AFRICA COMMAND SEEKS TO ELIMINATE SUPPORT FOR TERRORISTS

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Marine Corps Sgt. Joseph Bergeron explains combat marksmanship tactics to a group of Ugandan soldiers, Feb. 27, 2012. Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force 12 sent a small team of Marines into Uganda to train Ugandan forces to fight against al-Shabaab in Somalia and the hunt for Joseph Kony and his Lord's Resistance Army. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Jad Sleiman  

Africom Strives to 'Turn on Lights' Against Terrorism in Africa
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, June 21, 2012 - Eliminating terrorist safe havens and support for terrorist groups in Africa is a top U.S. Africa Command priority, Africom's top military officer said.

Army Gen. Carter F. Ham told American Forces Press Service he's committed to working with African partners to confront violent extremists "that have very clearly articulated an intent to attack the United States, its allies, its citizens and its interests both within Africa and also more broadly, in Europe."

All, he said, want to take advantage of ungoverned or under-governed regions where they can operate without restraint.

Countering this threat is the common denominator that drives Ham's theater engagement strategy and its broad array of operations, exercises and security cooperation programs. This includes teaching partner nations how to improve their border security, intelligence and tactical capabilities and equipping African nations so they can operate more effectively.

"Ultimately, what we want to do through our activities – not just through Africom, but as a larger whole-of-government and international effort – is to 'turn the lights on,'" said James Robertson, an Africom strategist. "And when the lights are on, we will find increased security and stability."

Africa has struggled for decades with civil wars and conflicts, underdevelopment and poverty that make it inviting to terrorists from the Middle East, Robertson said.

"They want what Africa has to offer," he added. "They want this ungoverned space so they can operate freely, and so our aim is to deter and disrupt them and, ideally, ensure that they don't gain access."

Recognizing the extent of the threat, Ham has set East Africa as the No. 1 focus of his commandwide counterterrorism strategy.

"Why East Africa?" said Army Maj. Gen. Charles Hooper, the command's director of strategy, plans and programs. "It's because East Africa faces the challenges that we face in Arabia, particularly Yemen, and the al-Qaida elements emanating from Yemen and other areas in the Middle East." It's also home to the al-Shabab terror organization in Somalia that formally announced its affiliation with al-Qaida in February.

Hooper also cited other terrorist threats in Africa. In the North African desert, the al-Qaida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb organization is committed to destabilizing the trans-Sahara region and Northwest Africa. But its pursuits, he said, also threaten European allies across the Mediterranean Sea, as well as the United States.

He also noted concerns in the Gulf of Guinea, a major transit point for illicit trafficking in drugs, weapons and humans bound predominantly for Europe. In addition, a violent group known as Boko Haram has extended its influence to challenge the central government in Nigeria – a major economic power in Africa and a contributor to United Nations peacekeeping missions.

Africa's vast natural resources compound the region's strategic importance, Hooper said, particularly oil that's exported to the United States.

"Access to the global commons, and stability in Western Africa and in those important sea lines of communication that run through the Gulf of Guinea and through Western Africa, remain important," he said.

OPENING OF U.S. CONSULATE IN HERAT (WESTERN AFGHANISTAN)

Map:  Afghanistan.  Credit:  U.S. State Department.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the Ceremony to Open the U.S. Consulate in Herat
Remarks William J. Burns
Deputy Secretary Herat , Afghanistan
June 13, 2012
Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador. And thank you, Governor Saba, for your commitment to a strong partnership between the United States and Afghanistan.
I am truly honored to mark the opening of the U.S. Consulate in Herat, the first American consulate in Afghanistan. As a city with a rich cultural history and considerable economic potential, Herat is a vital place for the United States to have a diplomatic presence. The opening of this consulate reaffirms our long-term commitment to Afghanistan’s success and the enduring bonds of friendship between our peoples.

The opening of this consulate builds on a long history of American engagement in western Afghanistan. In the 1950s and 1960s, American educators assisted the new teacher training institute in Herat, which is now the Faculty of Education at Herat University. In the 1960s and early 70s, American Peace Corps volunteers served here. After the fall of the Taliban, the United States undertook a number of projects and programs in Herat, such as the construction of the Department of Women’s Affairs office and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission building.

U.S. interest and involvement in this region flourishes today. The Ring Road that we drove in from the airport on was funded and constructed by USAID. The basic health services available to almost all citizens of Herat province are funded by on-budget support to your Ministry of Public Health. In the last ten years, more than 100 of your best and brightest professionals and students have traveled to the United States on education exchange programs. There are exciting partnerships between American universities and Herat University to advance education in agriculture, engineering, journalism, English, law and political science. And the single largest cultural preservation project the U.S. government has ever funded through the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation is right here in Herat – the preservation of the citadel.

And so we are here to celebrate the opening of the consulate -- this remarkable refurbished facility, leased from the Municipality of Herat. This was truly a community effort – we purchased local products to use in the refurbishment, some of which you can see on display in the waiting room next door. World-class quality, Chesht-e-Sharif marble now graces some of the floors. Every week, on average, more than 70 Afghans contributed their time and skills to the consulate’s construction. One expert carpenter turned plain packing crates into beautifully carved room dividers. And artwork produced by students from Herat University is displayed on the walls of the consulate.

President Obama and President Karzai signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement last month to signal that America will remain by your side for years to come. The SPA protects the gains of the last decade. It is a positive vision for the future of the U.S.-Afghanistan relationship that contrasts starkly with the vision of violence and extremism offered by the Taliban and al-Qaida.

