READOUT: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S VIDEO CONFERENCE WITH PRESIDENT GHANI OF AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
March 12, 2015
Readout of the President’s Video Conference with President Ashraf Ghani of Afghanistan

Today, the President spoke with President Ashraf Ghani of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan by video conference, along with Chief Executive Officer Dr. Abdullah Abdullah.  The President encouraged accelerated Afghan progress towards forming an inclusive national unity government and expressed his expectation that their visit to Washington later this month will demonstrate our mutual commitment to a strengthened U.S.-Afghan strategic partnership.  The leaders discussed the ongoing efforts of the Afghan National Security Forces to improve security in Afghanistan and the importance of countering extremist threats from groups like al-Qa`ida.  The President commended President Ghani and Dr. Abdullah on their leadership in promoting an Afghan peace process to end the conflict in Afghanistan and their initiative to improve Afghanistan-Pakistan relations.

WALES SUMMIT AND NATO'S CHANGING ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN

 FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

FACT SHEET: Wales Summit – NATO’s Changing Role in Afghanistan

NATO’s mission in Afghanistan has been the Alliance’s largest and one of its longest-running military operations, with 50 coalition countries contributing a peak of 140,000 troops over a 13-year campaign.  The United States, together with NATO Allies and partners, support a sovereign, stable, unified, and democratic Afghanistan and will continue our partnership with Afghanistan based on the principles of mutual respect and mutual accountability.  Moreover, we believe that an Afghan-led peace and reconciliation process is the surest way to end violence and ensure lasting stability for Afghanistan and the region.

International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).  Since 2001, ISAF has assisted Afghan authorities in maintaining security and developing the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), per a United Nations mandate and at the request of the Afghan government.  The ISAF mission is part of the overall international effort to enable the Government of Afghanistan to exercise its authority throughout the country by providing security and stability to the Afghan people.  NATO assumed command of the ISAF mission in August 2003.

At the Lisbon Summit in 2010, Afghanistan and ISAF nations, including the United States, committed to transition full responsibility for security to the Afghan Government by the end of 2014.  Afghanistan and ISAF nations reaffirmed that commitment in 2012 at the Chicago Summit and took a step further announcing a mid-2013 milestone after which the ANSF would be in the lead for security nationwide and the ISAF role would transition from combat to support.

Since June 2013, the ANSF has been in the lead, with modest coalition support, and has exceeded most expectations.  Today, ISAF forces focus primarily on training, advising, and assisting their Afghan counterparts.  At the end of 2014, the ANSF will assume full responsibility for security and the ISAF mission will end.

Resolute Support.  At the Wales Summit, NATO Allies and partners reaffirmed their intent to conduct a non-combat train, advise, and assist mission in Afghanistan beyond 2014, known as Resolute Support, contingent upon the Afghans signing a Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) and a status of forces agreement (SOFA) with NATO.  This new advisory mission would be at the security ministry and national institutional level, with advising to the ANSF at the corps level and advising to Afghan special operations forces at the tactical level.  This non-combat mission would be centered in the Kabul-Bagram area, with a regional presence in the north, west, south, and east. It would initially include approximately 12,000 troops.  Four Allied nations have agreed to serve as “framework nations” – Turkey will lead in the capital; Germany will lead in the north; Italy will lead in the west; and the United States will lead in the south and east.  NATO is prepared to commence this mission at the beginning of 2015.

For the United States’ part, President Obama announced on May 27, 2014 that the U.S. combat mission in Afghanistan will end by the end of this year and, contingent upon a signed BSA and NATO SOFA, the United States would be prepared to continue “two narrow missions” in Afghanistan after 2014:  “training Afghan forces and supporting counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al-Qa’ida.”

At the beginning of 2015, we anticipate 9,800 U.S. troops in Afghanistan with the majority participating in the NATO-led Resolute Support mission.  By the end of 2015, we would reduce that presence by roughly half, consolidating our troops in Kabul and Bagram Airfield.  By the end of 2016, our military presence would shift to a strong security assistance mission based from our embassy.  This presence would serve as the basis for sustained security cooperation with the Afghan government and continued coordination with Allies’ and partners’ efforts to advise and assist the Afghan security ministries and to continue to develop ANSF capabilities.

Financial Sustainment of the ANSF.  At the Wales Summit, NATO Allies and partners renewed their commitment to contribute significantly to the financial sustainment of the ANSF through the end of 2017 and to financially sustain the ANSF throughout the decade of transformation.  The international community has pledged nearly €1 billion annually to sustain the ANSF for 2015 through the end of 2017.  The United States has requested up to $4.1 billion in our 2015 budget, which would help sustain the ANSF surge end strength of 352,000 through 2015.  The United States expects that Afghanistan will assume an increasing portion of ANSF sustainment costs beginning with $500 million in 2015, as agreed at the Chicago Summit.  To ensure that donors can confidently commit their financial support to the ANSF over the long term, NATO Allies and partners welcomed the development of effective funding mechanisms including the strengthening of the Afghan National Army Trust Fund and the establishment of the Oversight and Coordination Body.  And finally, NATO Allies and partners look forward to working with Afghanistan to review planning for a sufficient and sustainable ANSF beyond 2015.

