Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And joining me now is a former secretary of defense and CEO of the Cohen group William Cohen good to see you mr.
I I wouldn't listen I I was surprised I thought that President Obama.
Had -- the 2014.
Date forty much zeroed in that that was what was going to happen we were gonna be gone.
So this surprised me not only the visit but also -- the new partnership agreement would -- to 2024.
Did you see this coming.
I did see it coming not the specific dates but I think it has always been the plan of the Obama administration.
To reduce those significantly.
Our presence in Afghanistan but to.
Have some kind of a residual force either.
Or in some capacity in order to maintain a presence so that we could continue to go after.
V networks on the Pakistani side of the border.
So way I assume that that is partner at -- -- -- you take into account.
This agreement is pretty yup porous as such number one no president can commit the united states of the -- and losses the treaty.
Beyond his own term.
Certainly -- -- to go to congress every year for authorization appropriation so congress has a major role to play in all of this -- so it's really a statement tried to send the signal.
That the United States is not simply walking away -- we want to help the Afghans continue to train themselves and to be able to sustain themselves against either al-Qaeda or -- -- the trying to overthrow them.
Well you just -- that one of my big questions which is this business about the fact that a president can't just signed treaties and this isn't a treaty but.
That's -- -- into will have to be renewed is if it goes along however let's get down to the nuts and bolts of running the Department of Defense.
The cuts are coming to defense.
We are keeping a force plus we're going to have to provide some sort of funds to the -- side administration.
How what's gonna give here financial.
Well sure they'll be a substantial reduction in the amount of money being spent in Afghanistan certainly Iraq now that all the troops are out very little being spent there.
You'll see a reduction anywhere from the hundred billion or so that we've been spending in.
Afghanistan down to a very small amount so I think that that is also part of the calculation you'll not have a large force on the ground you'll have.
Perhaps some teams of special forces that may rotate in.
Bill have a presence -- to reassure the Afghans to the extent that we can.
And it may be.
That's -- situation to vols and such a way that the Afghan government can survive and they'll be no role for the United States so to play in those circumstances but.
I think it'll be a fairly small amount of money.
Compared to what we've been spending in order to eradicate what is basically a tumor and you've got to keep Beretta skating eradicating that that that tumor.
-- until -- or less it will come back so that's the -- of the game plan us as I see -- that the president is trying to.
Reduce the four substantially.
Continue some small of Warsaw in order to keep the pressure on al-Qaeda prevent them from coming back and and also prevent the -- -- from toppling.
The the government but that's going to be up to the Afghan people as to whether they're going to resists the tell above taking over their country.
This is you -- it's -- -- you -- you described -- about this -- because in the past.
Our history has been after a war and a victory is declared than we keep our troops there week.
Go through the process of helping people build constitution's rebuild countries.
What both he -- and Afghanistan.
This is think that entirely different process because we are having to have a presence so that terrorism and those countries doesn't have a chance to re plot again.
-- Not a not only that but we have to be careful because that's it's like any other situation if you squeeze them down and once bought they'll pop up elsewhere as in Yemen.
War of Somalia or other parts of north Africa.
And so we're likely to see the -- this malignancy continue to spread is going to require us.
To continue to monitor where we can take action with the without the consent.
Of the individual governments where these groups are organizing and plotting to try and launch a terrorist attack against the United States very -- our allies so this is not something you can declare it's over.
It will never be over because as long as you have individuals who have access to technology and a globalized economy.
In a world is getting smaller and smaller by virtue of that technology David you're likely to have terror groups plotting to inflict damage upon no open democratic societies.
Yeah and that's the thing and makes -- so difficult it seems like what you're describing is a little bit of kind of an ad hoc policy that we're gonna have to.
Forgive the term make it up as we go along with with where these groups are -- wanted to do business -- credit destroy.
So well in fact I think that is part of the defense strategy going forward.
Namely were not likely to have a commitment of large numbers of ground forces anywhere in the world -- for the foreseeable future.
We have to a contend with a political a symmetric warfare.
Small terror groups are trying to inflict significant damage.
And so you put together a strategy you view -- developed before us this very light very Agile very flexible very quickly deploy -- So that you can attack these -- cancer cells as they start to metastasized.
Or before they can attest -- so.
That's going to be the strategy going forward lighter faster -- more Agile more lethal.
Forces being able to go into different areas strike quickly before these are types of groups can gather any momentum.
Or any sizable.
Presence -- a country and thereby be able plot against the United States I think that's going to be the future we have to contend with.
Secretary William Cohen always -- -- -- think is somewhat intuitive --
Filter by section