This agreement comes at a time when we have made significant progress toward defeating al-Qaida, transitioning security responsibility to Afghan forces, and denying extremists a safe-haven from which to threaten the United States. Let me discuss briefly our strategy moving forward.

First, we have begun a transition to Afghan responsibility for security. Already, nearly half the Afghan people live in areas where Afghan Security Forces are moving into the lead, and this number will rise to 75 percent by summer’s end. Herat City has been under the security responsibility of Afghanistan for almost one year, and I am pleased to see first-hand the progress you all have made in that time.

Second, we are training Afghan Security Forces to get the job done. As our troops draw down, Afghan forces have surged and become more capable.

Third, we are building an enduring partnership with Afghanistan. The SPA sends a clear message to the Afghan people: as you stand up, you will not stand alone.

Fourth, we are supporting Afghan-led reconciliation. In coordination with the Afghan government, our redlines are clear - if the Taliban wants to be a part of Afghanistan’s future, they will need to break with al-Qaida, renounce violence, and abide by the Afghan constitution. Many members of the Taliban – from foot soldiers to leaders – have indicated an interest in a settlement. A pathway to peace is now set before them. Those who refuse to walk that path will have to contend with strong Afghan Security Forces, backed by the United States and our allies.

And finally, we are building an international consensus to support peace, stability and a sense of economic hope for the people of South and Central Asia. Tomorrow, I will take part in the latest round of the Istanbul Process, where Afghanistan’s neighbors and near neighbors will affirm their significant commitments to developing regional security and economic development. I commend the Government of Afghanistan for the strong leadership it has shown in this process.

This consulate, built with so many Afghan hands and so much Afghan talent, is a small reminder of what the people of Herat can accomplish. And it gives us hope for the greater effort facing Afghans—which is not merely the building of a single structure, but the building of an entire nation that deserves a future better than its recent past. Let this building stand as a sign of our commitment: As you build this future, one day at a time, you can count on the steadfast support and friendship of the United States of America.

Thank you.

DEATH OF AL-QAIDA SECOND-IN-COMMAND CONFIRMED BY WHITE HOUSE

Photo:  9-11 Memorial at Pentagon.  Credit:  U.S. Navy.

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

White House Confirms Death of Al-Qaida's Second-in-Command

By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.

WASHINGTON, June 6, 2012 - The U.S. government has confirmed the death of Abu Yahya al-Libi, the second in command of al-Qaida, a senior White House spokesman said yesterday.

"I can tell you that our intelligence community has intelligence that leads them to believe that al-Qaida's No. 2 leader, al-Libi, is dead," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.

Carney didn't provide details on how or where al-Libi was killed but he said the deceased terrorist had "served as al-Qaida's general manager" overseeing the group's day-to-day operations in the tribal areas of Pakistan and managing regional outreach.

"I can simply say that he was the No. 2 leader in al-Qaida, and this is the second time in less than a year that the No. 2 leader of al-Qaida has been removed from the battlefield," he said.

Al-Libi was deputy to Ayman al-Zawahiri, who assumed leadership of the terrorist network after Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, was killed during an assault by U.S. Navy SEALs on a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan in May of last year.

"[Al-Libi's] death is part of the degradation that has been taking place to core al-Qaida during the past several years," Carney said. "[This] degradation has depleted the ranks to such an extent that there is now no clear successor to take on the breadth of his responsibilities."

Carney noted the loss of al-Libi adds pressure to al-Zawahiri to effectively manage the group. "We believe al-Libi's death is a major blow to core al-Qaida, removing the No. 2 leader for the second time in less than a year and further damaging the group's morale and cohesion, and bringing it closer to its ultimate demise than ever before," he said.

Carney added that al-Libi's death represents another serious blow to al-Qaida in the wake of the demise of bin Laden, in what is an ongoing effort to disrupt, dismantle and defeat a foe that brought terror and death to the United States on 9/11, and has perpetrated acts of terrorism against innocent civilians around the globe.

PRESIDENT REPORTS ON CURRENT MISSION IN AFGHANISTAN

Photo:  White House

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

President Updates Nation on Afghanistan Mission

By Jim Garamone

WASHINGTON, May 1, 2012 - After joining Afghan President Hamid Karzai in signing a strategic partnership agreement in Afghanistan's capital of Kabul today, President Barack Obama took to the airwaves at Bagram Airfield to update the American people on the mission in Afghanistan.

The speech from the large NATO base about 35 miles from Kabul was the last event of an eventful night that saw the president fly in to Afghanistan, sign the agreement and meet with American service members.

Bagram is the headquarters for the International Security Assistance Force's Regional Command East, and is an outpost for the war on al-Qaida. Obama said it is important for Americans to remember why U.S. service members are in such a place. "Here, in Afghanistan, more than half a million of our sons and daughters have sacrificed to protect our country," he said.

Afghanistan was where Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terror group planned, trained and financed the attacks that killed almost 3,000 men, women and children on Sept. 11, 2001. "And so, 10 years ago, the United States and our allies went to war to make sure that al-Qaida could never again use this country to launch attacks against us," the president said.

American and anti-Taliban Afghan groups had initial success, but bin Laden and his lieutenants escaped across the border and established safe havens in Pakistan. "America spent nearly eight years fighting a different war in Iraq, and al-Qaida's extremist allies within the Taliban have waged a brutal insurgency," the president said.