NATO-Afghanistan Enduring Partnership.  At the Wales Summit, NATO nations reaffirmed their commitment to strengthen its enduring partnership with Afghanistan, which would serve as the foundation for longer term security cooperation between NATO and Afghanistan.

WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS BRIEFING ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Background Briefing by a Senior Administration Official

Aboard Air Force One

En Route Joint Base Andrews

 1:35 A.M. (local)

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So I just wanted to give you guys a background readout here.  Upon taking off, the President called President Karzai of Afghanistan because they weren’t able to see each other.  They discussed progress that’s been made by the Afghan National Security Forces.  The President referenced that he’d heard very positive readouts of the progress in his briefings with Ambassador Cunningham and General Dunford.  They discussed the success of the first round of the elections and the preparations that are being made for the second round of elections. 

The President praised the Afghan electoral institutions for the work that they’re doing, as well as the Afghan National Security Forces’ work in securing those elections.  The President also reiterated his continued support for a process of Afghan-led reconciliation that President Karzai is committed to.

With respect to the BSA, the President reiterated his interest in concluding a BSA with President Karzai’s successor and agreed to stay in touch with President Karzai as we make determinations about what potential post-2014 presence could go along with a BSA. 

Q    What did Karzai say about that -- the BSA?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Just that they agreed to stay in touch on it and that President Obama would be in touch before we articulate publicly any decision-making.  But I think it’s understood by both of them that [the] BSA is something that his successor would conclude; we crossed that bridge earlier in the year.  And again, I think we saw good statements from both Abdullah Abdullah and Ashraf Ghani in recent days about their interest in signing a BSA. 

Q    Do you have any more information on how much of a heads up Karzai got?  Because it seemed like from the statement you guys had with the offer for him to come to Bagram, it was basically an offer that was made so late that he would never have been able to make it anyways.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I don’t know the exact timing of when he was notified.  That’s handled by the embassy.  I do think -- look, in the past, President Karzai has not traveled to Bagram when we’ve been there, so it’s not our expectation that he would.  He prefers to host President Obama at the palace.  Again, the nature of this visit was such that we were really keeping it focused on the troops and not looking to get into Afghan politics at this time.  So we weren’t surprised, but we did want to make sure that President Obama could speak to him given his travel to Afghanistan and the briefings he got from his senior [staff].

Q    So they spoke after we were wheels up, right?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Right after the plane was wheels up, yes.

Q    Do you know about how long the call lasted?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes, I think the call lasted about 15 to 20 minutes.

Q    And did he tell him -- I’m sorry, I wasn’t sure if I understood -- did the President tell President Karzai that he will let him know before he makes an announcement whether it’s at West Point or whatever about the plans for residual troop numbers?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes, he would, as a matter of course, consult with President Karzai before publicly articulating an announcement like that.

Q    And was this call that articulation?  Or there will be another --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  This call was about having been in Afghanistan and wanting to touch base with him.  And actually, the only other thing I left out is they also talked about the recent attack on the Indian Consulate in Afghanistan and the context of President Karzai also traveling to India tomorrow for Prime Minister-designate Modi’s inauguration.

Q    When exactly did the President invite Karzai to Bagram?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I think the embassy extended that invitation sometime before our arrival.  I don’t know the exact time.

Q    When Obama had his briefing with Dunford and others, what was the conversation like about the post-2014 plan?  I mean, are they still in the stage where he’s actually getting guidance and advice?  Or was it more him telling the Commander and others what he’s thinking about announcing?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I mean, it’s both.  He’s been getting their advice over the last few weeks.  He was able to share some of his thinking.  I think they really wanted to, given the context of how they see things on the ground.  I think the principal message that we heard from General Dunford and Ambassador Cunningham is that there are a number of factors converging here that do make it an opportune moment for the United States to articulate its commitment -- that the Afghan National Security Forces have performed, in some respects better than we anticipated; they have moved into the lead for combat; the elections have created a sense of optimism in Afghanistan. 

So there’s an environment in which there are some good strains that are converging that make a potential U.S. articulation of our commitment to Afghanistan worthwhile; also, the commitments from the two leading candidates.  So I think their message was that different parts of this puzzle are coming together in Afghanistan in this year of transition and that there is a continued investment that the United States can make that can help the new administration in Afghanistan when it does take power to have a stable beginning.

They also reviewed the ongoing security challenges that we face in Afghanistan -- how we are going about the training mission; how we are helping the Afghan National Security Forces not just build their combat force, but also be able to sustain some of the functions of a national army.  So I think they covered in some detail the state of the Afghan National Security Forces and then discussed the challenges of securing the second round of the elections.  The Afghans will be in the lead for that as well.  We’re simply providing advice and counsel on that.

