Daily adventures with the   



  White House Press Corps   
in their own words   

Our War On Terror - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 8/31/09
— Wednesday, September 02, 2009 —
0 comments
Q I believe it was March when the President announced his new strategy in Afghanistan and since then things have only gotten worse. This July and August I believe have been the two worst months in terms of U.S. fatalities. Obviously it takes a long time to implement a military strategy, but after six months not only are things not stabilized but they're worse -- they've gotten worse during that period of time. Is this an early sign that his strategy is not working?

MR. GIBBS: No, Chip, we under-resourced Afghanistan for the better part of a decade. Okay?

Q But now he's sending in additional troops and it's getting worse.

MR. GIBBS: Well, and not all those additional troops are there. The assessment that is coming back is part of what a new commander does when they go to a region when they're newly assigned, as the President has General McChrystal to this region.

But understand, Chip, we are not -- the President, whether it's the economy, health care, or anything, isn't going to -- we're not going to make -- we're not going to see the entire thing turn around in a few months, after years and years of neglect. You can't under-resource the most important part of our war on terror, you can't under-resource that for five or six or seven years -- whether it's under-resourced with troops, whether it's under-resourced with civilian manpower, whether it's under-resourced with economic development funding -- and hope to snap your fingers and have that turn around in just a few months.

I think that what the President enunciated throughout the campaign and actualized as part of this administration was to change our direction in Afghanistan, to understand it was the central focus; that in Afghanistan and in the hills separating Afghanistan and Pakistan were those again plotting to do us harm, and that for far too long we've ignored that with the resources that were necessary to deal with the size and the scope of the problem that existed there.

Q But as bad as it was when he came into office, it has become significantly worse since he announced his plan.

MR. GIBBS: It is a challenging place. We are forever indebted to the men and women who serve there, and particularly those who sacrifice and make the ultimate sacrifice. I think the General's -- we'll see the General's assessment when it gets here. The President is focused on ensuring that we meet measurable benchmarks and that we disrupt, dismantle, and ultimately destroy al Qaeda and its extremist allies. It's going to take some doing. It's going to take more resources, which the President has dedicated to this problem.

But understand, Chip, this was under-resourced, under-funded, under-manned and ignored for years and that's not going to change overnight.

Q Is it possible that you're simply losing control in Afghanistan and it's going to continue to spiral out of control?

MR. GIBBS: I think based on reports from what General -- based on some initial reporting that I've seen of General McChrystal's report, he says the situation is quite serious but the war is indeed winnable.

| | | | |

Labels: , , , , ,



>> Full Story

Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:29:00 PM

0 comments






We Obviously Are The Enemy - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 7/31/09
— Monday, August 03, 2009 —
0 comments
Q July was the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Afghanistan since the war began there, and I was wondering if you could convey what's being accomplished in exchange for this loss of treasure?

MR. GIBBS: Well, obviously let me begin by doing what the President would do, which is to honor and laud the sacrifice of men and women serving overseas, and to their families, especially to those who have paid such a tremendous price to protect our freedom.

You heard the President throughout the campaign and throughout the first six months here talk about the fact that for quite some time we'd taken our eyes off of the ball in Afghanistan; that we needed to improve the security situation, particularly as we led to elections there in the next month. We reviewed the policy and made some initial adjustments in forces. General McChrystal is in Afghanistan and is continuing to review our policy.

I think what's also important -- you've heard the President discuss, Jake, that progress in Afghanistan -- and what we want to do obviously is destroy and defeat those that are plotting terror against our country and others -- that we're not going to be successful simply by military means alone. We have to increase our focus on development, on agriculture, on civil society. Only through both means are we going to see progress.

I will say -- I think the President understands this -- that it's going to take quite some time to change the focus of what we have been doing over the course of many years there against the enemy.

Q Can you elaborate just on what specifically has been accomplished in the last month?

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I think we are making progress in the security environment, understanding that it is still an exceedingly dangerous place. We have benchmarks to measure progress. And, Jake, we'll continually review the policy in order to make a determination that we're seeing the progress the President wants in destroying and defeating the enemy there.

Q Are the Afghans meeting the benchmarks?

MR. GIBBS: We're satisfied with the progress that they're making. We also understand -- much as was the case in Iraq, and I've think you seen this as a big focus in what General McChrystal is doing both now and planning for in the future, and that is to strengthen and fortify the Afghan security forces. Much like Iraq, we cannot be there forever. Afghans are going to have to provide a measure of their own security, much as we're asking Iraqis to do and that they're doing in their own country.

But, you know, look, I think there's no doubt that for a long time the President believed we did not have the manpower and the resources that were needed to make progress and we're certainly hopeful that we're on track to doing more --

Q Don't you have things turned around? We're the invader of this country. They're the enemy? When we invade their country and destroy everything?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't want to -- I can't agree with much of the --

Q Who's the enemy? We obviously are the enemy if we invade a country.

