>>on the world sge: nuclear threats iiran terror threats at home turning points in afghanistan and the health care standoff on capitol hill tonight, on washington wee >>thoe who used to chastise america for acting alone in t world cannot now stand by and wait for america to sol the world's oblems alone. >>and what problems ty are world leaders reveal irans new iranian nuclear ambitions america, the uted kingdom, and france are aone.â iran's nuclear program is the st urgent prolifetion challenge at the world faces today.

>>genels and bureaucrats search for common ground in the afghanistan war debate >>the most important thing i wanted was us to refocus on y we're there. >>and new domestic terror plot reves al qaedas continuing influence meanwhile, lawmakers on capitol hill duel to a standoff health care form... >>m. chairman lete just mplete my thought here. >>in aout one minute you'll complete your thought. w gotta... >>i'll complete my tught and then make another point... >>this iyour delaying sator and we just have to... . chairman im not delaying. >>i making an extremely important point. >>bad blood everywhere look at y with the reporters coverin thweek doyle mccnus of the los angeles times nancy yousef of mcclatchy newspape... pete williams ofbc news and karetumuy of time mazine.

>>celebrating 40 years of journalistic excellenc live from our nations capital, th is "washingn week with gwen ifill" produced in association national journal. corporate nding for "washington week" is provideby -- >> we know wh we're here to stand by all w serve. to deliver the echnologies vital to freedom. >> to help carr hope to hose in need. >> ound the globe, th people of bing are working togther for at matters most. that's why we'reere. >> major funding for"washington week" is provided by the annenburfoundation, te publicaon of public broadcasting d by

contributis to your pbs station from viewer like you. thanyou. once ain, live from washington moderar gwen ifill. >>goo evening a friday morning surprise in pittsburgh tod, as the leaderof the united states,ritain and france gathered to denounce ir for seet plans to build nuclear plant >> this te deepens a grwing concern that iran i refusing to livep to those international responsibilities includi specically revealing all nuclear-reted activities. >> confronted by th serial deception f many ears, te international community has no choice tod but to draw line in the sand. >>tough words at a tough timea present obama ok his first major turon the world stagefirst at the u.n. genera assembly, then the g20 glol econmic summitn pittsburgh but if theyvenown about this nuclear plant for some time, wh

is announcent now, doyle? >> the nnouncement cme now, gwen. the immediate eason was te iranians found outthat the united states kn about itand they snuck into the ae, a bland little lett, there is somethinwe need you to know about. wee building something else. the back story behd that is mo interesting because what is comingp next week on october on thusday, is a reneal of those fac-to-face negotiations with iran about its nkes and the first ones uner the obama administration. and what the obama admistration had planned to do was to mousetrap the iranians with this revelaion at the talks. as understand it, what they plned to do in the frst session s say to the irnians, anything else youought to e comingclean on? ything you want to tell the rest of the world about and figure the iraniansprobably weren't going to say anthing and th once the iranis had

saido, we have come clean, the ited states was going to say well, w about this? and that would both mousetrap the iranians andit would impress the ther countries there, the ussians, the inese, the french the british, and so on with the ntinuing of theiran. that disrupted what he ianians tried to do d that's why you suddenly had thiannouncement. >> there was aair amount of ama in this disclosur today. what does it mean? doest mean they can actually rce iran to do somethi and do we kn that it's true what e u.s., france, and britain are chargin? >> it appears to be true in the see that iran has now admitted at it's true, has admied that it is anuclear installation the argume here was it for milita means. there is a long technic discussion about tha butit does appear, one of the significant thin that came out this was a verystrong statement from t russians saying they believe it's te, they thi it's unacceptable ad

