Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 1

Transcription

1 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 1 AWM: Ahmad W ali Massoud RN: Rehmatullah Nabil HK: Hekmat Karzai, BG: Bushra Gohar NS: Najmuddin Sheikh DS: Daoud Sutlanzoy MJ: Munizae Jahangir. MJ: Asalam-wa-leikum. I m Munizae Jahangir and you re watching the last episode of [inaudible]. Afghanistan is called the graveyard of empires and it has swallowed yet another one. As the international forces exit next year, it is leaving behind an insurgent Taliban, a weak economy and state institutions that may or may not be able to bring peace to a people who desperately want. Neighboring Pakistan too has paid a heavy price. We have spent millions of dollars, lost thousands of lives and we are still battling the determined militants and radicalism that eats away at the fabric of our society. What will happened post 2014 when international forces leave Afghanistan? Will the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan be strengthened, defeated or reconciled? Will the forces who have an interest in supporting extremism win over the forces who want a transition to sustainable democracy in both countries? Will the region be able to and regional players be able to pull themselves out of this quagmire towards economic prosperity and reconcile their political differences to avoid the chaos of the 1980s? To answer all of these questions I have with me here former Minister of Parliament, Bushra Gohar, who is a Senior Vice President of the Awami National Party, a party that was in power in [?Habuh port two qua 01:34]. She has represented the civil society and government of Pakistan in the United Nations and other international forums on several occasions. She is one of the few [inaudible 01:45] voices against radicalism in Pakistan. Seated right next to her, Mr. Najmuddin Sheikh, a former Pakistani diplomat who stayed as Foreign Secretary of Pakistan from 1994 to He has served as Pakistan s Ambassador to Canada, West German, the United States and Iran. Mr. Sheikh has been on the board of governors of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad and is Senior Vice President of the Karachi Council of Foreign Relations. He has also written many, many articles on foreign relations in the Pakistani press. We have a handpicked audience and students amongst them a face that is recognized on both sides of the divide, a well known journalist, Kathy Gannon. She has been consistently reporting on the Taliban for many years, is a special regional correspondent for Afghanistan and Pakistan for the Associated Press in Pakistan and is also the author of I for Infidel: From Holy War to Holy Terror. With that I will hand it over to you Mr. Sutlanzoy in Kabul. Who do you have over there?

2 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 2 DS: Thank you, Munizae. I would like to introduce my guests in Afghanistan, Mr. Rehmatullah Nabil, the former Chief of Intelligence of Afghanistan and presently the Deputy National Security Advisory to the President. We have Mr. [?Ahmad Massoud 02:54?], the former Afghan Ambassador to the United Kingdom and Mr. Hekmat Karzai who heads a [?think tank?] on conflict and peace studies in Afghanistan. MJ: Before we begin our show and we allow guests to speak to each other, MR. Sutlanzoy, we have seen how President Karzai has gone to [Quetta?? 03:15] and he has softened his stance on the Taliban saying that the Taliban leader, [?Mullah Omar 03:21?] is welcome to contest even presidential elections and also saying that the Taliban have never been a preventive element in Afghanistan s economic progress. On the other hand, we have not seen the Taliban move an inch from their position. They continue to say that they do not recognize the Afghan government so how come there is a softening of the Karzai government s stance on the Taliban? What has brought this about? My question is address to Mr. Nabil. DS: I think both our guests can address this because your expertise is in this field so you can both take this question. RN: It is wonderful to see you, Sheikh. Regarding the question on the softening of the position, I personally believe there hasn t been any change in the position. I think if you look at President Karzai s remarks, you will always find that he has addressed the violent opposition with [?druthers 04:12?]. He has always allowed them an opportunity to take part in the political process so at least regarding this comment I don t really see any change in this. Also, the media has also taken his comment out of context. This is at least in my opinion. He has said if the local population does not have any grievance, he is most welcome to run for any political seat. DS: I don t want to take too long, Munizae, to come back to you so you can take it from here. MJ: Thank you, Mr. Sutlanzoy. There is a realization in Pakistan that we ve all made mistakes in the past and if my panelists allow, I will go straight away to Miss Kathy Gannon who is a reporter and has been reporting on the reconciliation with the Taliban. KG: There has been a change of the Taliban s position. In [?Mullah Omar s?] [inaudible 05:02] statement, he did say that for the first time that the Taliban did not want to monopolize power. They did not want a civil war that they were ready to share power. I don t say that that s a starting point but that s a change and I think President Karzai has realized that. I think on all sides in the negotiations right now, the problem is I don t want to talk to this one; this one doesn t want to talk to that one. There hasn t been a substantive proposal on okay what are you negotiating about. They ve all agreed they want to negotiate. President Karzai has said he doesn t want the Taliban talking to anybody but his government and he has a point there but the Taliban are already talking to everybody.