MR. GIBBS: I think there are Afghans that wish to be free, that don't view the American and multinational forces that are coming from other countries as the enemy. I think we've seen the brutality of the Taliban and we've seen what --

Q Are we brutal when we bomb them?

MR. GIBBS: Let me finish my first answer. Obviously we've seen the brutality of the Taliban and what the plotting of al Qaeda can do. I think you've heard the President, I think you've heard General McChrystal, and our ambassador discuss the care that has to be taken to ensure the protection of civilians while we make the country more secure.

| | | | | |

Labels: , , , , , ,



>> Full Story

Posted by White House Press Corps @ 11:41:00 PM

0 comments






Conjoined Twins - White House Press Briefing by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 5/6/09
— Wednesday, May 06, 2009 —
0 comments
Q Madam Secretary, as this plan was being developed, the U.S. believed that a lot of the insurgency issues were going to be in eastern Afghanistan. Obviously the problem has now emerged more heatedly in Pakistan. How has that affected this strategy of the U.S. as this summit came together?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Jake, I think that the wisdom of the approach that we took even before the President was inaugurated has been borne out by the events of the last months. We were determined to see Afghanistan and Pakistan as a region, as two countries that were dependent upon each other, influenced each other, and needed to figure out a way forward together. So, if anything, the fast-moving conflict and, frankly, the adaptability of the enemy that we are all fighting has demonstrated clearly the wisdom of that approach.

One of the other comments that was made today is that Afghanistan and Pakistan are conjoined twins -- and, in effect, they are. But they were never treated that way. They were kind of one-off: What are we going to do about Afghanistan, and, oh, by the way, what are we going to do about Pakistan? And we have a history there, as you know. We have a history of having been deeply involved and then having withdrawn. And so I think seeing the two countries as connected geographically as they are, and in this common struggle against al Qaeda and the Taliban and their allies, has given us the flexibility to be able to move more agilely than we did before.

Q Madam Secretary, President Zardari said the following yesterday. He said -- on the U.S. relationship -- "I think it needs more effort; I think it needs more understanding on both sides." What is your understanding of his greatest concerns, from his point of view, that you picked up on in these meetings today -- on the U.S. relationship?

SECRETARY CLINTON: You know, Chuck, I think that's a very fair statement. I think that it does require more understanding on both sides. One size does not fit all. You don't take a strategy from one part of the world and impose it on another part. You don't look at each country just through the prism of the terrorist threat and expect to really understand what's the best way to combat that, and also to begin removing conditions that gave rise to it.

And I think that in my conversations with President Zardari -- whom I've known a very long time and was a great admirer and friend of his wife -- if you talk with him, as I have, about what he faced coming into office -- he's been President for less than eight months, and he inherited a very difficult and unmanageable situation. We have a pretty well functioning government. We've changed directions policy-wise, but you don't have to start from scratch -- and so I think a little more understanding on our part about what he confronted.

You know, he has successfully navigated some real crises. He made a very brave decision when he first came in to raise the price of wheat. Might not sound like a big deal, but it was a huge political challenge. But by doing so, Pakistan is now self-sufficient in wheat again. You know, you have to look at what he was facing: an economic crisis, a military-terrorist crisis, a legitimacy crisis -- just an enormous array of challenges. And I think if you're more understanding of both the history and the conditions, you not only can perhaps empathize a little bit, but be smarter in the suggestions you make, understanding what the consequences will be. And that's what we are trying to do through this process.

Q What are his asks? What are his asks specifically of us?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, you know. They're very public: more economic aid; more assistance with the military and police in terms of what they need to now go after this new enemy; what I just sort of read off in response to an earlier question about the sort of assistance we're going to offer, from agriculture to the economy to intelligence. That's what they're looking for.

Q Madam Secretary, a couple of questions. One, the Zardari government said it wanted time to have this negotiated arrangement in Swat Valley to see what would happen. They've now seen what has happened and are responding militarily. There are some reports in the region that the civilians on the ground now see the government in a different light, and saw that they tried to negotiate, saw what the Taliban did, and there's a backlash against the Taliban. Do you believe that was an inherent wisdom that maybe the U.S. did not detect before in the strategy?

And number two, with the sense that the refugee crisis in that area -- now that the Pakistan government has asked civilians to try to leave -- is that going to be something the U.S. and both these nations are going to have to confront in the very near term?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I'm sorry, say that again.

Q Well, the military's advice being to try to exit parts of the Swat Valley because of a assumed military offensive -- will that create a humanitarian issue that all three of these countries are going to have to deal with in a very near term?

SECRETARY CLINTON: You know, Major, I'm not going to second-guess the approach that was taken by the government of Pakistan vis-à-vis the Taliban in Swat Valley. Whatever the motive behind it might have been, the reality on the ground soon proved otherwise; that one had to confront the increasing influence and geographic spread of the Taliban. There aren't that many Taliban fighters, but they are so intimidating and they are so ruthless that a very few can control a large swath of territory, which is something that I think everybody learned in watching this unfold.

