The new U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad said President Bush is "unyieldingly committed to Afghanistan," and described it as "one of his top two foreign policy priorities," as he addressed journalists at Washington's Foreign Press Center November 19.

Khalilzad said he was going to his post with a clear mission "to accelerate the reconstruction of the country, improve security for the people of Afghanistan, accelerate the reconstruction of the country's economic infrastructure, and to assist in a movement towards building a democratic polity in Afghanistan."

He said the United States was continuing its fight against the remnants of al Qaeda and the Taliban in remote areas of the country, looking for "new ways to be even more effective against them" and making life "as difficult as possible for them."

"[T]his is not only a struggle between the United States and al Qaeda, but it's a struggle for the future of Afghanistan as well," said Khalilzad.

By targeting international workers and Afghans who are working on infrastructure projects such as roads, health clinics and schools, and removing land mines, the Taliban are "showing themselves to be the enemies of Afghanistan," he said.

The ambassador paid tribute to Bettina Goislard, a French refugee worker, who was killed November 16 by suspected Taliban rebels.

He denounced the Taliban for targeting Goislard and other international workers, "those very people who have more commitment to the construction of Afghanistan than [the Taliban], supposedly being from that land."

He also called upon Pakistan to take more action against al Qaeda and the Taliban and to prevent the use of Pakistani territory as a base for attacks within Afghanistan. He said the Taliban also pose a challenge to President Musharraf's vision of a democratic and moderate Pakistan.

When asked why Iraq was receiving significantly more aid money than Afghanistan in the recent $87.5 billion appropriations measure, Khalilzad explained that Afghanistan has fewer military requirements than Iraq and that there are many more countries involved with its reconstruction and security needs.

He noted that France is helping to train the Afghan National Army and Germany is training the country's police force while the Japanese work to demobilize militias. Meanwhile, the British are heading counter-narcotics operations, and the Italians have taken the lead in the reconstruction of Afghanistan's judicial system, he said.

MR. DENIG: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Washington Foreign Press Center. I want to welcome also journalists at our New York Foreign Press Center.

We are very pleased today to be able to welcome to our podium Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad. Dr. Khalilzad has served as Special Assistant to the President and as Senior Director for Southwest Asia, Near East and North Africa on the National Security Council. He has also been Special Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan, a position in which he continues. And, very importantly, just this week, on Monday, November 17th, he was confirmed by the Senate as the new United States Ambassador to Afghanistan.

We are very pleased to have Dr. Khalilzad here today with us to talk about the very important topic, "Progress and Prospects in Afghanistan." He'll have an opening statement to make, and after that we'll be glad to take your questions.

Dr. Khalilzad.

DR. KHALILZAD: Thank you very much. I am very pleased to be here and I appreciate the fact that you've all come here to listen to me and to ask questions about Afghanistan.

As was said, I was confirmed to be our next Ambassador to Afghanistan. I will be sworn in on Monday, and on Tuesday I should be on my way.

I am going to Afghanistan with a clear mission from the President, and that mission is to work with the Afghan Government and with the international partners that we have -- and we have quite a few of them working with us in Afghanistan -- to accelerate the reconstruction of the country, improve security for the people of Afghanistan, accelerate the reconstruction of the country's economic infrastructure, and to assist in the movement towards building a democratic polity in Afghanistan.

Success in Afghanistan is the only option, I say. We have seen what failure in Afghanistan can produce. Under the Taliban, Afghanistan was the playground of international terrorists -- al-Qaida -- that plotted and planned that dastardly attack that took place in the United States on September the 11th, 2001.

We want an Afghanistan that can work for the Afghans, can look after the security needs of the Afghan people, that can provide for representative institutions, and increase economic well-being for the people of Afghanistan who have suffered so much for so long. And I will do my very best with the increased resources that the Congress under the leadership of President Bush, with his proposals, have provided and with a team of Americans dedicated to help Afghanistan succeed.

But I am going to go to build on the successes that we have already had in Afghanistan. There has been a lot that has been accomplished as a result of efforts by Afghans, the result of efforts by our coalition partners and other international players who are assisting in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Of course, the United States has played in the reconstruction the lead role that it played in the effort to liberate Afghanistan from the backward tyranny that was the Taliban rule of Afghanistan.