3 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 3 The government in Afghanistan today will change in There is an office in [?Quetta 05:55?]. That office is to allow negotiations. It s broken off with the Americans. They say they won t talk to President Karzai. They re talking with some of the opposition or the opposition. That there should be maybe or if it s possible maybe to have all of these players together in a place like [?Quetta?] but you have to get to some substantive I think position. MJ: Already. So what Kathy or [inaudible 06:21] is saying is that there isn t a substantive proposal now with the reconciliation process with the Taliban whether it s the Afghans talking to the Taliban, the Americans talking to the Taliban or the Pakistanis talking to the Taliban. What is holding us all back from a substantive proposal? NS: Perhaps it s right to say that at the moment nothing is happening in terms of substantive progress towards substantive negotiations. Kathy suggested and I think this should be borne in mind, while I appreciate President Karzai s position that it is his government and his council with whom negotiations should take place. Perhaps there should not be a total bar on the Taliban talking to a wider range including their loyal opposition in Afghanistan. As Kathy pointed out, in 2014 there s going to be a change of government so we have to think in a rather larger context of how these negotiations can move forward. MJ: Alright. We ll go to you Bushra and then we ll go back to Kabul. There is an acquisition that comes from the other side of the divide saying that Pakistan has a role in sabotaging the peace process with the Taliban. Do you believe that Pakistan really is sabotaging the peace process with the Taliban because on the other hand, we have seen a paradigm shift in the establishment s perception of Afghanistan? It seems that they re now wanting to talk to other groups than just the Taliban. They ve recognized that they may be backing the wrong cause. They want and we ve heard General [?Gaani 07:49?], Chief of [inaudible staff], saying that they wanted Afghan [led?] Afghan [inaudible] peace process. BG: There might have been a slight shift but I personally feel that right now we have to review our own policies and articulate them well. I mean as far as we are concerned, we believe that any interference in Afghanistan s affairs is not in our interest, in Pakistan s interest. We have to accept Afghanistan as a sovereign state. MJ: Have you done that or are we in the process of it? BG: We are in the process but I think we need to further articulate our policies. Also that we have a system that s... MJ: Who s going to do that? BG: You see this takes awhile. We have to there s a lot of things that the Parliament should have taken care of. We are in a transition right now. Anyway, I feel that we have actually got a bigger mess in our own house as a result of it. It is the right time to

4 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 4 actually say and for us also we are talking about talking to the Taliban but we have certain conditions for that. We re saying that they renounce violence, if they accept the constitution, we can sit with them. I m not sure about the conditions on the other side aside and I m also not very sure about this venue of [?Quetta?] for this whole process and then do we say that the Talibans on this side and that side are different? They re the same as far as we re concerned. They re basically connected. They re the same. They have their... MJ: So we need to have a more wholistic approach. BG: Absolutely. MJ: Alright. Let me go with that and over to Mr. Sutlanzoy. What Bushra Gohar here is saying is that we need to have a wholistic approach to the way we deal with the Taliban but the really big question is why should the Taliban strike a deal with an army or with international forces that are about to leave? There is a perception of how would you make that deal stick in the first place and I could address that question to Ambassador Massoud. AM: We really have to say very frankly which side the Taliban came from and who are the Taliban, who they have been supporting for and which country or which section have supported the Taliban? We have to state that fact and then we can come to the conclusion but now let me just say about this peace initiative and peace program of our government as well as the Pakistani government. Let me say that if the Taliban is a [?so called 10:29?] [?proxy?] or if it s a terrorist group movement or Islamic group, the problem is that what are the two governments of Pakistan [or Afghanistan 10:04]. Do they have the wealth and the program to solve their differences? DS: Thank you. Mr. Nabil, the Taliban, [inaudible] Taliban and Pakistan [inaudible] Taliban [inaudible] and then [?Akon and Ekbert?], are these groups coordinated and are they all under the same umbrella and what does that mean for the future of that region? If we re trying to work together as two nations, where do these fit? RN: In the end of 2009, when attention was diverted once again to Afghanistan, then the pressure was increased on these all good Taliban who were [?created for 11:15?] by the name of good Taliban inside Afghanistan and some of them were not managed to come back and they expand their own area in different parts of Pakistan? DS: Where are the good Taliban now? RN: Nobody can say these are good Taliban, these are bad Taliban but unfortunately there are some perceptions on the other side of the border that these are good Taliban, these are bad Taliban. [Inaudible 11:44] is good Taliban because he s killing people inside Afghanistan, not Pakistan. MJ: He s actually killed Pakistani soldiers on the Pakistan side.