Q    So the progress that they’re making, does that suggest that a smaller force would be fine, like of 5,000?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, it suggests how do we focus on supporting those functions of the Afghan National Security Forces that are going to be necessary for sustainability so that not only can they serve as a combat force in the field, but how are they building out the structures and institutions of a national army, and also how we’re going to coordinate with our allies, some of whom have also indicated a commitment to a post-2014 Afghanistan.

Q    But is it fair to say that short of whoever wins the election, not signing the BSA, that the zero option is off the table at this point?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: If there’s not a BSA, we will not keep troops in Afghanistan.

Q    Right.  But if the BSA is signed, you guys will move forward with --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, yes, I think the President has indicated that, and you saw in his comments today that it’s our expectation that if there is a BSA we’d look at how -- what force structure could fulfill those missions.  And that’s what he’ll have a chance to speak to in the coming days.

Q    Ten thousand has been the high number that we’ve been using.  Is there -- we shouldn’t use that number anymore when we talk about the range?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I’m not going to get into numbers.

Q    Has the President called, or is he planning on calling on this flight either anyone in the leadership of Ukraine or in Russia?  And can you talk about that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  We don’t have any current calls scheduled, but I would expect that he will call at the first opportunity the newly elected President.  I think, obviously, we want to monitor how they are certifying those results.  What I will say is that the President was commenting about how well the election went from his perspective.  Clearly, the Ukrainians turned out in significant numbers.  Clearly, the message they were sending was one of national unity and a commitment to democracy.  Even in some of the more difficult provinces you saw people working to vote. 

I think the statements you saw after the election from leaders like Poroshenko, they underscore national unity and send very positive signals about the future of Ukraine, not just its relations with its neighbors, but in reaching out to the east.  So again, I think the overarching message from the election was extraordinarily positive when you look at the difficulties of the last several weeks -- for Ukraine it’s a turnout of those numbers and to have such a clear result.  And in support of policies of national unity, inclusion, economic stabilization, I think sets a very good groundwork for our relationship with Ukraine going forward.

Q    -- was that Poroshenko got more than the 50 percent-plus one, so there’s no run-off and they kind of move ahead, instead of being in limbo for another month or so.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, again, that’s up to the Ukrainians.  I do think, though, that the sense of stability in getting to work that comes from a clear election result could be extraordinarily positive.  It provides some assurance and legitimacy at a time where Ukraine has been dealing with significant challenges.  And again, what we’ve always said is this election will settle the legitimacy question.  There were questions raised by Russia and others after the Yanukovych government collapsed and he fled town.  Now the people of Ukraine have spoken, and I don’t think there can be any questioning the legitimacy of a result that reflects such a broad cross-section of the Ukrainian public.

So I think we made clear that the United States, our European allies will be there for this new government to help them deal with some very difficult challenges -- stabilizing the economy and trying to calm this conflict.  And we hope that Russia will choose to play a constructive role in respecting this result.

Q    No calls to Putin expected?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  None expected.

Q    Is there anything -- any color from behind the scenes that we couldn’t see, either in the hospital visit or in his interactions with troops that you want to talk about?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Like I said, the only thing I’d say is that he -- or a couple of things.  He was able to tour kind of the -- some of the operation centers.  And in each place that he went he made a point of going around to each desk and shaking everybody’s hand and thanking them.  As he mentioned in his remarks, in the operation center he saw a poster of the Twin Towers, which clearly resonated with him, and he referred to the fact that, in his private remarks to the troops in those operation centers, that it reminded him of why we’re here. 

When he finished those briefings and walked towards the hangar, he went through the Hall of Honor that they have there, where they have photos of the fallen from Afghanistan.  So he was able to look at photos of many troops who had been lost in Afghanistan and thought that was obviously particularly profound on Memorial Day weekend to see those photos, even as he was then able to go and spend some time with the troops as well.

So I think he was, as always, moved by the visit and inspired by what these troops are doing every single day on behalf of the United States.

Q    How many soldiers was he able to meet with at the hospital?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I don’t know.  I’ll check that for you.  The other thing he did -- he was able to give out some awards.  Did we get you the background on that?

Q    No.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I’ll get that for you.  A number of Purple Hearts and other awards.  So we’ll get that for you.

Q    Were there new awards done tonight that was part of this?  We don’t have that.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes, he -- well get you what he gave out there, yes.

Thanks, guys.

END          

1:48 A.M. (local) 

U.S. MILITARY IN AFGHANISTAN ADAPTS TO TRAINING ROLE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Right:  Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is greeted by Army Maj. Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, commander of the International Security Assistance Force’s Regional Command East and of the Army’s 10th Mountain Division, upon his arrival on Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, May 1, 2014. Dempsey is in Afghanistan to visit troops and commanders. DOD photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Daniel Hinton.  