Among the accomplishments that are the most noteworthy so far, in my view, is, first, that Afghanistan has kept to the political timeline for moving forward. The Bonn agreement had a roadmap on the political track and the establishment of an interim authority, the Grand Assembly, or Loya Jirga; six months later to establish a transitional authority, a constitution and a constitutional Loya Jirga. The draft of the constitution has been produced. Of course, it's an Afghan product produced by an inclusive process -- and the upcoming Loya Jirga.

I look forward to being in Afghanistan during the coming constitutional convention and look forward to a final document, a constitution that will be a roadmap, guide, for Afghanistan's journey to the kind of vision that I talk about before.

On the security front, of course the challenge of the Taliban, al-Qaida and extremists like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar continue. There is a challenge of drug traffickers. There is a challenge of common criminals and some local leaders who act like warlords. The ultimate answer to the security problem of Afghanistan is Afghan institutions able to deal with those problems -- national army, national police, and fair laws fairly applied.

And we're making progress. Already 5,000 Afghan National Army (ANA) troops have been trained. Some 1,000 police have been trained, or more. And in the course of next year, as part of the acceleration strategy, we'll do more. The rate of training for the ANA, for the Afghan National Army, will go to 10,000 per year by June. We plan to train 20,000 policemen in the course of the next year. And, of course, with Italians in the lead, we will assist in accelerating the judicial reform process in Afghanistan with regard to fair laws.

But during the transition, as Afghanistan makes progress towards standing on its own feet, which is the goal with regards to security, we will, of course, continue with the operations against the terrorists and extremists and increase the number of provincial reconstruction teams that we already have that are playing a positive role in parts of Afghanistan; continue to work with President Karzai on dealing with those regional leaders that act like warlords; and, of course, the increase in the capacity and so police should deal with the criminal elements more; and, of course, we will focus, dealing with the British, who are in the lead on the counternarcotics, to do more to confront this problem. It's a complicated problem. Maybe if you ask me a question, I'll talk about it. But we understand the importance of this issue and the necessity to do more.

With regard to economic infrastructure, ultimately, of course, Afghan and outside investors will have to bring up the standard of living of the Afghan people, but there are responsibilities to facilitate to create conditions that can attract Afghan and external investors -- the private sector, the free economy, which has got to be the answer to the economic problems.

There are different kinds of infrastructure. One is roads, airports -- and we will help. We have already are working and expect to finish by sometime in December the first layering of pavement for the Kabul-Kandahar road, and we'll finish it, complete it, in the course of next year. We'll work on the Kabul-Kandahar, and then the Herat-Kandahar part of it.

Others, such as the World Bank, have started work on Kabul-Dushi to the north. There are other road projects that we will encourage.

But, in addition, the United States will assist in paving 1,000 additional kilometers of secondary roads in Afghanistan next year.

Besides infrastructure of this kind, of a physical kind, there is a need for laws and rules that can be friendly to economic progress, and also government institutions in Afghanistan need to be responsive to the needs for economic progress to take place.

And we are prepared and will assist the Afghan Government to increase its capacity to do these things by helping them, if they need our help, and to hire Afghans who are living overseas or willing to go and work in their country; but, as well, if there is no Afghan living overseas who is able or willing to go, to get others to come and assist them in this regard.

And lastly, on the political track already referred to, to what has been accomplished besides a constitution, which is very important, there is the issue of local councils, issues of election of president, free press, building of civil society. Progress has been made in these areas already, and I will be glad to answer questions that you may have on the progress so far.

But a lot has been done, a lot still needs to be done, and I look forward to getting to Afghanistan to do a lot more. And for me personally, as most of you know, I was born in Afghanistan. As I say to people, only in America can something like this happen that coming from Afghanistan, having served in various capacities, now the President and with the approval of the Senate has tasked me to go and to help Afghanistan stand on its own feet. And I have made my commitment to the President and to others that I'll do, obviously, my very best to be results oriented and help the country move in the right direction.