they thi irn has tofess up here. the russians, one ofthe inresting thngs tha has been hpening over the last few weeks and this push that little futher down the rod is the russians who had been dad set against sanctions are now moving closer and cler to that. what this is is a prelude to those negotiatons where the iranians ill be ased to feeze at they're doing that's t western --hat's the western proosal. the expectations is the iranians won't freeze iand then we do go bacto pursuing sancions. but in the vw of the administration,more of he ground rule has been laid because of the announcemen >> what is iand what is the violation? is it a violatn to have it or to have it andnot say anything about it? >> ah, here is the roblem. inhe case of iran is dfferent from most other countries, it's not aviolationto strt building a peaceful clear plant. any country can that even iran. at some pot, you have to repo it to the u.n., but n

iran's case, ian has been out of complianceor so long, tey hid their inial plan for so long that the u.n. as passeda seri of resolutio imposing new requirements on them sohey're not suppsed o do anythi without repotingt right away. so the facthat thiswasn't reported before in theyes of the serity council,is a violation. doyle, threasoneveryone was in pittsbgh was because therwas a meeting of the world's industal powers,the g-20. this seems to ha stepped news of anything coming out of that. did anything hpen out of that gw: it stoppethe u.n general assbly as well. >> karen, for those of who get excited about multilater diplomaticeetings, there was some news there. the g-20 i theexpansionof the old g 8 -- >> which w an expasion of the g-7. >> we go bacwards on tha they have broened out in ffect the economic board of directors incle developing growing counies like brazil and dia

anchina and they ade that permanent. that's pretty interestin they tried come up with plan thadoesn't seem tohave ve many teeth for continuing economic cooperati and decision-makg to keep the recovery going. my favorite part, though, is that they issued a communiq, all of theleaders sayg earlier thisear we met an talked aut launchinga recovery for theconomy and one of the lines reads imply it worked. so they patt themselves onhe back. >> doyle, you mention e russians and howhey changed their position in ght of this ws. are there any other counies you' waiting to her rom? gwen: china? >> of coue, chna. actually, though, e first question is, what will russia really do russ has sid somethings. dmitry medvedev, the president of rusa says we don't like sanctions but we he to go do them. no one has actually seen russia pport sanctions, fnancial sanctio, the real tough ones uld be cutting off il and gas

for iran. it pduces oil but not as. we'll ha to see if that happe. gw: so october 1, the nextset ofmeetings we'll see. anotheset of hard choices awaithe president back in washingtonas litary leaders press for a shift in afghistan strategy th could mean adding 40,000 troops to t forces on the ound. but athe root of it all is debate aut how, exactly, the u.s. shoulproceed. by cusing on counteterrorismor on counterinsurgen and whats the difference between thetwo, nancy? >> gwen, thee are lots of phrases we throw aound a lot. they are t ends of the spectrum. counterinsurgency some call it nation buiing. it's a manpower heavy te of assignment. you send a lot oforces in. ey secure the area and they help build local overnments. the idea being that they leave a viable sysm in place so that when forceleave, that contry n survive, in this case, ghanistan on its own andnot bring the talin back in so it's securit it's governance andn the case of afghanistan, it al means the training of its my and police.

gwen: that'what the 40,000 troops would be r. >> that's rit, they would be part of that. that's one end of the spectrum. the other is counrterrorism. at's a much more lited approa. that calls f using drones and other itelligent-gatheri apparatuto monitor the situation. the idea being there thathe united states can on do so much, that maybee shouldn't be in the busess of nation building. it's considered a moreimited approach, but also deands far less toops and is less stly. both imptant factors given the poll numbers swing the american public is not eager about th war and the economic reities that the nation is facing. anso what is happening in washington nowis the debate out where the administratio wants to fall that spectrum. six nths ago, they indicate they were movingloser to counterinsurgenc the general, t commander there went to afghanistan with that expectation. i think you're starting to s a shift towards conterterrorism. the e biden camp, if you will, who sort of leaning in the white house and he geneal petraeus camp er here who is

