>> well, we're going to be discussing that in brussels and chicago. and obviously, we'll want to work closely with our isaf partners to determine what that enduring presence will look like. but clearly, it's -- it -- you know, any future presence will focus on areas like counterterrorism and focus also on training assistance and advice, as we've provided and probably will continue to provide in the future. do you assume there'll be hundreds if not thousands of u.s. soldiers still on the ground in 2014? >> i don't -- i don't think we ought to comment on what we're assuming at this point, mainly because we really want to engage in serious consultation with our partners as to what that presence ought to look like. >> but there will be some u.s. presence, correct? >> that's -- i think that'll be the case. >> secretary panetta and chairman dempsey, i wanted to follow up with -- on the attacks over the weekend. these kind of attacks are -- amount to something like guerrilla warfare. couldn't that in itself be effective enough to undermine the confidence of

on nato, i am leaving tomorrow for a joint ministerial in brussels, the last high-level meeting that will take place before the chicago summit in may. we are at a pivotal point for the alliance, as we build on the gains that have been made in afghanistan, and try to chart the course for the future in that area. we will also be working to ensure our nato has the right military capabilities that will be needed for the future in order for nato to assume the responsibilities that it must as we proceed. even as we deal with these global security challenges, we have a great challenge here at home, which is working with congress to implement our new defense strategy. let me give you a quick update on where i think things stand at this point. since the president's budget request was released on february 13, the budget and strategy that we have developed have been subject to intense scrutiny on capitol hill. german dempsey and i went to the hill to testify five times before the key committees. there had been more than 50 additional congressional hearings the service secretaries, the service c

before christmas, i was on a panel in brussels with a professor who is the iranian representative to the iaea. there was one thing we agreed, we are the only people in the world who have read all those reports. [laughter] let's go back to the iranian nuclear program. the international community's concern about it for a number of reasons. maybe the biggest reason is that iran conducted this clandestine and uranium enrichment conversion activities two decades without fulfilling its reporting requirements to the iaea. moreover, actually iran diverted nuclear material which it received from abroad, never reported to the iaea. this is a classic diversion of nuclear material. it also accepted nuclear material from the safeguards and conducted additional experiments from these. years the first lesson, calling a spade a spade. but you have never heard the iaea has said that nuclear materials were diverted. the reason for that was in 2003 when this came into allied of the international community, the reason for that was the agency did not call it a diversion and noncompliant because it would

uruguay had collapsed in brussels. we came home and began to negotiate nafta. president bush signed in december of 1992. it was put through congress the following year. within five months, we completed the uruguay rounds. people did not want to have the north american market not have the benefits for the global economy. my friend to my left thing is that doha is dead. i believe there is a way to bring back. >> i'm still to your left. [laughter] >> no change at all there. i believe doha could contribute to those of five strategies i just mentioned. a simple package that would harvest some gains. i would move forward if i had a chance to do so. i think the trans-pacific partnership could be grade. the stated goal is to bring together economies from across the pacific into a single trading community to serve as a platform for broader regional integration and a free-trade area of the asia-pacific. the trans-pacific partnership involves nine nations. we have trade agreements with four of the nine. brunei, new zealand, malaysia, be add-nam' would ons. the potential f