Thank you very much.

MR. DENIG: Dr. Khalilzad will be glad to take your questions. I just ask you, as usual, to use the microphone, identify yourself and your news organization. Let's start with the lady over there, and then we'll come over here.

QUESTION: Thank you. This is Tulin Dalohlu from Turkey's Star TV.

DR. KHALILZAD: Merhaba.

QUESTION: Merhaba. I have two questions to you, actually. The first one is: What is the level of presence of al-Qaida today in Afghanistan? And second, what is the threat they impose to the reconstruction of the economic infrastructure?

DR. KHALILZAD: Of course, the level of presence is far less than it was two years ago. Of course, during the rule of the Taliban before the effort to liberate Afghanistan started, the country was ruled by a coalition of Taliban and al-Qaida. Now, of course, that's not the situation.

But what happened, as the result of the liberation effort, is that some al-Qaida people were killed, some were captured, and some were captured subsequently, and some dispersed to other countries and to remote areas of Afghanistan. And we are on the hunt for them. We have tried to make life as difficult as possible for them. But we have said from the beginning this was going to be a long struggle, the war against al-Qaida and terrorist groups with global reach in general.

There is a continuing threat from al-Qaida and from the Taliban and the others that I talked about, and we will be relentless in our effort. We look for new ways to be even more effective against them. My own view is that we need to involve the Afghan people more in this struggle, especially in the areas to the east and south. And this is not only a struggle between the United States and al-Qaida, but it's the struggle for the future of Afghanistan as well, and the Afghan people have a lot at stake here. Their future prosperity, their future stability, depends on the success of the enterprise that we are about in Afghanistan. But we'll be relentless in our effort, we'll be focused on it, and this will be a priority of mine.

MR. DENIG: Okay, let's go to Russia up front here.

QUESTION: Dmitry Kirsanov, Russian News Agency, TASS. Mr. Ambassador, I have a number of general questions about U.S.-Russia cooperation in Afghanistan but I'll try to keep them short.

First of all, I'm interested whether you can, from your point of view, if you can call the cooperation between Russia and the United States and Afghanistan constructive and productive, in what concrete spheres, what else you expect Moscow to do to help you stabilize Afghanistan?

And finally, sir, don't you think there is a threat for Russia and the United States to become rivals, competitors, in Afghanistan again, because Russia has traditional strong relations with Northern Alliance and you support Pashtuns?

DR. KHALILZAD: Well, on your second issue, we support Afghans in their efforts to have representative institutions for all Afghans, regardless of ethnic affiliations or sectarian affiliations, men and women, to participate in the political process, to have a say appropriate to the situation in Afghanistan. Only by everybody in Afghanistan being represented, seeing themselves in the Afghan political institutions and economic institutions, can you have an Afghanistan that -- at least the way I like to say it -- works for Afghans.

If you have only one ethnic group involved, the other ethnic group will be dissatisfied and there will be problems. So you need representative institutions, democracy and representative institutions. Elections, civil societies, free press, all of these things are important. So I don't see an issue that the United States going to favor one ethnic group against the other. That's not what's called for, that's not what we will do.

With regard to a Russian role in Afghanistan, of course you know the background of Soviet and Russian relations in Afghanistan. We would like Russia to play a constructive role, to play a role in Afghanistan. We think that there are ways that Russia could be helpful. There is clearly a role for Russia with regard to de-mining, because during the war, the Soviets' invasion of Afghanistan and during the resistance to the Soviets, there were a lot of mines that were spread, the most heavily mined country in the world. And a lot of Afghan children continue to suffer from that. I hope that they can be helpful in that.

Also Russia has done a lot of, during the Soviet era, examination of the mineral and other resources of Afghanistan. I think providing that information, sharing it, and encouraging the development of those resources would be also very helpful.

Also, for elections and for registration, there is a need to purchase Russian jeeps, I am told, because Afghans are used to those, dating back to the old days. Russia could assist with that by providing them at a discount rate because the Afghans need a lot of them. You know, Russia could make money, but it also will be helpful to a poor country like Afghanistan at this time.