5 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 5 [Crosstalk] RN: Yeah. Unless we don t eliminate this perception and come up with one strategy to have repeats in the [?consolation 12:05?]... DS: You are talking about one strategy by both nations, by both governments? RN: By both nations. MJ: What Mr. Nabil over there said good Taliban, bad Taliban, the fact remains that on either side of the divide, your government, previously your government and their government is willing to talk and negotiate with the Taliban so what is the Taliban or the bad Taliban that we are now negotiating with? BG: Well our position and I can just tell you about the [?end piece 12:33?] position is that there is no such thing as good, bad or ugly Taliban. They re all the same and they re all in it together so we need to actually stop differentiating between the good and the bad and the ugly. The western powers actually added to this confusion by starting this whole debate about good Talibans and bad Talibans and I feel that that gave and that became pretty dangerous because what is good for one may be bad for the other. I think there s far too much focus on talking to the Taliban and not... MJ: What should be done then? BG:...and not talking to the people and there are other groups other than the Taliban who are living in Afghanistan who may not want or care for the Taliban or these talks with the Taliban and there are groups here in Pakistan also. We need to engage with them rather than just focusing very narrowly on these talks with the good, bad and ugly. I feel that there is a trust deficit that needs to be addressed. We need from both sides of the divide which, you know, the issue that I took up earlier was that you can t just shed the baggage of the past. MJ: Let me go forward with that. She s made a very important point. She s saying that basically you need to speak to other groups other than the Taliban but the problem there is that it s the Taliban who are up in arms on both sides of the divide. NS: I understand that but look what I m trying to suggest is that the first thing we need to do is get over the misunderstandings and miscommunications between the two governments. MJ: And how do we do that? NS: Well let me first give you an example. We have one take on the trilateral in London. The Afghans have another. Second, when we talk about groups, obviously we ve talked about the Taliban but the starting point in terms of terrorism is Al-Qaida.

6 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 6 Now the Americans may say that there are only fifty or sixty Al-Qaida in Afghanistan and there are a hundred on the Pakistan side of the border but I think that we have to take account of how much there is by [inaudible 14:41] Islamic movement of [Uzbekistan?], how much there is by way of the [?Chechnians?], etcetera who incidentally have no interest in peace. They have no prospect of returning to their homes. MJ: So we have to take a short break over here but these are important questions that you have raised and we will raise those questions after the short break. We will ask exactly what will happen to all those foreign militant groups who are based in North [inaudibleistan? 15:07]. Once we are 2014, will these groups change their strategy? What will happen to the nature of militancy in Afghanistan and Pakistan? We don t just share a common border. We also share militancy and extremism. All of that after the short break. [END OF CLIP 1] [BEGIN CLIP 2] MJ: Welcome back. You re watching [Sarat -inaudible], a program that we telecast from Afghanistan and Pakistan. The question we are asking in this segment is will militant groups change their strategy post 2014 in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mr. Najmuddin Sheikh, just before the break you said that we have the [?Uzbaks 00:23?], the [?tageeics?], the Chinese, all kinds of people in North and South [inaudible]. What is going to happen to them in 2014? That s a very valid question that you raised. Kathy, you have covered Afghanistan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban both. What is going to happen to them in 2014? KG: Well if I could just say, I mean Taliban is thrown around. The name Taliban is thrown around for everybody. Already there are changes that have occurred. I think you have to look at the whole complexion of the militancy in the tribal areas in Waziristan has changed with fewer Arabs, more Central Asians, also Turkic origin with European passports a concern for everybody. Groups like the Islamic Jihad Union have gotten much stronger, poses threats to Europe. I mean it s a different to keep looking at it the same as 2001 through the [?Arab Spring 01:20?] has opened up areas where a lot of the Arabs are able to go back. [Crosstalk] MJ: So 2014, will they relocate back into Afghanistan? KG: No. Well I think you also have to, you know, Afghanistan these training camps didn t start with the Taliban. They were there post/pre Taliban. They were there after In 1995, the US Report on Terror listed [?Sayaff 01:42?] as a concern as a terrorist so all I m trying to say is that you have to try and take a more larger look at the situation and there are no easy answers and no simple answers as well. You ve got players on both sides that are problematic. You ve got a changing environment in the world. You ve got the Middle East that s opened up a certain amount of areas for people so I think to say