But the tide has turned, he added, and the Taliban's momentum has been broken.

"We've built strong Afghan security forces," the president said. "We devastated al-Qaida's leadership, taking out over 20 of their top 30 leaders. And one year ago, from a base here in Afghanistan, our troops launched the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. The goal that I set – to defeat al-Qaida and deny it a chance to rebuild – is now within reach."

The president said the key to completing the mission is transitioning security responsibility to Afghans. He noted that half of the population of the country is already protected by Afghan soldiers and police, and the Afghans are prepared to move into the lead in other parts of the nation. At the NATO summit in Chicago later this month, he said, leaders will endorse a plan to turn security responsibility over to the Afghans in 2013.

"International troops will continue to train, advise and assist the Afghans, and fight alongside them when needed," Obama said. "But we will shift into a support role as Afghans step forward."

American forces already have started coming home. In 2011, 10,000 troops from the Afghan surge returned to their bases. Another 23,000 will return by the end of September. "After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more and more of our troops coming home," the president said. "And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014, the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country."

The coalition is working to train Afghan soldiers and police to shoulder that security burden. This summer there will be 352,000 members of the Afghan security forces. As it stands, Afghanistan will field an army and police force at that number for three years, and then reduce the size of the force.

The United States is building an enduring partnership with Afghanistan, the president said, citing the strategic partnership agreement he and Karzai signed earlier at the presidential palace in Kabul. "It establishes the basis of our cooperation over the next decade, including shared commitments to combat terrorism and strengthen democratic institutions," Obama said. "It supports Afghan efforts to advance development and dignity for their people. And it includes Afghan commitments to transparency and accountability, and to protect the human rights of all Afghans – men and women, boys and girls."

Within this agreement, the president explained, the United States will work with Afghan partners to accomplish two narrow security missions beyond 2014: counterterrorism and continued training. "But we will not build permanent bases in this country, nor will we be patrolling its cities and mountains. That will be the job of the Afghan people," he said.

The United States is working with Afghan government leaders to negotiate a peace in the country. "My administration has been in direct discussions with the Taliban," Obama said. "We have made it clear that they can be a part of this future if they break with al-Qaida, renounce violence, and abide by Afghan laws."

Many members of the Taliban are looking at this offered hand, and many already have taken it, the president said. "A path to peace is now set before them," said he added. "Those who refuse to walk it will face strong Afghan security forces, backed by the United States and our allies."

Finally, the United States seeks to build a global consensus to support peace and stability in South Asia, and needs Pakistan to be part of the process. "It can and should be an equal partner in this process in a way that respects Pakistan's sovereignty, interests and democratic institutions," he said. "In pursuit of a durable peace, America has no designs beyond an end to al-Qaida safe-havens and respect for Afghan sovereignty."

Working on a timeline provides a sense of urgency, spares treasure and saves lives, Obama said. "Our goal is to destroy al-Qaida, and we are on a path to do exactly that," he added. "Afghans want to assert their sovereignty and build a lasting peace. That requires a clear timeline to wind down the war."

Withdrawing immediately, he said, would leave Afghanistan vulnerable to a new civil war and re-establishment of terrorist safe havens. "We must give Afghanistan the opportunity to stabilize," he said. "Otherwise, our gains could be lost, and al-Qaida could establish itself once more. And as commander in chief, I refuse to let that happen."

The best course, Obama said, is to end the war responsibly.

"My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under the dark cloud of war," he said. "Yet here, in the pre-dawn darkness of Afghanistan, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of our troops in harm's way has been cut in half, and more will soon be coming home. We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al-Qaida."

The future is possible, the president said, because of American service members, who have deployed to Afghanistan and other dangerous areas time and again.

"In an age when so many institutions have come up short, these Americans stood tall," he said. "They met their responsibilities to one another, and the flag they serve under. I just met with some of them, and told them that as commander in chief, I could not be prouder. In their faces, we see what is best in ourselves and our country."

Obama stressed that America must honor its debts to these service members. "We must give our veterans and military families the support they deserve, and the opportunities they have earned," he said. "And we must redouble our efforts to build a nation worthy of their sacrifice."
 

U.S. BELIEVES AL-QAIDA IS STILL MAJOR THREAT

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Al-Qaida Offshoots Are Biggest Terror Threat, Official Says

By Jim Garamone

WASHINGTON, April 29, 2012 - Core Al-Qaida – the group led by Osama bin Laden – has been surpassed by its affiliates as the biggest terrorist threat to the United States, a senior intelligence official said.

"With bin Laden's death, the global jihadist movement lost its most iconic, most effective and most inspirational leader," Robert T. Cardillo, deputy director for intelligence integration with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told reporters in an April 27 conference call.

Bin Laden's death allowed al-Qaida second-in-command Ayman al Zawahiri to move up, but he has not changed the group's strategic direction and does not have the charisma to appeal to new recruits, Cardillo said.

Navy SEALs killed bin Laden in Pakistan during an intelligence-driven operation on May 2, 2011.

The al-Qaida offshoots – al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula, al-Shabob in Somalia, al-Qaida in the Mahgreb – "will surpass the core al-Qaida remaining in Pakistan," Cardillo said. "Each group will seek opportunities to strike Western interests in its operating area, but each group will have different intent and opportunity to execute those plans."

The "Arab Spring" uprisings that began last year have influenced the jihadist movement, the deputy director said. "The unrest and reduced security provides terrorists inspired by that movement more operating space as security services focus more on internal security and regime stability," he said.