So there is a lot that can be done. I, certainly, myself -- and I think I can speak on behalf of our government -- would like to see Russia to play a positive, constructive role in helping Afghanistan achieve the goals that I described.

MR. DENIG: Okay, let's take the gentleman in the middle, please.

QUESTION: My name is Abdul Adil from Pashtun Service of the Voice of America. My question is this. Mr. Khalilzad, you are starting your mission at a time that the United Nations is pulling out Afghanistan from eastern, from southwestern, and also from -- they are closing down some offices in Peshawar and other parts of Pakistan. Don't you see that as a regression for development and reconstruction in Afghanistan?

And my second question is, many people have this speculation that you are acting like a kingmaker for Afghanistan. How much that is true or not? Thank you.

DR. KHALILZAD: Well, thank you very much for both of those questions. Number one, I don't think you are right with regard to the first one, that the UN is withdrawing. I think that's not my understanding of the situation.

But clearly, with the attacks that have occurred against people who are there to help Afghanistan succeed, whether it's a French woman in Ghazni that was killed, or people who work to build the Kabul-Kandahar road, or people who are de-mining, to get rid of these mines that maim and kill Afghan children, or people who are building schools and people going to burn the schools that have been built -- they are showing these people who are doing that, the Taliban and their other extremist friends, are showing themselves to be the enemies of Afghanistan, of the Afghan people. And interestingly, you saw that in Ghazni the people -- not the police, the people -- captured the two suspects that were responsible for the killing of the French woman.

And this French woman said, before she died as a result of this dastardly act, that she would like to be buried in Afghanistan. The commitment of this person born in France, wanting to go and serve the people of Afghanistan, and these people, the Taliban or their friends, coming to kill those very people who have more commitment to the construction of Afghanistan than they do, supposedly, being from that land.

That will not stop progress and success in Afghanistan. We are committed to success in Afghanistan. We will see this thing through. We will be there for as long as it takes to do the job. There is no alternative. And we will help our UN colleagues and friends in ways that are prudent. But, of course, these terrorists, they see progress as their enemy, they see reconstruction as their enemy, and we will take steps -- you didn't ask me about that -- to deal with that problem.

With regard to my own role as a "kingmaker," Afghanistan has a government. Afghanistan is a sovereign country. My role is to help that government. I'll go on behalf of the United States to help that government, and to help others. And I think we need to do a better job of -- all of us who are trying to help Afghanistan, work together, coordinate better to help it and to increase the capacity of Afghans to do more things for themselves. That's my mission, and I'm not a "kingmaker" and I don't have that aspiration.

MR. DENIG: Let's go to Egypt in the middle, please.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mohamed El-Setouhi, Nile News, Egyptian Television. I have two points. First, there is an impression that the United States is too busy with Iraq now, and giving less and less attention, paying less attention to Afghanistan.

DR. KHALILZAD: Right, right.

QUESTION: This was clear with recent package, aid package, to both countries. Iraq had the lion's share compared to Afghanistan. Is it something you are -- what's your take on that?

The other point, people talk about applying the Afghani model in Iraq, with regard to electing a Loya Jirga and then a leader and so on.

DR. KHALILZAD: Right. With regard to the first one, I think that that's wrong. I can say at first that, from my dealing with the President, that he is unyieldingly committed to Afghanistan. This is one of his top two foreign policy priorities.

And with regard to the assistance, during this period that we have been involved in Iraq, we have increased assistance to Afghanistan. We can chew gum and walk at the same time. We can do two things at the same time.

And with regard to the amounts for Iraq and Afghanistan, part of it could be regarded as the success of Afghanistan. Afghanistan's further along in some ways. On the military requirement, in the supplemental, only 11 billion is needed for Afghanistan, while in Iraq that number was much higher because the intensity of the need, military need, is greater.

On the economic side, it's also a question of capacity for absorption, and Afghanistan it's not only us, there are a lot more countries involved, and it's building on what has been done so far. But you can rest assured that we want an Afghanistan that can stand on its own feet, and that means, both in terms of security, continued commitment to security and the building of the army and the police and other institutions that are needed to deal with the security issue, in cooperation again with the Afghans and others, because others are participating in this, I could name them, such as the French are training officers of this ANA. And the Japanese are playing a very important role in the DDR [Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration] process, demobilization of existing militias. Of course, I mentioned the British on the narcotics issue. The Germans have the lead in training the police, the Italians in terms of the rule of law.