pushing for more forces. >> so, though, if it'sa counterinsurgency, that suggest that there are dmocratic institutions thacan be built there. how do the fact that we stll have adisputed eleion factor into all of this? >> it's a big fator. theadministration says that that's been onof the reasons that they're having to relook at thistrategy. on august 20, tey held a presidential electionn afghanistan. mid karzai has claied to be the winner. that is largely in dispute. the are thousands and thousands of disputed baots. the stemate could g on unti next spring. inhat case, i think it cmes to the funmental question of if you're doina counterinsurgency, is the united states prepared to trai 34,000 soldiers to ultimaly serve government th the united states considers corru and iompetent. i think that one of the reasons this dete is flourished. >> when should we expect a decision from the prident? has he impoed a deadne on himself or from coress? >> he suggested he will take

weeks and week partf the reason they think they have e time is they don't have the troops right now, espeally with the troops in ir right now. thfeeling is the unted states can't pull a troops ut until after the presidential eletions in iraq in anuary. so that's a factor. but practically saking from the military perective, the army needsix months' notice to notify, to deploy, and ttrain s forces. the maines need three months. so if by november 1,he give them a decisi, the army can be there by may, thetart of fighting season. but this administration ha indicated it could be til the end of the yearbefore they make a decision. >> nancy, as you lookat the specum of options you scribed, is anybody i the administration here talkin about one tha would mount t a withdrawal of amican forces from afghanistan,ecause it's costing a lot money, it's unpopular if ounterterrorism with no troops on the ground would rk, it would sound like a lot of people would think it's a -brainer?

>> well, i dn't think -- there would have to beome troops there. there would be troops in kandah and cap you will and nimal presence. the estion is how much can y department on s few forces. i don't think anyone is talkg about that ereme. to be honest, i don'think the administration hashe option. the esident campaigned on this being war of necessity. committed 7,700 troops earlier this year and 4,00 ainers. so i tnk to make that dramatic of a shi would be a prblem, not only strategally, but litically. gwen: i was going toay if al qaeda is sll now widely consered to be based in pakistan, what is the argument and is ther any argent made any more for pursuing alqaeda or is the talinlinked to al qaeda in afghanistan proper. >> that is the question. what is e relationship between the taliban and al aeda. in 2001 before e attacks tt alqaeda subsidized the taliban finanally. theyon't need that any ore. it's the taliban subsiding al

eda. ose who support sending more tops in say, ys, they'rein pakistan, but if you ge them the oppounity to come back to ghanistan, that becomes a sa haven,t gives hem more oppounity so the plan d practice attacks and imakes it harder for the united stes to monitor with those drone attacks. but they haven't answered publicly that ndamental question. gwen: thnk you, nan and welcome to "waington wk." >> thankou. gwen:so where al qaeda, and how much of a reat do they po? we may havgotten one incation this week with the exsure and arrestf an afghan-american terroruspect who authoritiesay was planning bomb attacks it may seemhat weve hear about a lot oplots like this before. why is this one different? pete? >> if you think abo the lots we have seen ince 9/11, most f them are pple trying to learn to become terrorists by gong to correspondence schl. they go on tthe internet, downlo material to build bombs and find oer people through the internet. if we belve what the vernment says, here is someo

o went to school tobecome a terrorist. the government says thisan, najibullah zazi who ves in suburban denver actuly went to pakistan with e purpose of attendinging an al qaed training camp. they said he hasadmitted dog this ihis conversations with e f.b.i. other peopleave done that, too, have comeo the united states after going to pakist but thehave lost nrve or lost their way. th say, no, went byond that, too, and bgan to immediately put in effect what he learned thee, tried o gather t chemicals neceary to build a very potent kind of explosivthat's sort of a favorite of terroris around the world th can be made of ordina chemicals that he got at lst three other pple in the denver area o help im go around to all of all things bety supply stores because they sell the kindof chemicals thatare the precurors. havi gotten them all togetr, he was ting to figu out how to make the formul work. he got a hotel oom with a sove in it. heas heating the chemicals to conctrate them. hes urgently, just before he went to new york two wks ago, e-mailing, apprently, his