7 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 7 that Afghanistan will become a safe haven post 2014 isn t correct. To say that Pakistan will stay the same post 2014 also isn t correct. I think it s already changing. There are so many convulsions going on already. MJ: Alright. But you made an important point and I d like to throw back to you this is a concern over here also when our leaders over here say that they re going to reconcile with the Taliban and of course a concern over there too that what if they end up sharing power and as Kathy said some of them are militants are already in power. So 2014 is really not the watershed moment. The process has already started. What do we do? RN: Let me go back to some of the issues that were raised by the panel. First, I was delighted to hear the host on the other side said that we believe that we have made mistakes and we have learned from the mistakes. The sad reality unfortunately says otherwise which is that there s a saying in this region that the only thing we learn from history is that we don t learn anything. It was said that there s no process. There s no plan. The Afghans have put forth a roadmap to the Pakistanis in their last meeting which is a five point step plan on how to reach a political settlement and the Pakistanis have a hold of that and we would expect the Pakistanis to move on that but the sad reality here one more time is that whenever we move forward, we take one step forward, two steps back. DS: Now what do we do to make this a common goal to fight this together? RN: Here s what we do. We stop using militancy as an instrument of policy. This is the number one prerequisite. They have done it in the past and there s insecurity within the state establishment because there is the India factor because there s the [?Kashmir 03:55?] factor and because there is the Afghanistan factor. The second step is nothing can beat sincere cooperation between two partners. So far unfortunately the Afghans believe that we have not had sincere cooperation from the Pakistani side. DS: Thank you very much. MJ: Najmuddin Sheikh? NS: Right now we have a situation where [?Mulaf Gozundar 04:14?] and [?Fakey Moment?] who has been arrested but who has not been handed over to Pakistan yet, found shelter in [Gunar and Urestan?] and have been using that as a base for attacks in Pakistan. The actions that Pakistan has taken and I think that now much more resistant is being exercised is in retaliation for the attacks that are coming from that side. So it isn t the Afghan civilian that is being targeted. It is the Pakistani militant who have found shelter there. MJ: That are taking refuge there. Bushra, just quickly.

8 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 8 BG: I think it isn t helping this discussion if we continue with this blame game. Both sides have a problem and we have to actually sit together and solve our problems. We have to move away from the old strategic policies. We haven t really clearly moved away from our policies. We have to also deal with what is going on in North Waziristan. It isn t helping this country if we continue to have safe havens or training camps in Fattah. We have to extend our [?writ 05:16?] in Fattah. Before we start blaming others, we should have [crosstalk]... MJ: Pardon me. Pardon me. BG:...[?Fazzula?] should not have left [?Swaft?]. Why did [?Fazzula?] and all his supporters leave [crosstalk]? MJ: Your party was in government. BG: Well we have been raising... MJ: Right? They were in power. BG: [Crosstalk]. Listen. We have been actually taking all these issues up within the government also. You have to also recognize that the previous parliament was basically a transition set up where the foreign policy was not entirely in the control of the parliament. MJ: Let me ask you a question... BG: This position also... MJ: Let me ask you a question. After your senior leader, [?Basheed Badoor 05:58?] was killed by the Taliban, there was a consensus amongst the [?A&P?] that there is going to a military operation in North [Waziristan 06:07]. What kept you back? BG: You need like for in [?Swath?]. We were able to get a consensus for an operation in [?Swath?] and get [?Swath?] cleared. For North [Waziristan], we need a consensus. MJ: Why was there not a consensus? We were under the impression that the consensus was there after [?Mallala Uzaday 06:30?] was shot in [?Swath?]. BG: Yes. MJ: There was a consensus. BG: Well... MJ: What happened?

