity of action, we will fail. what is happening to pakistan, i would just like to enunciate. everyone knows. why is it there. why are these to there? is there an indian community there? are they doing trade there? what is the interesting of india? nothing other than aiding and abetting terrorism in pakistan. i have documentary evidence.
i know indian intelligence is coming, i of the construction activity that they are doing, and i have been telling the president not to give construction activity to indians on our border. you can go anywhere in the interior. we will build a road for you. but no, they must build their. they want to call terrorists into pakistan. and who is against the interbreeding of pakistan, he said on television and in the media. they don't believe in pakistan. he is sitting in kabul, sir. he is -- i have seen
photographs. let me say this to the others. the training of diplomats, military intelligence, it takes place in india. i have been offering everything to karzai. nothing in pakistan. only india. we are being stabbed in the back. what should isi do? it is supposed to protect pakistan's interests. therefore, the united states must understand what is happening. and i say this very openly to everyone. help pakistan stop all this. there must not be a proxy war
there. i totally agree with you. but please understand who is doing it. and why it is happening. >> you made some remarks earlier of regarding the conduct of military operations in afghanistan. can you make some suggestions regarding the local tribes, leaders, etc.? it seems to run the country to the least official strategy of building of the afghan army and the national police. d.c. a possibility of your ideas or similar ones of them powering tribes and local leaders could take place? is there anybody that will listen to this? where are we doomed to fail because of this idea that we need to build national
institutions? >> it is not in conflict. the conflict -- the national army and police, we can raise them to a level, that is a good course of action. but i said that there is the added possibility. if we can't have the possibility, the police and the national army is the answer. ultimately, they are to take over. i hope ethnic balance is being maintained. i am afraid you're pushing more to the taliban. there is the war there.
total war. the revival of 89. we must have ethnic balance, and we must have people and the dominant position. not in having the water to ministers giving useless portfolios. under his nose, how is this happening? we must -- and the police and the national army is being raised in large numbers, enough to police the border and the talents, that is very good. i think that is the right strategy. >> we are getting near the end
of our time. this is in the order that i recognize. and then, at the back. >> very nice to see you again. i would like to ask about a different militancy problem, not one coming from afghanistan, but one coming from within the country, particularly punjab, particularly, l.e.t. pakistan faces a dilemma of how to deal with groups that have been very helpful in the past with india and it will even offer again to join the army against india if necessary. they are causing havoc. i heard from officials as recently as yesterday that l.e.t. was a fantastic success
because it destroyed some many promising chances for peace. because you banned so many of these groups, but i would like to ask you about your own time in office. given everything that has happened since july of 2007, did you make a mistake? >> [unintelligible] >> attacking. and the brothers. >> l.e.t. and i have hinted at the history that 1989, the freedom struggle started. [unintelligible] because the suppression of the
indian army iran and pakistan, it came about. and left europe in the early 90's. evenother names i don't remember, frankly. groups can about in pakistan, and it was such -- there was a lot of sympathy, no government really did anything about it. and also, they were going to fight to the indian army. it went along with the psyche of the people of pakistan and everyone. india was refusing to even people in -- table it in any form. it did not allow pakistan any room towards resolution.
it went along this activity and went along with the psyche and the thinking of the entire population. then comes 9/11. now rejoined the coalition -- we join the coalition. there is taliban, al qaeda, everything. [unintelligible] they developed a nexus with taliban and al qaeda. these are problem areas involved with terrorism in pakistan. i have banned almost all of them. it is easier said than done. the pakistan government and the
intelligence organizations, allow them -- you can rock the boat so much that the boat capsizes. that need to be done. allow gradual action for the strategy that does not disturb the entire law and order situation in pakistan. this is what i would like to say. by the way, [unintelligible] they did the best work with the earthquake. they did an excellent job in the relief operations. you are dealing with a situation that has popularity
with the people. when they went to fight, it is very popular with the people of pakistan. they are being killed, so we must help them. it is a difficult situation for any government in pakistan. that is the root. that is my concern that president obama -- [unintelligible] you have a responsibility towards everyone. i thought maybe it least he should have mentioned that you need to resolve this. certainly, i did not do anything wrong. it is in the hearts of -- heart of islamabad. the women, another 2,500 with
explosives and suicide jackets inside the mosques. we were being humiliated. the government was being insulted. the government was challenged by these. i remember the alarm that was caught in the diplomats. they sent their families out. these people were beating them up inside of that moscow -- mosque. before taking action, i did everything to bring them to an understanding. i used all religious lobbies, the consul of islamic ide ologies. ologies.