American Units Adapting to New Missions in Afghanistan
By Jim Garamone

American Forces Press Service

BAGRAM AIRFIELD, Afghanistan, May 2, 2014 – As you walk into the headquarters for Regional Command East here, you see a photo of the second plane hitting the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

Underneath the photo is an inscription: “Never again.”

“Our soldiers understand why they are here,” said Army Maj. Gen. Stephen J. Townsend, the commander of Regional Command East and of the Army’s 10th Mountain Division. “International terrorists will never use this country to launch attacks on the United States or our allies again.”

Townsend spoke during a break in meetings with Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is visiting here to confer with senior leaders.

But the mission American and coalition service members perform has changed from one in which Americans did the combat operations to one in which U.S. and coalition forces train, advise and assist Afghan forces.

When he does battlefield circulations, Townsend said, he tells the U.S. and coalition service members that the mission is to “get the Afghan national security forces stood up, so we can stand down.”

This, the general said, is the biggest change he has seen since his last deployment to Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011. In 2011, American and coalition forces conducted about 95 percent of the operations. A few Afghan soldiers accompanied them, he said.

“Now, it’s exactly the opposite, with 95 percent of the operations led by the Afghans,” he said. “In fact, between 80 and 85 percent of those operations are Afghan unilaterals. There’s nobody from the coalition with them at all.”
This does not mean that American and coalition forces are out of danger. Last week, two 10th Mountain Division soldiers were killed conducting force-protection patrols.

Veterans of multiple deployments understand what is happening, Townsend said. “They are very happy to advise the Afghans and help train them and encourage them as they leave the gate on a mission,” he said. “They stand by as part of a quick-reaction force if needed.”

But they understand that “victory has an Afghan face,” the general said.
The mantra now is to train the trainer. U.S. forces train Afghan officers and sergeants, who in turn train Afghan privates. “That’s the only way we can build an institution that can sustain itself,” Townsend said.

The effort also is transitioning from unit-based security force assistance to functionally based assistance. In the past, American soldiers have been covering down on Afghan kandaks, or brigades, to train all aspects of what that unit needed to function effectively. “Now we are shifting our lens to functions -- critical functions,” he said.

Logistics and intelligence are two of these critical functions. Training now strives to connect kandaks through the chain of command to the Afghan Defense Ministry. “A lot of the Afghan units are functioning just fine,” Townsend said. But they do need things from outside the unit to perform best, he added.

Spare parts, replacements and intelligence sharing are examples of functions outside a unit that are critical to the unit’s success, he explained. “We’re trying to get the Afghans to push their intelligence down through channels to the unit that needs it,” he said. “We’re trying to make that pipe work.”

With logistics, the Afghans have no historical data to forecast what spares will be needed. As a result, they are still buying bulk parts. This is inefficient, the general said, because “you end up buying too many of one widget and too few of another.”
“They don’t have enough money to be inefficient and wasteful,” he added. “They have to be very efficient. We’re trying to help them maximize their bang for the buck.”

When Townsend speaks with U.S. and coalition troops, he said, they ask him about the status of the bilateral security agreement that would allow a continued U.S. presence in Afghanistan beyond this year. They also ask if the United States will leave a residual force in Afghanistan, and what it will do. “They may operate at the foxhole-and-rifle squad level, but they think at a national level,” he said.
The general said he believes Americans should know about the work his troopers are doing here.

“We lost a soldier, … and I read a post on the Internet from an American that said, ‘I thought we were out of there,’” Townsend said. “The American people need to know we are still here and doing the nation’s mission.”

DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER TAKES NOTE OF PROGRESS IN AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Carter Meets With Afghan Officials, Notes Progress
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 16, 2013 - Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter has wrapped up a three-day visit to Afghanistan, where he met with senior International Security Assistance Force, coalition and Afghan officials.
In a statement summarizing the visit, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said Carter met in the Afghan capital of Kabul with Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, Interior Minister Umar Daudzai and members of the Afghan Parliament to stress the importance of a timely conclusion to the bilateral security agreement that will spell out the terms of the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan once the current mission ends there in December 2014.
Carter also stressed the importance of timely, free and fair elections in Afghanistan next year, the press secretary added.

In addition, he said, the deputy secretary noted the "tremendous progress" made by the Afghan national security forces this fighting season, the first in which they've assumed full lead.

Carter also met with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham and ISAF Commander Marine Corps Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. to discuss progress made on concluding the bilateral security agreement, supporting the Afghan forces and setting conditions for a stable and secure Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond, Little said.

The deputy secretary also visited ISAF and Afghan forces in Bastion, Shindand, Gardez and Ghazni to commend them on their ongoing efforts and successes, the press secretary said, and he thanked Polish forces at Ghazni and the 203rd Afghan National Army Corps at Gardez.