9 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 9 BG: A lot happened since and so I personally feel that we need to also clearly recognize that we need action. We cannot there is this thing about maintaining status quo as far as Waziristan or [?Fatta 06:54?] is concerned and that [crosstalk]... MJ: But what kept us back from going in North Waziristan? You said a lot happened. Exactly what happened? BG: Yes. Let me tell you, we have tried through our [?APC 07:02?] also to actually push for some kind of action even if we need to talk to some of the groups. We wanted a process to start. We cannot continue the way we are right now no action, no talks, do nothing until That process where we are trying to maintain status quo is not helping Pakistan at all. The other point that I want to raise again and again, it isn t only about Afghanistan and Pakistan. We need to open it up. Within the country we need to open it up to other groups and within the region we need to open it up to other countries so that we can all sit together around the table and try to find a solution. MJ: So you have extended an olive branch. You are being honest. You re saying that we have problems. That we were not able to fully control our foreign policy here that we re also in a transition phase, be patient with us. The politicians are really on your side but what about the region? Would the United States allow Iran to play a major role in what happens post 2014? That s a major question to you over there, Mr. Sutlanzoy. DS: Thank you. Are we politically prepared to take ownership, Mr. Ambassador, both on the government level and at a societal level in Afghanistan and Pakistan from your point? AM: As far as Afghanistan is concerned, may I just say this I have very close relations with the late [?Ben Azel 08:39?]. Back in London, we were talking about this issue of the region. So, therefore, may I just suggest that the case of Afghanistan and Pakistan that have been taken by the military wing of Pakistan which have not been discussed with a civilian, I m pretty sure that if Ms. [?Bhutto 08:59?] was alive if she was the one with full authority, the situation would have changed but now what I am saying here to those across the border to the Pakistani people is that the people of Afghanistan do not have not much problem with the people of Pakistan. They have been very helpful to the people of [inaudible 09:17], especially those refugees but the problem is the foreign policy of Pakistan. The problem is the strategy which they have adopted regarding Afghanistan and the problem is that after all of these years, the people of Afghanistan, especially those who are the mainstream in Afghanistan, the believe that the strategy of the Pakistani government which have been conducted by the military have not changed. Therefore... DS: So what should be done? What should be done short, briefly?

10 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 10 AM: Well what can we do is that if we can continue this interaction between the two nations to really progress with this confidence building process between the two nations to see ways in which how to resolve our problem, to pressurize our government to go for peace not to sacrifice the nations for their own advantage. DS: Thank you. MJ: We have an answer here. Bushra Gohar? BG: I personally feel that we need to intensify our engagement with the civil society, with politicians, parliament to parliament exchanges need to increase. It should not be held hostage by the bureaucratic exchanges. [END OF Clip2] [BEGIN Clip 3] MJ: One of the things that was spoken across the border was civilian to civilian let s have an honest conversation, but the question really over here, and analysts over here say that the withdrawal of how many troops will remain post 2014 is not important, what is important is the 2014 elections, that on your side of the divide they re done in a transpatterned and a credible manner. We are having elections on our side; we know how difficult it is to have credible elections on the Pakistan side. But what has the Afghan government done to make sure that these elections are going to be credible? We ve already seen how President Karzai has been at loggerheads with the opposition where he said that, There is no need for more voter registration, and the opposition has said, Yes, we want more voter registration since the 2009 elections. So are we really building in both countries civilian democratic structures that can actually sustain democracy and oppose militancy and extremism? DS: Thank you. Ambassador Massoud, I would like to throw this question to you. Are we doing enough, and is the government doing enough? Is the opposition a real opposition? AWM: Well, let me say that, of course, in Afghanistan we are in the process of democratization in Afghanistan. Of course, there have been up and downs in Afghanistan, but we are still heading towards democratization. We are hopeful, we are optimistic that at the end of the day we will reach our goals here in Afghanistan. Before Mr. Hekmat Karzai talked about the roadmap, the roadmap which was put forward by the Afghan government, that might have been a good roadmap, but since there is no consensus amongst the Afghan people, at the same time, since there is no consensus amongst the Pakistani people, we will not reach a common goal there. Then terrorism can utilize our differences to their own advantages. So therefore, I should [come to the 01:56] 2014 as the election. Yes, we are hopeful, we are hopeful that the elections should be transparent. We are trying to get this commission as an independent commission, we