As new Middle East leaders address public demands for their participation in government, "we assess that core al-Qaida and the jihadist movement will suffer a strategic setback in that the Arab Spring strikes at the very core of their jihadist narrative," he said.

Al-Qaida believes in progress by violence, but the elections in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and the up-coming election in Libya rebuke that assertion, Cardillo said.

"However, prolonged instability or unmet promises by these new governments ... would give al-Qaida, its affiliates and its allies more time to establish networks, gain support and potentially engage in operations," he said.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE LEON PANETTA STILL FOCUSSED ON AL-QAIDA

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE 

Panetta: U.S. Remains Focused on Pursuit of Al-Qaida

By Cheryl Pellerin

ABOARD A MILITARY AIRCRAFT, April 27, 2012 - America has become a safer place since a Navy SEAL team killed 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in his Pakistan compound nearly a year ago, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said today.

Returning from a weeklong trip to South America to strengthen military ties in Colombia, Brazil and Chile, Panetta, who was director of the CIA on May 2, 2011, when the al-Qaida chieftain met his end, recalled the high-risk mission the Defense Department called Operation Neptune Spear.

"I don't think there's any question that America is safer as a result of the bin Laden operation," Panetta told reporters traveling with him.

"When you combine that with the other operations that have ... gone after al-Qaida leadership," he added, "I think it has weakened al-Qaida as an organization and certainly it has prevented them from having the command-and-control capability to be able to put together an attack similar to 9/11.

But al-Qaida remains a threat, the secretary said.

"It doesn't mean that we somehow don't have the responsibility to keep going after them wherever they are -- and we are," he said.

President Barack Obama's decision to give the bin Laden operation the green light was gutsy, the secretary said, since there wasn't absolute confirmation that bin Laden was inside the Abbottabad compound.

Officials had based the operation "on a lot of circumstantial evidence," the secretary said, yet it was the best lead on bin Laden's whereabouts since 2001.

However, the validity of the evidence, he said, was "still a big question mark."

Panetta said the operation provided "several fingernail-biting moments" for U.S. officials and military leaders who from Afghanistan, the CIA operations center and the White House were monitoring the raid as it happened.

One of those anxious moments occurred, the secretary said, when the military aircraft used in the operation -- two lead helicopters plus backups -- entered Pakistani airspace.

"When they crossed the border and were going into Pakistan there were a lot of tense moments about whether or not they would be detected," Panetta said.

Another nail-biting moment occurred as the helicopters entered the Abbottabad compound and one of them lost lift and had to be left behind and destroyed, Panetta said.

"What had happened was that we had picked up from weather reports what the heat conditions were going to be on the ground," the secretary said, "but it turned out to be hotter than we expected."

The heat, intensified by the compound's thick, high walls, caused the helicopter to lose lift and end up on the ground.

Panetta was at that time on the line with Navy Adm. William H. McRaven, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. McRaven was monitoring communications from Jalalabad, Afghanistan.

After the loss of the helicopter, Panetta recalled asking McRaven, "Okay, what's next?" The admiral, the secretary said, replied, "Don't worry, we're ready for this."

There was additional tension during a 20-minute period of silence that began after the SEALs entered the building where everyone hoped they would find bin Laden, the secretary said. Then they heard weapons fire.

"We knew gunshots had been fired but after that I just didn't know," Panetta said. It was at that point that McRaven reported that he might have heard the code word -- Geronimo -- that would mean they had found bin Laden.

"We still were waiting, and then within a few minutes McRaven said the words, 'Geronimo KIA,'" the secretary said, which meant that bin Laden had been killed in action.

"And that was that," Panetta said.

It was also tense when the team got back into the helicopters and began to leave the compound, he said.

"By that time they had blown [up] the helicopter that was down and you knew that we had woken up all of Pakistan to the fact that something had happened," Panetta said.

The concern revolved around what the Pakistanis were thinking and how they would respond, and whether the team could get out without problems, he said.

"The moment they crossed the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, we finally knew that the mission had been accomplished," Panetta said.

Yet, he said, there were no cheers or high-fives at the CIA's operations center.

"We had some special forces people at the operations center at CIA and we all kind of looked at each other," Panetta said. "As a matter of fact, I have a picture in my office of all of us putting our arms around each other, just [acknowledging that] we got the job done."

Today, nearly a year after bin Laden's demise, the United States and its allies continue to hunt down al-Qaida and other terrorists -- wherever they may be.

"The more successful we are at taking down those who represent their spiritual and ideological leadership, the greater our ability to weaken their threat to this country and to other countries," Panetta said.
 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NEWS BRIEFING