And it's a very good situation in which we have the UN, the international community, and the U.S. working together. In every instance, that's our preferred, obviously, option. The President spoke today in London on this, so that's the first preferred option. But cooperation has to be result oriented, and in Afghanistan, I must say it is. So we are very pleased with that.

Second, with regard to Afghanistan and Iraq, as I said, Afghanistan has had its phases of interim authority and Loya Jirga and transitional authority and government that will come out of elections next year. But Iraq and Afghanistan are different. You know, Loya Jirga is an Afghan institution. I don't know whether you could exactly duplicate it. But having some representative process for selecting a government and authority in Iraq, I think that's where things are headed, as you know, with Ambassador Bremer's discussions with the Iraqi Governing Council. I used to do Iraq until May, but I'm not doing it anymore, and so I'm not on top of the details of that. But I think the President, when I was doing Iraq, when I went to one of the meetings -- I think it was either in Nasiriya or Baghdad, I forget which one -- but he told me to tell the Iraqis, we absolutely have no interest in governing Iraq. I mean, you know, this whole liberation took place to facilitate Iraqis taking control of their own destiny and building up a democratic representative country, and based on their own traditions. And I think Ambassador Bremer is trying to do that.

But let me not get into that. I have enough to think about in the way of Afghanistan.

QUESTION: L. K. Sharma from Deccan Herald. I was wondering whether you are going with political guidance which will make you get in touch with the residual Taliban and start a move for a rapprochement with them.

And the second question is rather personal. Do you see your appointment as a trendsetter that -- and America will be able to find, perhaps, ambassadors of all countries to all countries who originally came from there, or their forefathers came from there, and will it create some kind of a repercussion in the State Department which may consider you as Afghanistan's Ambassador to the United States rather than the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan?

DR. KHALILZAD: On the last one, I know that I am, and everyone knows I am the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan. I don't think there is any problem with that. With regard to whether there are other Americans who have been born or their parents came from other countries, I think that's a great asset for the United States and for the world. And, of course, given the ethnic diversity of our country here, I mean, there are opportunities for everyone.

On the issue of the first question, I think there are, obviously, Taliban who have committed crimes against humanity, who have supported terrorists, who have done dastardly things against their own people, against others, and there has to be an accountability process regarding what's to be done with those people. And there are, on the other hand, others who may have been in the government or in local places that who did not commit the kind of actions that I talk about. And the Afghans need to find mechanisms that can work for Afghanistan, where the requirement of justice has to be dealt with, but also the requirements of reconciliation and bringing the Afghans together needs to be taken into account.

This is an Afghan issue, for Afghans to figure it out. You know, there's a lot of experiences in other places where things of this kind have happened and people need to study them, learn from them, and we would be willing to provide whatever expertise and help we can. But this is an Afghan issue that the Afghans have to deal with.

QUESTION: Ambassador, I'm Meredith Buel, from Voice of America, and I have two questions, if I could, please. The first revolves around some remarks you made to a small group of reporters yesterday where you said there are Taliban leaders and people like that who are using Pakistani territory to come across and carry out attacks in Afghanistan and you said we would like Pakistan to do more.

Can you please tell us, or expand on those remarks just a little bit, and tell us the scope of your concern about that and what you would like to see Pakistan do that it is not currently doing?

And my second question is: How critical is it to the future stability and democratization of Afghanistan to either kill or capture Usama bin Laden and Mullah Muhammad Omar?

DR. KHALILZAD: First, with regard to the first question, of course, we all know, and I have said that yesterday as well, that Pakistan is an important ally and partner in the war against global terror. We appreciate the steps that President Musharraf has taken since September 11th against al-Qaida.

Of course, as with ourselves, as I talked about it earlier, we want everyone, including Pakistan, to do more against al-Qaida, what remains of al-Qaida in Pakistan.