He also visited Herat to pay tribute to the men and women affected by the Sept. 13 attack on the U.S. consulate there, and to praise Afghan and ISAF forces for their quick and decisive action, Little said.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE BRIEFING FROM AFGHANISTAN BY GEN. RICHARD CRIPWELL

Map Credit:  U.S. State Department.
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Presenter: Director of Strategic Transition Group, International Security Assistance Force Joint Command Brig. Gen. Richard Cripwell 
DOD News Briefing with Brig. Gen. Cripwell via Teleconference from Afghanistan


            CAPT JANE CAMPBELL, DIRECTOR, PRESS OPERATIONS:  Good morning here in the briefing room, and good evening in Afghanistan. I'd like to welcome the ISAF Strategic Transition Group Brigadier General Richard Cripwell, British army, to the Pentagon Briefing Room.

            Brigadier Cripwell assumed duties at ISAF headquarters in April of this year. Since 1982 he has served in junior regiment appointments with the Royal Engineers and the Queen's Gurkha Engineers and in field and amphibious regiments. He commanded 34 Field Squadron (Air Support) and 26 Engineer Regiment, supporting a number of Royal Air Force and mechanized brigade deployments.

            Brigadier Cripwell has also served in command and staff positions in Kosovo, Mozambique and Iraq. He has also served operations in Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, and various parts of the Middle East and the Balkans.

            This is Brigadier Cripwell's first time with us in the Pentagon Briefing Room. He will provide brief opening remarks on progress towards transition in Afghanistan and then take your questions.

            And with that, sir, I'll turn it over to you.

            BRIGADIER RICHARD CRIPWELL:  Thank you.

            Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. As was said, my name is Brigadier General Richard Cripwell, and I am the director of the Strategic Transition and Assessments Group here at ISAF headquarters.

            Thank you all for being here. I'm pleased to have this opportunity to talk to you about the transition of security responsibility from ISAF to the Afghanistan National Security Forces, a process that is placing the lead for security in Afghanistan with the police and the armed forces.

            It is a process that was initiated by the Lisbon conference in late 2010, a process that is defined by the Inteqal agreement or the transition agreement and which is regulated by the Joint Afghan-NATO Inteqal Board, which is responsible for making recommendations to the president of Afghanistan about transition.

            There are plans to be five tranches to transition. And as you will be aware, on the 13th of May, President Karzai announced the details of tranche three. As a result of that, every capital in all 34 provinces in Afghanistan has now entered transition. This tranche will see three-quarters of Afghanistan's population living in areas where the ANSF is in the lead for security.

            The importance of this process cannot be overstressed. President Karzai stated in Chicago that it remains his highest joint strategic priority. And we are on track, with our Afghan colleagues, to complete the process of entering transition by the middle of 2013, with completion of the process by the end of 2014. After 2014, we will maintain an equally strong partnership with Afghanistan, as the Strategic Partnership Agreement and many bilateral agreements make clear.

            I would conclude these brief opening remarks by saying a few words about how the Afghan National Security Forces are going to assume the lead for security within the country. I am fortunate enough to work with the army and the police every day and to see them all over the country. The responsibility for leading security is not one they take lightly, but it is one that they relish.

            They are growing in capability all the time, and their confidence in themselves is growing exponentially. During recent high-profile incidents across Afghanistan, the ANSF have taken leading roles and responded aggressively, with little or no coalition support. In simple terms, they know what they have to do, and that they are proving that they can do it every day.

            Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes my opening remarks. Again, thank you for attending, and I look forward to hearing your questions.

            Q:  Hi, General. This is Courtney Kube from NBC News.

            I realize that current ops aren't really in your daily purview, but there was a suicide attack in Khost earlier today, and we've been having a hard time getting the ground truth on what happened. Can you give us an idea? It seems -- our understanding is there were both Afghans and Americans killed. Can you give us your understanding of what happened?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  All I can tell you, and this is -- I've been, in fact, out of the capital for most of the day -- I'm aware that there was a suicide bomb attack in Khost, that there have been ISAF casualties, and I understand there have been a great deal of Afghan civilian casualties as well. But I have no more details than that, and I think it would be inappropriate for me to speculate. The ISAF spokesman will have more details in due course.

            Q:  General, Otto Kreisher with SEAPOWER Magazine and others.

            We've had another incident recently of green-on-blue. That's a continuing problem that kind of erodes the confidence our troops have in working with their allies. How do you appraise that situation? And what's being done, you know, to avoid those?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Well, firstly, I'm not aware that there have been any recent green-on-blue attacks, although I'm aware there's been some accusations of them. But to approach your question more broadly, of course any death out here is an absolute tragedy, and it is more so when it is caused by Afghan forces.

            But I should be clear, firstly, that it's a tragedy as much for the Afghans themselves.