FROM:  DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DOD News Briefing with George Little
            GEORGE LITTLE:  Good afternoon.  I have no announcements to make today, so I will go straight to your questions.
            Yes, sir.  
            Q:  Yes.  Thank you.
            Or, Bob --
            Q:  No, no, please.
            Q:  OK.  Thank you.  
            MR. LITTLE:  You all can vie for your place, if you want.
            Q:  My question is as far as opening the doors of Pakistan's -- the supply route to Afghanistan for the U.S., Secretary Panetta also spoke very clearly about this, that Pakistan is now sending a mixed signal rather than a clear policy or clear -- what they want.  
            But what Pakistan is saying -- that really that if the civilian government opens the route for the U.S. for supply and they have threats from the religious organizations and terrorist organizations that if they -- if the civilian government opens the route, then they will march to Islamabad -- and so what's happening?  What's going on?
            And also, ongoing violence in Karachi also is a threat to the stability in Pakistan.
            MR. LITTLE:  Well, let me break apart that question into a couple of answers, if I may.  First, with respect to the ground supply routes into Afghanistan, we remain hopeful that those routes will be reopened in the near future, and discussions with the Pakistanis continue on a range of issues.  General Allen and General Mattis had a very good session with General Kayani and other Pakistani officials recently, and we look forward to future discussions.  
            As I've said on repeated occasion to all of you, the relationship with Pakistan remains very important to the United States and we're always looking for ways to explore further cooperation.  And it's important to recognize that cooperation does continue on a variety of fronts, and that includes the issue of counterterrorism and also coordination along the border with Afghanistan.
            So we think that we are -- the relationship is settling and, even though we've been through a rocky period, we can get through it.
            On the issue of terrorism, the Pakistanis have been the victims of very devastating violence inflicted by terrorists, so we share a common cause in thwarting al-Qaida and other terrorist groups that are operating in the region, and we're going to continue to try to work closely with our Pakistani counterparts to prevent terrorist attacks against Pakistani interests, against American interests and those of our allies.
            Q:  (Off mic) -- quickly, that if Secretary Panetta has said that Pakistan think or Pakistanis told him that India's a threat to Pakistan.  That's why maybe this problem is going on.
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not quite sure --
            Q:  If Secretary Panetta has said in his interviews or in his remarks, I believe, that Pakistanis told him that India is a threat to Pakistan.
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get into private discussions that the secretary may or may not have had at various points.  But everyone recognizes that there have been tensions in that region for some time. We recognize those, and we believe that -- and to the extent that we can do so, we will -- we'll try to forge our greater cooperation to prevent unintended consequences of historic tensions from creating greater conflict.
            Barbara.
            Q:  George, why -- can you walk us through why the coalition and the United States is negotiating an agreement with the Afghan government right now governing how night raids are conducted in the war in Afghanistan?  Why are you doing it?  Why is it important?  And then I want to ask you a follow-up, since you brought up the Allen-Mattis meeting.
            MR. LITTLE:  OK.  Well, first, on the issue of night raids, this has been a concern of the Afghan government for some time.  We recognize that.  We recognize the effectiveness as well that night operations have had over time.  And that's why we're working through an agreement with our Afghan partners.  We believe we're making progress in heading toward an agreement on this and a broad range of other issues.
            It's important to recognize too, Barbara that at this point in time we're working hand in hand -- ISAF forces are working hand in hand with our Afghan partners on night operations, and they are highly effective.  And many of them don't take place with a shot being fired.
            So we're working closely with our Afghan partners.  We're making progress.  And that's reflective, I think, of the progress we're making overall.
            Q:  Right, but what I don't understand, and maybe you can explain, is why do you -- if they're working and they're effective, why do you need an agreement?  What is the -- if you can't say what's in it, which I'm assuming you can't, what is the scope of it?
            What it is intended to address?
            MR. LITTLE:  I wouldn't get into the scope of a prospective agreement and get out ahead of what actually may come out on paper at the end of the day.  
            But there are agreements that we make with our Afghan partners and our -- and other partners around the world all the time when there are concerns expressed, when they want to determine how particular operations are going to move forward into the future.  And it's important to realize that this will be, at the end of the day, something that they're responsible for -- when we move toward an enduring presence as part of our -- the transition process, and codifying that, we think, could benefit Afghanistan, the United States and our coalition partners.
            Q:  I'm sorry -- (inaudible).
            MR. LITTLE:  It makes sense.
            Q:  This is -- this is post-2014, or would it go into effect --
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get into timing at this stage.  I'm merely pointing out the fact that creating a template for giving the Afghans more responsibility for their own security, to include in certain operations, is, we think, something that is a sign of progress.  And again, without getting into timing, that cooperation is essential, and we're going to work with them to try to help move the transition process forward.
Q:  Do you expect U.S. forces to maintain a role in night operations?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get out ahead of what may or may not be in an agreement.
            Jim.
            Q:  You mentioned early on that you're doing these night operations -- (inaudible) -- with the Afghan allies.  Do you have a percentage?  Do you happen to know how many of these operations are done with Afghans participating?
            MR. LITTLE:  Jim, it's not an insignificant number.  I don't have the precise number for you, but I can definitely assure you that we're working hand in hand with our Afghan partners on this and a wide range of other operations, and they are having an effect.
            Q:  Do you think it's more than half?
            MR. LITTLE:  We'll get back to you on that since I don't have a precise number, but I think it's in the ballpark.
            Q:  OK.  Great.  Thanks.