professor to try to gure out why isn't this working, at am doing wrong. and then after that, for a reason at i don't think they don't derstand, he rented a car, drove to new york, and of course, that's when it all cme apart. gwen: is hit? is he the center of t cell ey think they have found or are there othepeople still ou ere? >> the feeling out ther he is it. everytng seems to revolve around him. hes the one that hey saywent to al qaedalthough they subjected in vernment papers this week thaterhaps others went with him. but in terms of being in contac with people, buying thestuff trying to ke it, you know,e seems to be the top oft. there is someone else pulling his string, we don't kn in a yet. >> they found the y and the stuff. how much do they know abt what he planed to do wit this? >> well, wt we have be able to learn from wh they say is still not much. he han't said muh. he aparently has told somewild stors about, heaid for example, i was td by one offici that during his

interogation, you know, i really didn't intend to target nhattan, i was gng to hit a big diount store,something outsidof manhattan. then ihaed my mind. was trying to throw themoff. he also sa, you know, i was entirely omy own in this. thsimple answer to the question is, as far as we kn, they don't knoyet what the plot was, what thetarget was, the means ofttack or the timing. >> pe, do we know how early the government picked up this guy's trai, how much intelligce went ito connecting the dots. because after 11, one of the great ars was that the countrysid my be full of secret al qda sleeper cells. do we gea sense outs f ths whether we are safegainst that? >> one of the surprisi things about thisase is the government hasot come out and plicly patted itself on the back very ch. we have heard ry little fom the torney general, the direor of the f.b.i., the secretarof homeland secuty or the presiden though wre told ty're all deeply involved in this ca. ey haven't cme out to say, we can't nnect the dots. they're still not sur precisely

that they have p the thing out of business. it ds say that. and there are suggestions that theyave been -- they're keeping the eye on im for many months, perhaps as long as a year. they wereware that he went to pakist. heas said to have gone ast augustnd come back in jnuary of this year. they we aware he went there, aware he came back, followg his moements, watcng him bu these emicals. so it does appear that they h him very carefully under observatn. >> pete, it'extraordinary detail. what tipped the gornment off? what staed this a year ag? i don't think we know the answer to that qustion. my own suspicion is i on't think you can a young person of his anst r, hisfamily came from afgnistan and go to pakistan from the u.s.ithout being on the hit parde. that's tng one. then i thinke get into areas likehe foreign intlligence surveillance t which allows e government to keep and eye and an ear o people once hey leave the countr they clearlylayed a role. we know at. the government filed in cour saying we innd to useevidence

at we obtained under this aw. gwen: wasn't there adust-up with a imam hat they tried to recruit to be informant that didn't work out? >> we now for a fact he drve to new york ad got therejust fore the september 11t anniversary. e government was very eagerto find outhat he was doing there. while the f.b.i.as looking at this, a nework policeman went to an ima who was asource before, what do you know. heade some phonecalls. those phone calls got back to zazi himself and he realed the feds were all over him. gwen: thak you, pete. >> remember health cae, the administration's number one priority well, thdebate continued this week along these lines. >> no one hould di becase they cant afford health care. this bilwould fix tht. none shouldgo bankrupt because they getsick. this bill would fix tat. this bill increases costs. it doesn't low the the increased spending reuires

more offsets which require moe taxes ich are passedon to the very peopl we're trying to help. >> this shoun't be about imsing punitive msures on individuals anparticularly in these vey difficult ecomic times. it is about our responsibility to accomish the gol of affordability. gwen: translate fous, karen, wathat gridlock wejust saw or is there sthg mething else going on we n't see? >> asugly as t was towatch d it was ugly, i think a lot progress was ade tis week bause what happenewas we have been waiting for this committee, theenate finance committee for months. ur other committees in congress, the other fr have all acted, ut ths is theone mo closely divided. this is the one where the chaian max baucs was tryng to work withthis bipaisan group to come up with a deal that didn't happe so finaybelatedly ty start slogng through their bill, 500