            Every single day there are tens of thousands and more ongoing relationships between ISAF forces and the Afghans. We work extremely closely. We work extremely well together. These attacks are absolutely not representative of the huge, huge majority of the Afghan forces, and they are dismayed by them as we are.

            In answer to your question of what's being done, I -- the Afghans are doing an enormous amount to ensure the loyalty of every single member of the police and the army. The deputy commander here has spoken about this in the past, but it includes biometric testing, it includes the deployment of a national directorate of security officials into units. And as I say, they are turning every stone they can to ensure the loyalty of their own forces.

            Q:  Yes, thanks for speaking with us. This is Kristina Wong from The Washington Times.

            Last summer there was a highly critical ISAF report called "The Crisis of Compatibility," on the relationship between ISAF and Afghan National Security Forces. I'm wondering, what recommendations from that report have been implemented? And has that relationship between ISAF and ANSF forces improved?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I can't speak to the detail of the report, but I can tell you -- and as I said in my introductory remarks -- I am out almost every day with Afghan army officials and Afghan police officials, and that we work extremely closely together. And we see that in my area in transition all of the time.

            The whole point of transition is to put the ANSF in the lead and for ISAF to be in support of them. And those relationships, day in, day out, across the country are working extremely well.

            Q:  What metrics are used to gauge the ANSF other than performance in those high-profile attacks?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I'm sorry, could I ask you to repeat the question? It got lost in transmission.

            Q:  What metrics are used to gauge the progress of the -- and competence of the ANSF other than performance during those high- profile attacks? And why are they -- why are they deemed better than expected?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I think that -- actually I think it's not just that they're doing better than expected; I think they're also surprising themselves with their ability and their capability. It's not simply an ability to deal with high-profile attacks. The fact remains is the Afghans are out dealing with incidents of all sorts every day. Their ability to plan and conduct operations is improving all of the time. And they are now routinely, for example, planning and conducting brigade operations around the country. This is very serious soldiering, and it's a significant achievement on their part to have -- to have come this far in the time that they have.

            Q:  Dan De Luce from Agence France-Presse.

            What would cause you, if anything -- what would cause ISAF to reconsider the pace of this transition? Is there anything that could somehow slow down this scheduled transition?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I've certainly seen nothing to date at all that questions the pace of transition.

            As I'm sure you are aware, transition is simply about the security forces being able to be in the lead. It doesn't necessarily mean that all of the challenges that lie within a district or province have been solved. But to date, in tranches one and two there has been no regression in terms of security or governance or development in those areas.

            And whilst clearly there are challenges ahead in tranche three, I've seen no indication at all that either the Afghan national forces would not be able to deal with those problems or that they would put the rough timetable for transition into question.

            Q:  And then in that context, how concerned are you about the ethnic composition of the Afghan force and the relative shortage of southern Pashtuns in the force?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Well, the details of the makeup of the ANSF are, you know, beyond the issues that I look at. But all I can say is that whatever the ethnic diversity of the security forces, I've seen absolutely no impression of that in the areas that I visited and in the reports that I read of their performance around the country.

            Q:  Hi, my name is Ben Iannotta. I'm editor of an intelligence magazine called the C4ISR Journal.

            The decision not to plug the ANSF into the Afghanistan Mission Network, is that driven by strategy or cost, or is it a sign of a lack of trust between ISAF and ANSF?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I don't know is the simple answer to that question. I think I'd have to refer you to the spokesman or to a particular expert on that.

            But there is no -- to be clear, there is no lack of trust in the ANSF. We are going on operations with them every day. They are leading, certainly in transitioned areas, nearly 50 percent of operations. You absolutely have to trust your comrades and colleagues when you're operating in that kind of environment. So there is absolutely no lack of trust between us and our Afghan colleagues.

            Q:  Hi, General. John Harper with the Asahi Shimbun.

            How many ISAF troops do you think will need to remain in Afghanistan in 2013 to ensure the transition moves along smoothly?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  You'll be surprised to hear that I'm not going to indulge in speculation over troop levels in Afghanistan. But I am absolutely confident that the ANSF, first and foremost, will be absolutely in a position to assume the lead for security across the country, supported by ISAF forces, by roughly the middle of 2013.

            Q:  Thank you, General. This is Lalit Jha from Pajhwok Afghan News.

            As we are post-2014, what do you think the key challenge is which ANSF are facing now and that needs to be addressed on a priority basis before 2014?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Well, I think the -- again, you'd be better off asking those who are responsible for equipping and training the ANSF that question.

            I've certainly seen on my travels nothing that is stopping the ANSF conducting operations as they choose to and stopping them from reacting to incidents in a manner that they choose to. ISAF support is there, but increasingly, the Afghans are more than capable and more than content to deal with operations entirely dependent on their own capabilities.

            Q:  Otto Kreisher again.