            Q:  (Inaudible.)  Regarding North Korean planned missile launch, what do you assess could be the worst-case scenario?  And what can the Pentagon do to prevent that worst- case scenario?
            MR. LITTLE:  Well, I'm not going to get into speculation on scenarios. The important thing, we believe, is to emphasize with our partners around the world that the North Koreans should not violate their international obligations by conducting a missile launch, which they have announced they might do.  So the focus at this point is on reinforcing to the North Koreans that this is something that the international community objects to.
            Q:  Can I follow on that, George?  There's reports out of South Korea that the North Koreans are working on an even bigger missile than the Taepo Dong II, there are suggestions that there's satellite imagery out there, and that this bigger missile could have a range that could reach the U.S.  
            Do you have any evidence that they're working on such a missile, and any comment no that?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'll have to take a look at those press reports coming out of the region, but I would just merely say that this is something we're working with our partners on.  The secretary had a very good phone call with his Japanese counterpart this morning.  And this is, you know, an issue of importance, we realize, to the United States, to our partners in the region.  And the main point, again, is to try to emphasize very clearly to the North Koreans that they have international obligations that they must uphold.
            Q:  At this point, what is your assessment of their longest range in terms of their missile?
            MR. LITTLE:  Yeah, so I'm not going to get into those specifics, Justin.  But you know, again, we're monitoring all of this very closely.
            Q:  Quick follow-up?
            Q:  What specifically is the U.S. military doing to prepare for this rocket launch?  Are you moving any assets into the region?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get into specifics.  But we, along with our partners in the region, are monitoring developments very closely.  And that's where I'll leave it.
            Q:  And does the U.S. -- (inaudible) -- provide food aid to the North Korea even if the missile launching?
            MR. LITTLE:  On the issue of food aid, I would ask that you touch base with the State Department.  But without commenting specifically on food aid, I would say that, you know, North Korea, you know, must do the right thing.  And that's what we're calling on them to do.  And we are asking that they not move forward with a violation of their international obligations.  And that's something that we just -- we can't countenance.
            Q:  (Off mic.)
            MR. LITTLE:  Yes, ma'am.
            Q:  (Inaudible.)
            MR. LITTLE:  OK.  
            Q:  Yeah, South Korean long-range missile went 1,000 kilometers. U.S. and South Korea do compromise -- did that issue?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm sorry.  Say that again.
            Q:  The Koreans with the missile -- long-range missile distance, 1,000 kilometers, upgraded to South Korean missile range.
            MR. LITTLE:  Uh-huh.  Well, we're -- I'm not going to get into the -- into specifics on that.  But obviously, we are, you know, in constant dialogue with our Republic of Korea allies on ways of shoring up their capabilities.  And we continue to work closely with them.  We have an unwavering commitment to the defense of South Korea, and we are going to continue to work closely with our allies.
            Yeah.  OK, yeah.
            Q:  Yeah, I'd -- George, I wanted to see if you could comment on reports coming out of Canada regarding the Joint Strike Fighter program.
            Apparently, there was an audit general report saying that costs were basically under assumed, I guess, and there is now reconsideration of the country's participation in the effort.  One, yeah, can you comment on the report?  And two, what would the effect be if Canada would have if it were to leave the program?
            MR. LITTLE:  The secretary had a very positive meeting recently in Ottawa, as you know, trilateral discussions with our Canadian allies and the government of Mexico as well.  And you probably saw Minister MacKay speak publicly to this issue and represent the government of Canada's views on the F-35.
            I'm not going to speak for our Canadian allies, obviously, but what I can say is that we are strongly committed to the F-35.  We believe the design is showing great potential and that it can deliver the needed advanced capability for the U.S. and for our international partners.  We remain focused on completing development and testing so that we can put the aircraft in service, and for a long time.
            We believe we're making significant strides on the F-35.  Yes, there have been issues in the past with respect to development and testing and with respect to cost.  And it's been a priority of this secretary and his leadership team to advance development and testing as well as control costs.  And we believe that we're doing that.
            I would also say that we're pleased with the emerging appearance of stability in the manufacturing flow at Lockheed-Martin, Pratt & Whitney and in their supplier teams.  Building test aircraft has given way now to beginning deliveries of a low-rate initial production jets. And that's a sign of progress.
            Q:  George --
            Q:  That said -- but with the trouble that Canadians are having, the British are considering dropping their buys of the program.  What does that say to the international partners for the program?  I mean, it seems like they're running into a lot of difficulties, aside from the difficulties that have been going on: on the U.S. side.
            MR. LITTLE:  Again, without speaking to or about or for other countries, we realize that there are certain pressures right now, including budget pressures, in certain parts of the world.  But the important issue remains that this is a fifth-generation advanced strike fighter.  And it's important, we believe, not only to the security of the United States, but to the capabilities of our partners as well.  And we are committed to this program.
            And we have made progress.  It has had issues from time to time. But we are -- believe that we will get over the goal line with F-35. We're moving into production, and this is a clear sign that even though there have been issues in the past, that we can move beyond them.
            Tony .
            Q:  Just to follow up, the program office -- (inaudible) --
            MR. LITTLE:  You would never have an F-35 question.  
            Q:  I might have a Kentucky question.
            MR. LITTLE:  OK.  All right.    I'll go for that one.
            Q:  Yeah.  (Inaudible) -- almost didn't cover the spread, but --   On the F-35, the program manager on Friday acknowledged that there is about 9 percent growth in the overall program from 1.3 trillion (dollars), which is a hell of a lot, to 1.51 trillion (dollars), which is a lot.  Nine percent, in relative terms, that's a lot of money for that program.  But is it -- are you -- is the DOD concerned at that amount of growth at this point?  Or are you looking at that as, hey, it could have been worse, and this is -- this shows some signs of stability?