11 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 11 are trying to persuade Mr. Karzai to supervise the fair and transparent election in Afghanistan. We think that we are in the process of bypassing [crosstalk 02:12]. HK: And I think one of the positive things that have happened in Afghanistan is that Afghanistan is not the hub of terrorism. Afghanistan particularly has captured various militants, but at the same time, when I say the threat has changed -- DS: Post 2014 do you see that strength to prevent Afghanistan from becoming one? HK: Absolutely. I think Afghanistan now has a security sector. Afghanistan has institutions that it did not have, and Afghanistan has the support of the international community. Bushra Gohar talked about militancy in North Waziristan; there s not just militants in North Waziristan. Let us look at Karachi, what s happening in Karachi where there s militancy all over? Let us look at particularly Baluchistan, look at where the minorities are being hunted. DS: So you think no militancy in Afghanistan, it s all on the other side? HK: No, that is not what I m saying. I am telling you that there are problems on both sides, but at the same time, we need political will on the other side, and at the same time from our leaders to identify this threat and deal with it. DS: And very last of a comment, the election, are we prepared to use the election as an instrument to create a situation where these things are addressed properly? HK: It s a huge opportunity; if we do not have a successful election, it will have a huge impact. DS: Okay. Munizae, with that I ll come back to you. Please, thank you. MJ: All right. Mr. Najmuddin Sheikh if you had something? NS: I just wanted to make one comment, with regard to what Ambassador Massoud said. That the blue print that was sent to Pakistan, and that I thought was agreed between Pakistan and Afghanistan for reconciliation, was a blue print that does not have consensus in Afghanistan. Now, this is one of the issues that is going to be a problem. The second, and I think this is more important and this is something that I d like to reiterate, that there is miscommunication between Pakistan and Afghanistan at the government level. This needs to be corrected. I think we need one [? CBM 04:03] that can be done. MJ: Which is? NS: Which is the Afghan side should say, Okay, we are trying to move ahead. Here are the names of the Taliban that you should seek to release. And tell us in advance that they are being released so we can monitor them and we can use them in the reconciliation

12 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 12 process. And on Afghanistan side, if they say to us that, Look, Kunar and Nuristan is as much a problem for us as it is for you, we have limited control there, do not blame us from what is happening in Kunar and Nuristan, we are sending [? Fakih Muhammad 04:35] back to you. I think that would be an enormous -- MJ: Okay. That is a very solid CBM that you ve suggested. Let s see if it can be done from the Afghan side. Bushra Gohar, quickly, and then we will move out. One more CBM, if you can say just one more CBM. BG: Yes. On the [? people s 04:51] level, I think we can open our -- in fact, facilitate people traveling back and forth. MJ: But there are three CBMs that have been suggested, people to people contact, and the second one is, If you give us the name of the Talibans we will release those Talibans, and in return [Mullah Fa--inaudible] should be brought back to Pakistan. [? Fakih Muhammad] should be brought back to Pakistan. DS: The first part will go to Mr. Karzai and the second part to Mr. Nabil who ll get the [? audience later.] HK: The logic that was used to bomb Kunar is because [? Fazular] and [Fakih Muhammad] is in Kunar, so that s why we are bombing it. By that logic, Afghanistan should bomb most of your cities, but we are not doing that, and in your bombings all you re doing is killing civilians on CBMs. Particularly on CBMs, we had recently suggested on CBMs for the religious authorities to come together and conduct a people to people discussion, to look at the issue of militancy, to look at extremism, but what happened? What was the response on the other side? How can you have a CBM in an environment which does not allow for any kind of CBMs? BG: Why just limit it to the religious group sitting together? I have suggested that the parliament to parliament sitting together should be increased, the engagement should be increased. We can have spots, you know, encouraging youngsters to meet together, we can have cricket matches and things like that. I question this whole focus on just religion and Talibans and, you know, as if -- MJ: Find an out of the box solution. BG: An out of the box solution from this whole thing. MJ: Mr. Sutlanzoy. DS: Mr. Nabil, please address the Taliban s question. RN: Yes. Just quickly, it was mentioned that the names of Taliban were given to Pakistan side and they were released. I think that s not true. These names of these Taliban were picked up by Pakistani side, we never gave the name of Muhammad Ali