            Let me follow up on that. There's been, you know, substantial reports about their lack of air cover -- indigenous air cover, their logistics problems, their intelligence and communications. You don't see those as a problem?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  All I'm saying, as I -- as I said to the -- to the last question, I think the details of those issues -- these are issues that are not affecting transition, and that that clearly is the bit that I am most focused on. I have not seen issues about enablers impacting on the ability of the Afghan security forces, be it army or police, to maintain the lead in transitioning areas.

            Q:  Good morning. Larry Shaughnessy from CNN.

            The talks to try to reopen the Pakistan border to ISAF convoys fell apart not long ago. I know the Northern Distribution Network is working, but at a tremendous cost. Is there something besides money that is a problem created by the lack of a southern distribution network, for lack of a better term, through Pakistan? Or is it just a matter of it costs more to do everything?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I haven't been privy to the negotiations that have been going on over the opening of the Pakistan GLOC. Now, clearly I'm aware that there have been some very detailed negotiations in the past, and I'm sure there will in the future.
            I'm not aware of the detail, other than to say -- as, again, the deputy commander said not so long ago -- that ISAF is managing perfectly well at the moment in its conduct of operations. But the detail of the discussions over the GLOC, I'm afraid I haven't got any information on that.

            Q:  If I could follow up. But beyond the discussions, in practical, day-to-day operations, is the lack of a GLOC with Pakistan causing you any operational, day-to-day problems? I know he's saying it's working right now, but do you anticipate a problem that cannot be easily solved using the Northern Distribution Network?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  I'm not aware of one, no.

            Q:  Chris Carroll, Stars and Stripes.

            Is progress being made throughout the entire ANSF? We continually hear anecdotes about, you know, a large number of Afghan forces who are not well-trained and who are not easy to operate with. Is it the case that there's a small group or, you know, a minority of well-trained professional soldiers and a larger group that are not progressing at the same rate?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  You know, I must say, I've never heard that.
            Again, at the risk of repeating myself, you can't -- you cannot mount -- wherever you may be in this country, you cannot mount, as the Afghans are doing, brigade-level operations and hope that a thin veneer of professionalism is in some way hiding a basic incompetence below that. You know, a brigade operation requires a properly trained and, indeed, resourced force. They're doing that around the country.

            So I certainly haven't heard the apocryphal stories that you mention, and I don't believe the evidence on the ground would support them either.

            Q:  Just a follow-up question. What kind of capabilities are the ANSF developing -- for example, explosive, ordnance disposal, logistics, special forces, you know -- that we might not hear about every day?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Well, it's kind of you to think that I would know, but I'm afraid that is -- that is well beyond my brief on transition, and you would be far better up close, not least because you would be speaking to someone who knows, to speak to somebody else on this.

            Q:  General, it's Luis Martinez of ABC News.

            Every region in Afghanistan brings its own security challenges. How do you tailor ANSF forces to each region? I imagine they bring their own unique characteristics that require specific training to -- and so it's going to vary from region to region. How can you -- how do you do that?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Well, you're absolutely right, of course, that the, you know, various parts of Afghanistan bring challenges of their own. And the Afghans deal with this as any other army in the world would deal with it, that there is -- there is always a level of basic training that is provided to every member of security forces, which is then honed when you get down to a unit in a particular area.

            It is the responsibility of the Afghan corps and the Afghan brigades to make sure that that -- the special training, if you like, sensitive to the environment, is conducted. And of course ISAF is absolutely part of that training process and mechanism in various parts of the country. But the Afghans would treat this in -- no differently to any other army in the world.

            CAPT. CAMPBELL:  One more.

            Q:  If I could follow up, sir. With the push into the eastern portions of -- eastern regions of Afghanistan this year, does that mean that you see more of a kinetic force among the ANSF that go in there? Or do you try -- find a mix, given that you're going to have to turn that over towards the security transition in the future?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  If I understand your question correctly, again, I don't think that -- the nature of basic training doesn't change. Wherever a unit may go to thereafter, whether it be -- wherever it may be deployed in the country, there will always be special training that will be conducted before it goes into a certain area.

            I don't think, wherever you may go in this country, that you should assume that operations will be more or less kinetic. The important thing is that the forces will get the appropriate training, the appropriate assistance wherever they may get deployed.

            Q:  Another question. Can you describe from what you've seen, you know, personally, the relationship between ISAF and Afghan forces? How close do they interact when they're not training? Are they eating together?

            Are they -- can you -- are they friends? Are they -- you know, how do they interact with one another, besides from during training, that you've seen?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Yeah. I mean, working together means all of those things. Going out on a patrol or an operation is just part of working together.

            Our troops and Afghan troops absolutely in the field eat together. It's clearly difficult to socialize together, but they are -- they are together. And I think, as much as people who may well be speaking different languages can be, there are unquestionably some very close relationships all over the country between ISAF forces of all nationalities and the Afghans.