So the other point to remember -- it goes back to Chuck's earlier question -- is there have been areas of Pakistan that have been ungoverned for a very long time. The British Empire did not govern them; no Pakistani government, civilian or military, attempted to govern them; and they were basically left alone, and they left the central government alone -- it was kind of a unspoken agreement.

But what nobody bargained for was foreign fighters and foreign money and a foreign ideology that would in some way link up disparate elements within these regions into a network, a syndicate, if you will, of extremist groups. And I think that has changed -- that's another one of the paradigm shifts. You know, you could leave those folks alone and they took care of their own business, but that was fine, we were okay in Lahore and Islamabad and Karachi and other places. But as they became more aggressive, and as they kind of broke out of the traditional model of how they had stayed close to home and basically controlled their own surroundings, that produced a new challenge.

And I think that it's part of the change in attitude that we're seeing in the Pakistani military and intelligence services, and in the civilian government.

Q And the issue --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we're obviously concerned about that. We're going to watch it and see what we can do to help.

MR. GIBBS: She's got a couple of important meetings she's got to get to, so we're going to let her go.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Robert.

MR. GIBBS: Thank you for coming.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thanks, everybody.

Q Come again. (Laughter.)

| | | | | |

Labels: , , , , , ,



>> Full Story

Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:09:00 PM

0 comments






The Pakistanis Are Nervous - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 5/5/09
— Tuesday, May 05, 2009 —
0 comments
MR. GIBBS: Helen.

Q Does the President have congressional approval to send thousands of troops to Afghanistan? And what does he mean that extremists are a direct and general threat to us? Can you explain that?

MR. GIBBS: Sure. I presume that the authorization for increased troop activity in Afghanistan goes back to 2000 -- I don't know exactly when the vote was, late 2001. I think the President outlined a strategy to deal with this region and to deal with Afghanistan and Pakistan, understanding that al Qaeda and its extremist allies operated in these two countries. I think it is clear from their actions that they pose a threat not only to those countries, but also to the United States. And I think we saw that --

Q Are they a threat because we're there intervening in their civil war? Or are they going to come here?

MR. GIBBS: I think it was pretty apparent the threat that they posed and the destruction that they ultimately caused in 2001, and that the President will take action to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies.

Q Robert, what is the President going to do to reassure Zardari in Pakistan when he comes here tomorrow that this growing opposition on Capitol Hill or sort of reticence opposition on the Hill is from reticence about providing aid to the country -- how is he going to reassure him that he can guarantee the money, that the money is going to come, that Congress will be able to get this done?

MR. GIBBS: Flesh out for me the reticence a bit.

Q I guess that it seemed to be -- Chairman Obey today saying that he -- on sort of a stricter basis, he's not going to have an -- sort of an unfunded aspect to Afghanistan and Pakistan. And there's clearly -- the Pakistanis are nervous that they're not going to get the same amount of aid that they've seen in the past.

MR. GIBBS: Well, a couple different things. Understand that nobody is more impatient in seeing progress on a strategy to deal with Afghanistan and Pakistan than the President of the United States. He has talked about this for several years. These meetings over the course of the next couple of days make good on the promise of being engaged in this region actively. As I said to Helen, there is a shared threat from al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and the best way to confront that threat is through an alliance and cooperation with both of those countries.

Q You say al Qaeda, but then is it the Taliban, or do you call al Qaeda -- the Taliban one of al Qaeda's allies in this case?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I'd say al Qaeda's -- I think I said al Qaeda and its extremist allies. Obviously that denotes al Qaeda, and in specific instances, the Taliban.

Q Who Pakistan is, at one hand, at war with; on the other hand, negotiating with.

MR. GIBBS: I think they can speak to the danger of doing that.

Q Well, I understand it, but I guess, going back to the funding --

MR. GIBBS: Well, let me -- back to your funding, I mean, understand that we organized -- helped organized a donors conference in Japan that brought forward $5 billion worth of assistance to help with this problem in Pakistan. But, Chuck, as I said here yesterday, and I think the President has said on numerous occasions, there shouldn't be and there won't be blank checks; that the President supports the building in of accountability measures to ensure that we're making progress and that if progress isn't made that we'll readjust our strategy. He said that in ordering and conducting the review of our strategy in this region, and in the delivery of that review just a little while ago.

Q Disengagement could be a possibility here? That seems to be what some on Capitol Hill are saying -- hey, if progress can't be seen in a year, then why should we keep throwing more money at it; in fact, we should back off.

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President has made clear the priority in ensuring that we're addressing this extremist threat. Nobody is more impatient than the President in seeing that succeed as quickly as possible, and if, for whatever reason, parts of, or aspects of the strategy aren't succeeding as well as we'd like, then those will be changed in order to succeed.

But again, Chuck, we have a threat, the Pakistanis and the Afghanis have a threat that has to be addressed and that's what the President intends to do.

| | | | | | |

Labels: , , , , , , ,



>> Full Story

Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:05:00 PM

0 comments