13 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 13 Jalali, who was killing Afghans and he was governor of Taliban. We never gave the name of [? Malik Muhammad 07:03]. Yes, we requested them several times, since they don t have [? a strategic] value for Taliban, they are more tactical. Give it to us, hand it over to us, we were questioning them. That was one. They were released, and even the names we are given to us after one week or two weeks. DS: So it was misinformation. RN: We gave the name of [Mulah B-inaudible] and his team to be released. On one side, we are saying that we are releasing Taliban based on request of Afghan government, but on other side, there are very clear evidence that the past three months, 12 Taliban who are willing to talk to Afghan government, who are willing to engage in peace, they were arrested and later on they were killed. We have the name, the families came back from [inaudible name], we have all the detail of these. You know, we are beyond saying that, Please stop, this sort of thing. [CLIP 3 ENDS - 08:05] [CLIP 4 STARTS - 00:07] M1: My question is to Mr. Hekmat Karzai MJ: All right. M1: Well, Taliban [Ahamed Karzai are not inaudible] will rule in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of US and NATO forces after 2014 or there will be a civil war as we have seen in past. MJ: Bushra Gohar. BG: We did pass a unanimous resolution saying that, We must not allow our soil to be used by terrorists for any purpose, either outside or inside. I do agree with [? Karzai inaudible 00:42] that we have a problem, also, of militancy in other parts of the country, as well, but we have to -- it is our responsibility. [? Fatar] is in control of the militants. We have to extend our root there. It is very important, we have to extend the constitution to Fatar, as well. So that the people there have -- MJ: So you re not absolving yourself of this responsibility? BG: No, no, no. MJ: You re responsible and you have to deal with the militants. BG: Yes, yes. And the absence of women in this whole process has to be noted. MJ: We ve spoken about that.

14 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 14 BG: And I think it is very important that if there are no women in this whole peace process, their views are not taken, then I don t think we re going to any kind of peace that is acceptable to anyone on either side of the border. DS: What do you see from your point of view the preparedness of the Afghan nation so Afghanistan will not face a civil war again? That question was asked. AWM: Well, Afghanistan for the past 12 years I believe that there have been opportunity amongst the Afghan [? elites 01:49] to understand the situation and to reach consensus amongst each other. And therefore, I think that they will use the [inaudible] in Afghanistan, and I m pretty sure in 2014 there will be consensus to go for 2014 election with some sort of consensus that whoever wins in Afghanistan he will rule Afghanistan, so therefore the realization amongst the Afghan elites is a very hopeful sign for [inaudible/crosstalk]. DS: So you re saying the election will have a role in the stability and war on terror and bring stability to the region? AWM: Well, the election itself is a step forward, but at the same time, we the Afghan, the elites of Afghanistan have reached that sort of understanding that they will use the 2014 election as a good opportunity to come from the crisis to the stability. DS: Thank you very much. MJ: Concluding remarks. BG: Well, first of all, I agree that there needs to be a political will on both sides. I can t understand why there is such an insistence, I mean, there is this feeling that once we start talking with the Taliban things will get better. We have to move away from this. This should not be the only thing everyone is talking about. Talking to the Taliban and talking to the Taliban, what does that really mean? Also, we need to understand we need -- MJ: Fight them? BG: We need to actually deal with the issues, all the root causes and the issues, rather than just saying that if we start talking everything will get better. That is a very simplistic -- MJ: But meanwhile, do we fight the Taliban? Do we talk to them? BG: We have to, first of all, as far as Pakistan is concerned, we need to review our policies and we need to articulate them better. We need to extend [? 03:39], our own areas, at least, that is very important for us. We need to, actually -- you know, there are

15 Afghanistan-Pakistan Town Hall on Regional Cooperation Clip 4 15 many issues that we have to -- these are internal issues, we have to get our house in order before we start dealing with all the other issues. But as far as the Taliban are concerned, our position is they have to accept the constitution, they have to renounce balance and only then there can be space for talks. If not, clear action has to be taken, otherwise we are losing all our areas, and then they re spreading, also, like already that has been mentioned. MJ: All right. That is very, very clear thinking. Thank you so much for joining us. Thank you to all of you who came on this show, and from the platform of Express TV and Tolo News, we, the media, have tried to build bridges between Kabul and Islamabad, and we hope that in the days and the years to come these bridges will not be burned. We hope that forces of peace, and those forces who want sustainable democracy, will win over forces who want extremism and militancy in both the countries. And we thank all our guests and all the audience who came and joined us in this show. This is the last of the CDs of [Sarat-inaudible 04:58] till we see you again, maybe with another country, and maybe with another attempt to build bridges across the border. Thank you, and goodnight. [CLIP 4 ENDS - 05:14]