Two, with regard to the Taliban, they do pose a threat to the stability of Afghanistan and to the success, the effort in terms of the speed with which we want things to develop in Afghanistan, and to the stability of Afghanistan. We also think that the Taliban pose a threat, a challenge, to the vision that President Musharraf has talked about, which is a vision of a democratic Pakistan, a Pakistan that is moderate in Islamic orientation.

And we want to work with Pakistan to end Pakistan's use as a sanctuary by the Taliban who come across to Afghanistan to do the kind of things we talked about earlier, whether to attack our forces, to attack coalition forces, to attack Afghan forces, to attack people who are trying to build roads, build clinics, build schools, de-mine, and we will work energetically on this issue.

With regard to your second question, which was -- I forget now, what was it?

QUESTION: My second question was how critical is it to the stability and democratization of Afghanistan to either --

DR. KHALILZAD: Oh, yes, to get those two guys. Well, it's very important to get those guys. It's important if for nothing else symbolically, and but it's not only important to get those guys but important to do all the other things that I have described for success in Afghanistan. Success in Afghanistan is the most important, and certainly getting Mullah Omar and UBL is important. And I think, I believe, one way or the other, it will happen.

MR. DENIG: Let's go to India up here, please.

QUESTION: T.V. Parasaram of Press Trust of India.

DR. KHALILZAD: Yes, sir.

QUESTION: So far you have 13,000 American coalition troops and fighters and peacekeepers in NATO. I was wondering whether this number is enough for a country like Afghanistan. And, if not, how many more would you like to have?

Secondly, on the drug issue, there was a very interesting comment by one of the poppy growers in Afghanistan, when he was asked, "Why you are growing poppies and not wheat?" And he said that the profits from poppies is really enormous, and so, naturally, they want to grow them. How do you propose to deal with that problem?

DR. KHALILZAD: Thank you very much. Both good questions. On the first one, I said before that, in our view, the ultimate answer has got to be Afghan institutions. I've even said that we do not want Afghanistan to be kind of a security-welfare state, dependent on the international community indefinitely.

But the question really is: What do you do during the transition? One of the things that we have decided to do is to help accelerate the building of Afghan institutions, to kind of reduce the amount of time for the transition. But, in addition, we're looking at additional assistance that could be provided during this transition, and this is something that needs to be adjusted as the circumstances require. And one is the role of NATO, as you mentioned. We have already removed the restriction that was placed on ISAF by the United Nations, which was to limit it to Kabul and its vicinity. That no longer is the case. And Kundus, the PRT [Provincial Reconstruction Team] there, will be taken over by the Germans, has been taken already, they have started, and under the umbrella of NATO.

We will support expanding that. At the same time, I mentioned, we have our own provincial reconstruction team, and some other countries also have provincial reconstruction; the British, for example, are in Mazer-e Sharif with their PRTs, and we will encourage more of those, do more ourselves and see that others do so.

As I said, you have to look at the mix at all times, and adjust as circumstances require. But we understand the necessity to help Afghans during this transition.

And the second question, sorry, on the narcotics, I think, of course, that's part of the problem, part of the situation you described, the alternative ways to make money. That's why employing Afghans, having more employment opportunities in ways that they can make a living that is not as huge gap or a difference, it would be important. And we are doing that through this acceleration. There will be a lot of employment opportunities for Afghans. And they will be able to sell their products, if you have roads, to markets, to bring to markets.

But also the law enforcement capabilities of the Afghan Government will increase. This [growing of poppies] is an illegal thing to do, and if you have people who could make a living doing other things, and a government that could enforce the laws, I think it should be helpful.

However, this is a difficult issue. It's a complicated issue. We know from the experience in other countries, there is no easy kind of solution as long as there is a demand and people are willing to pay the kind of prices they do. But it's important to focus on this and we will look for ways to be more helpful to the British, who have the lead on this issue.

MR. DENIG: I'm afraid we've run out of time. I'm very sorry, but thank you very much, Dr. Khalilzad. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. All the best, Dr. Khalilzad.

DR. KHALILZAD: Thank you very much. Thank you.