amendmentsmore than 500 have been fed against it what was important, i tnk, about this week was that max baucus prvailed onevery single ne of those amendments tat came up. at onearticular key vote which would ha blown up the deal the white hoe had madewith the drug industry,he sded with the republicans against the democrat think what this suggests, and there is on more bi test coming on the so-called public opon next week -- is that this bill is going to come outf this committ and it's going to come out of this comittee wih the basic rchitecture tt the airman wants. >> so what does that mean r the timing of when w'll start toee a final bill? gwen: we have en asking that question for aear now. it's an important question. >> at the beginng of the week, max baucus was sayinhe would ha the bill out of his mmittee by now. now ey're coming back on tuesday. there talk that theouse may trto get its ill to theloor as soon as mid-october. that may wl be the caswith

the senate, too, if max baucus can get the bil out nxt week. and then, of course, we get into the in event which is when e house -- if it ges out of bot houses, en the two of them try to reconcile. >> kar, you mentione the public option,he government-run hlth plan, and we havheard all of these different ve yants,co opens and this's and that's. where things stand on the public option and is tt still the critical issue this po seeding? >> on e senate sie, idon't think so. all the signs are that t puic option -- this mnd you, is a searate medice-like prram that would be seup for the uninred to buy into if they wand to. i don'think it's going to survive ithe senate. the white house is lirng with senator olympia sthnch owe ho may vote on this bill. it's aallback and not in te initial bill.

that's the big flash point betwn the house and the senate. this is supposed to be abou improving health care. why is the main ommittee about it, the senate inance committee, is congre more worrd about paying for and then fill the blank, or do they -- it sms backwards. >> i think it's bcause the committee eviously acted, we're all petty heavy liberal. people are looking at t fince committee as sort of a proxy for what the fght is ing to look like on the senate floor. and essentiall if you caget something through this committee, the chaes of getting somethinthrough the entire senate are prtty decent. gw: ok, sobipartisansp which seems ke a fantasy on some levs has come to be represented byne person and that'solympia snow the senator from maine who has let hehand print on this ill. >> s sre has. the other repblicans sort of negotiating but really ever did put anytng on thetable,

olympia snowe has been going in and essentially atever she wants, they are trying t accommodate. e has gotten additional tax brks for small busins, addition purchasin mechanisms r them. she has tten annuaphysicals for medicare reipients. t it's still unclear, even though they are trying tgive her everythinghe wants, whether she is gng to vote for e bill in the end. hebig concern riht now is this ideof requiring everyone in the country who doesn get insurance fr their employer or from a government program go out and buy it. and she is rried thathis is simply going to be unafforble r too many people and that e economis so frgile that the middle class is ju not going to be able to handle he government telli them they ha to go out and spend money on something else. gwen: how muc for normal partisan divid this is he rublican and she is talng about the people to afford we'll see wh happens and what the white house re is. they'll get whatever they n get. ank you everyone around the ble. before we , tonight a poi of

rsonal privileg 10 years ago i shwed up in this studion this char and ou invid me into your hmes. we, now, i know what they mean when thesay time fles when you're having fun because its een nothing ess than gratifyinfor me to play host to o weekly hlf hour to smart and civil conversaon for the past decade. like a dinner party,ou just want to keep on going. we coun't do it without yu, so thanks. keep track odaily developments overt the news hour with jim layer. wel be turning over this ti slot to my pal ken burns for his amazing seres, the national parks, amera's best idea. so we won't see you ext week, but we'll beack in two weks onwashington week." good night. >> theconversation continu online. see more fm our panel about the week's top stories ad we answer your questions. it the webast extra found on on "washingn week" online at pbs.org.

>>orporate funding for "washington we" is provided by -- >> we know hy we're here, to design the fuure of light inside an out. >> to budtomorrow's chnologies in amazing ways. >> and reshape thescience of aerospace rever. >> around the globe, theeople of boeing are woing tgether for the drms of generations to come. >> that's why we're here. >> major funing or "washington week" also provided by te annenburg undation, the corporation fopublic oadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers lik you. thank you.