            MR. LITTLE:  We do believe that we're achieving stability over time with respect to development and testing and with respect to cost.
            We continue to address the issue of the large overlap of testing and production, and -- you know, and the concurrency issue.  And making critical changes to aircraft after accepting the cost burden -- you know, for instance, that is challenging.
            As you know, there's a new lot, Lot 5, that begins a business arrangement that shares this burden with industry in future years -- will continue until discovery from testing recedes.  So I think this is something that we have to get our arms around, where we're serious about cost control.  The secretary has asked very emphatically that we try to tighten up, especially as we look to a constrained defense budget going forward.  And he believes that we're settling down, I think.
            Q:  This recent cost increase of 9 percent, while not great -- you're not seeing it -- there's not -- that's not cause for alarm within OSD?
            MR. LITTLE:  I think that -- look, we don't like to see cost increases.  But no, we're committed to this program.  And we're committed to cost controls.  And we are not -- we are not running to the exits on F-35.  On the contrary, we are running with enthusiasm toward the prospect of putting this airplane into full production, again, for us and for our partners.
            Q:  You're not saying this is a slam dunk, though, at this point, are you?
            MR. LITTLE:  I am -- I'm a very happy man these days.  If you're going to use a basketball analogy, given that my team won last night -- a great game, for all you Kansas fans -- don't want to cause problems in the ranks.
            Q:  George, Ambassador Crocker recently made some comments that suggested there was a greater danger of al-Qaida using Afghanistan to launch 9/11-style attacks on other Western cities.  Have you seen a rise in the number of al-Qaida fighters in Afghanistan, or has it remained relatively steady?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get into specific numbers, Chris, on fighters associated with al-Qaida.  I mean, the important thing to remember about al-Qaida is that even they may -- even though they may be smaller than some other groups in the region, it's about their objectives.  And one of their objectives -- even though they are damaged from serious pressure that's been brought to bear against them, one of their objectives remains to attack the United States and our allies.  So we have to keep the pressure up.  We have to make sure that they don't have the ability to strike us again.
            And look, if you take their raw numbers, whatever that number may be, they're part of a bad stew of militant groups in the region, and they continue to try to forge relationships with those groups.  Now, some of those relationships have been disrupted, and that's a good thing, obviously.  So we have to -- but we have to keep our eye on the ball.  And we can't continue to -- or we can't let up the pressure.
            Q:  Well, just -- NATO officials put the number at about a hundred.  But I wasn't asking you for a specific number.  I was saying, has the number remained relatively steady, or have you seen a rise in the number of suspected al-Qaida fighters in Afghanistan?
            MR. LITTLE:  I would probably, you know, ask that you touch base with my colleagues in Afghanistan.  I'm unaware of a steep rise in the number of al-Qaida.  But again, this is about a group that has attacked the United States, and we need to continue to do everything we can to keep up the pressure.  This is -- this is a continuing problem, and again, not just because of al-Qaida, but because of their relationships.
            And that's why on the Afghan side of the border, we need to continue to put pressure on them and their militant allies, and on the Pakistani side of the border we need to work closely with the Pakistanis to ramp up efforts against them.
            Q:  George, have ISAF and the Afghans come to an agreement on a number for the ANSF post the 352,000 surge?  And if not, when do you expect an announcement on that number?  And what -- you know, obviously it's going to be lower.  Can you give us a range of anything -- or a specific number?
            MR. LITTLE:  It's a good question.  I don't have a specific number to provide today.  We are in discussions with our Afghan partners about what the enduring number of ANSF personnel will be and what the funding will be.  I don't have any announcements to make today.
            What I would say about the ANSF more broadly is that, you know, there's been a lot of discussion recently, and rightfully so, about some tragic and recent incidents, but this is one of the untold success stories, I think, or it's a story that hasn't been told enough, and that's the success of the ANSF.  They are now in the 330,000 range, maybe even higher now, in number, and they're doing great work, on their own and with us and with our allies.
            And I think that's -- you know, even though we have seen recent incidents that have been problematic, there's an arc of -- over- arching progress that continues to expand.  And this is a testament to our Afghan allies' commitment to taking the fight on themselves, providing for their own security, and we're going to continue to stick with them to try to enhance their capabilities.  This is important.
            Now, to your question, Justin, will the number be lower at some point?  Maybe.  But that's something for us to work out with the Afghans.  Again, I'm not going to get into the -- into specifics.  We need to have an enduring and sustainable ANSF that can again provide for the security of the Afghan people.  This is about giving the Afghan people responsibility for governing their own country and for providing security for their own citizens.
            Q:  Do commanders in the field dictate that number?  Or does funding ultimately dictate that final number?
            MR. LITTLE:  There are a number of factors that go into discussions of this sort.  I'm not going to get into what's part of the calculus, but the important thing is to be able to ensure that the Afghans have a number of ANSF personnel, army and local police, that can sustain the gains that they have made working closely with ISAF forces.  And that's going to be the -- that's going to be the key factor, I think.
            Are there resource discussions to be had?  Of course.  You can't field a force of hundreds of thousands, potentially, and not look at the resource equation.  So that's going to have to be part of the discussion.
            But the important principle here is to get the ANSF to where it needs to be, and we think they're moving in absolutely the right direction.  They have worked closely with us, even in the aftermath of recent incidents, and that's something that we're very grateful for and is a sign of the progress they're making.
Yes, in the back.
            Q:  George, is it the position of the department that the aid that was agreed on Syria, the aid that was agreed to last week, that is totally a State Department function?