            So this isn't simply coming together as you prepare to go out the gate on a patrol. These are -- you know, as I say, the patrol is, if you like, just the pointy end of some very strong relationships across the country.

            Q:  Excuse me. General, Chris Carroll from Stars and Stripes again.

            Is there any update on the numbers from the recent 1230 report on the percentages of Afghan units able to operate, you know, with advisers or with partners, et cetera?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  In simple terms, no, there isn't. As you know, the 1230 comes out every six months or so. The next one will be due in the late fall. And yeah, that will be the appropriate time, not least because, obviously, the data is being collected. So in simple terms, the answer is no to your question.

            CAPT. CAMPBELL:  General, we'll wrap it up with one last question here and then turn it back over to you.

            So one more question on our end, sir.

            Q:  Matt Schofield, McClatchey Newspapers.

            You know, going forward, the future of -- the future success of the ANSF, we've heard there is some backsliding on the success against poppy production. This is a primary source of funding.

            What's the -- what's -- going forward, how do you see that moving? I mean, is there -- does there need to be a renewed effort to go back after poppy, to decrease the funding of Taliban, et cetera? Or do you -- are you happy with the way things are going, or is that -- is that not an operational thing -- is that not a transitional issue?

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  It's not a transitional issue. But what I will say is that the governor-led eradication schemes this year have been more successful than they ever have been. And you know, as an example of the Afghans taking responsibility for their own future, I think it's an excellent example. But it doesn't impact on transition. No, it doesn't.

            CAPT. CAMPBELL:  General, we're grateful for your time that you've devoted to speak with us this evening your time, this morning our time. And I'd like to just turn it back over to you for a few closing remarks on your end, sir. And again, thank you from the Briefing Room.

            BRIG. CRIPWELL:  Thanks very much indeed. And thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your questions.

            I would just reiterate what I said at the start, that transition is a strategically important process for this country. It is one not simply that is being imposed on the Afghans; it is one that they are absolutely part of.

            And the success of the Afghan National Security Forces to date in assuming the responsibility for 75 percent of the population of their country, and the success that I have no doubt that they are going to enjoy in the future, is absolutely critical to them assuming responsibility and ensuring the sovereignty and peace in this country in the future.
            Thank you very much, indeed, for your time.

            CAPT. CAMPBELL:  General, thank you.

MAJOR GENERAL JOHN A. TOOLAN RATES AFGHAN FORCES

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Commander Rates Afghan Army, Police Progress

By Jim Garamone

WASHINGTON, April 24, 2012 - The Afghan national security forces have made tremendous progress, but still require U.S. aid, instruction and capabilities, said Marine Corps Maj. Gen. John A. Toolan, the commander of the 2nd Marine Division and former commander in Afghanistan's Regional Command—South West.

Toolan told the Defense Writers' Group here today that by the end of his command the Afghan security forces were shouldering more of the security burden.

The Afghan army did well in the province, but there weren't enough of them at the beginning of the year. That changed when the Afghan 215th Corps arrived. But even that was problematic. The 215th Corps did not have many Pashtus -- the largest ethnic group in Regional Command—South West. Part of this was because the people didn't trust the national army. Another part of it was Taliban intimidation.

Today, more than 15 percent of the 215th Corps is native Pashtu and local men are enlisting.

A scarcity of uniformed police presented another issue for the general. "We weren't able to bring in a whole lot of police officers at the beginning of the year," Toolan said. "We relied heavily on the Afghan local police."

The local police, he said, were the key to success in Marja and Sangin.

"What we don't want to have is to continue to work through ALP for the next couple of years," Toolan said. "We want the ALP to morph into the uniformed police." Working against this is that Afghans in the local police want to stay local. They have no desire even to move to the next town.

The capacity of the uniformed police is picking up, the general said, but while the Afghan army has good credibility among the public, the police do not. "We need to understand the Afghans have a design for the future," Toolan said. "They have a force lay-down in their minds. Early on, we were trying to use them in places based on our ideas of what was an important district to seize, clear, hold and rebuild."

But the Afghan army wants to be on the borders protecting the nation as armies are supposed to do. "But we have to be careful because I don't think the police are entirely ready yet to take full responsibility for the population centers along the Helmand River Valley," the general said. "The police are the key to success in the province, but they haven't gotten past being a paramilitary [organization] yet."

The police need to become beat cops and not military units, Toolan said. They need time to become police who investigate crimes, collect evidence, interview witnesses -- do all the things that police do to establish the rule of law for the benefit of the citizens they protect.

"The challenge for us is to put the training programs into place for the police," the general said. "From a military perspective, we have taken it pretty far. But we need to start handing it off to the law enforcement professional. Very similar to what we did in Bosnia in 1997, 1998. That's a model that people are looking at as we head into the Chicago Summit."

The Afghan security forces "are moving along fine," Toolan said.

"From a capability perspective," he added, "we're good with the army, ... and the police need the most work."