            Because it appears that some of the equipment that the opposition will be getting is night-vision equipment, military night-vision equipment. Does the U.S. military have any involvement in that?
            MR. LITTLE:  This is a State Department-led effort.  The, I think, $25 million in humanitarian assistance is something that the State Department is managing.  The secretary of state, I believe yesterday, spoke at some length about the nature of this assistance and, I believe, used the word "nonmilitary" at one point.  So I would refer you to her comments.
            On Syria writ large, we remain very concerned about continuing violence in that country.  We're working closely with our partners in the region to try to determine what can be done.  And again, we believe that -- I would just reiterate the policy of this administration, and that is that President Assad needs to step aside.
            Yes.
            Q:  George, the recent commitment of President Obama, President Calderon and Prime Minister Harper in regards to fighting the organized crime implies a new strategy or more resources or training for Mexico and all the countries affected by this tragedy ?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not sure that I have any specific agreements or accords or other instruments of international law to point to.  But what I can say, that it was a remarkably productive discussion, a historic dialogue, the first of its kind to discuss hemispheric security issues, to include narco-trafficking, trafficking in illicit goods and a range of other issues.  So we hope that this dialogue can continue in the future.  We look forward to working with our Canadian and Mexican counterparts to try to set up future forums such as this.
            And we're always looking for ways to explore deeper cooperation with our allies to the north and south.
            Courtney.
            Q:  On the Quran burning incident, has -- there obviously hasn't been a investigation publicly released.  Has Secretary Panetta been briefed on any findings yet?  Or can you update us on where the U.S. and/or the U.S. joint Afghan investigation stands?
            MR. LITTLE:  The -- this is an incident that we obviously have taken very seriously and have undertaken a deliberate process to investigate.  As I understand it, the investigation is not yet complete, but we're working toward completion.  And beyond that, I don't have anything to report at this stage.  But I'll certainly keep you posted.
            Q:  So Secretary Panetta has not been updated at all on the progress or any findings or anything like that on this investigation after all this time still?
            MR. LITTLE:  He has taken, for obvious reasons, a strong interest in the progress of the investigation and where it stands.  I'm not going to get out ahead, though, of what the investigation might yield. Again, this is something that needs to come from Afghanistan first, from our commanders, General Allen there, and then we'll move forward. The -- we understand the concerns that this issue or incident raised, and we're committed to addressing it, and General Allen has in Afghanistan.
            Q:  But just to be clear, when you say that the investigation is not yet complete, do you mean, though, the U.S.-Afghan joint one, or do you mean the U.S. -- wasn't there a U.S. one -- as well like at 15-6 investigation?
            MR. LITTLE:  We're obviously taking a look at this ourselves. And to my knowledge, that investigation has not been completed.  The -- as far as the joint investigation goes, I'll have to get back to you on that.
            All right, couple more questions, and then I'll take -- I'll take leave.
            Q:  Can I follow up on Pakistan?
            MR. LITTLE:  OK.
            Q:  The U.S. had a 10 million (dollar) bounty on Lashkar-e-Taiba leader Hafiz Saeed.  And Hafiz Saeed is blamed for having some sort of support from Pakistani intelligence.  Don't you think it will affect those ongoing efforts being made by intelligence officials from both sides to improve the strained relationship?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to comment on reported ties between the -- elements of the Pakistani government and certain groups inside Pakistan.  The LET, from the U.S. perspective, is a very dangerous group that has mounted operations externally and continues to plot attacks.  This is a very serious issue for us, and I think that's why you saw this announcement.  You know, we believe that this group remains a threat, remains a threat to people in the region and to us.
            Q:  Can I follow up on this quickly?
            MR. LITTLE:  OK.
            Q:  The U.S. military says that it has good contacts with the Pakistani military.  The generals were here a couple -- a few days ago.  So what is the feedback that you are getting from the Pakistani military on this issue?  Because this man, who has killed dozens of Indians and six American citizens, is roaming free in Pakistan.  So what is the feedback that you are getting from your military counterparts?
            MR. LITTLE:  I'm not going to get into the specifics of our discussions with our foreign counterparts.  The focus with the military in Pakistan right now is continuing to look for ways to cooperate.
            That's an essential part of the relationship, to cooperate on a number of levels, political being one and of course military being another, and there are other means of cooperation as well.
            So I think the government of Pakistan understands our long- standing concerns about LET and I'll -- I think I'll leave it there.
            Final question.  Yes.
            Q:  Your briefing already mentioned about that this morning for Secretary Panetta and the Japanese defense minister's meeting -- I mean the telephone conference.  Could you just give us a little more detailed information about that?  And did they talk anything about other than North Korea missile launch?
            MR. LITTLE:  As you know -- well, I'm not going to get into specifics of their conversation, but they did address the prospect of a North Korean missile launch and both expressed concern about the possibility of that occurring in the near future.  And of course we both hope that it doesn't.
            The United States has regular dialogue and the secretary thoroughly enjoys speaking on a relatively frequent basis with his Japanese counterparts.  And so they discuss a wide range of issues.
            We understand the concerns that our Japanese allies have about this prospective launch, the potential impact on the security of the region, and this was a call to share common concerns over the North Korean missile launch, among other reasons.
            Q:  George -- I mean, the reality is, while everyone's concerned, what does the U.S. do about it, other than sit back and take it when it happens, to see what -- where it all lands? I mean, isn't that really the reality here?
            MR. LITTLE:  I think I said "last question," but I'll make this one -- the last.
            MR. LITTLE:  And I'm really not going to get into speculation on it, Barbara.  I mean, this is something that we take very seriously, the prospect of a North Korean missile launch.  What we may or may not do is something that I'll leave to others to hypothesize on.
            All right?  Thank you, everyone.