least 100 times larger than our own sun. the ability to navigate among these stars is invaluable to astronomers, but even to a casual observer it's pretty mind-blowing. >> the taliban said it's shocking attack on a school was retaliation. did the killing of 130 kids shock the country in a way that has pakistan taking off the gloves? it's "inside story." >> hello, i'm ray suarez. since the partition of the british empire in india pakistan

has had a divided soul. those divisions have become more acute in recent years as the growth of a religiously orthodox country within a country has been tolerated by a more secular more modern state. with an untable and unraveling of afghanistan on the front tear and a fast growing confident india on another events have pulled pakistan in multiple directions. has the audacious murder of 130 boys and girls in a school operated as a water shed moment, clearing away the ambiguity of the taliban, introducing clarity amid the bloodshed and horror? >> an attack killed more than 140 people. 132 of them children, and stunned the country and turned public opinion roundly against the taliban

pakistan. which claimed responsibility for the attack as retribution for military separations against the group. as parents bury their children, pakistan is taking action. pakistani ground forces killed up 70 militants in the northwest tribal areas. the deaths of the children will not be in vain. >> today our national leadership has decided to continue the war even if there is one terrorist remaining on our soil. >> he has lifted the ban on the death penalty for terrorism cases. the terrorist attack, the worst in pakistan's history, highlights the internal and external challenges facing the country. relations with its nuclear neighbor india remain intense. those tensions were amplified

when an anti-terrorism court granted bail to the accused mastermind of the 2008 mumbai attacks. friday, pakistan reverse course and rearrested the man. pakistanis are reaching out for help in cracking down against the pakistani taliban. although separate, operates on the border of pakistan. what will it mean for pakistan going forward? it has received billions of dollars in u.s. aid since the 2009 attacks, all the while fighting off critics that it harbors terrorists. as pakistan copes with this tragedy it's unclear how willing

the country is to eradicate terrorist groups that call pakistan home. a look at pakistan after the attack on the army public school this time on the program. a balancing act at the top of the pakistani state with elements of state security and the armed forces said to be sympathetic to the taliban. is that over? with the americans and nato ending combat operations next door in afghanistan, and a popular new leader confidently strolling on the world stage in india, what is next in pakistan. joining us next, chairman of the institute of public policy based in pakistan, also the former finance minister of pakistan. professor at georgetown's center for peace and security studies, and deputy director for south asia as the simpson center. has this been a water shed

moment? has there been something different about this attack that separates it from others in the attack? >> i believe it is a water shed moment, and i believe we'll see a fundamental change in the way that pakistan is looking at terrorism. i'll give you three reasons for it. one is that there is a new guy who is in charge of pakistani armed forces. and he's much more --we had conversations with them, and they told us that that is his first priority to get rid of extremists. the second is th is a serious individual, i've known him for a very long time. we were together at the world bank, and they're serious about cultivating a positive relationship. and a third, something that not many people have commented on is pakista pakistanis are very scared of the islamic state and what is happening in iraq.

they think that unless they move, it is quite possible that something like that could also throw roots into the country. and we ar they are not prepared to accept that. that is my believe that something will happen now. in a positive sense. >> dubai that? this is oh so over the top that it has people inside of pakistan that may have been sympathetic before looking at things like i.s. and saying oh, no, that could be us. >> i wish that were the case. we've seen these so-called water shed events in the past we've seen them make demands and then renege. thithese are times when pakistanis would stop and ask what are they doing.

you see public support for taliban decline, in other words, becoming more ambivalent, and that attitude relaxed within a month. i think the real problem that pakistan has, and i think it's fundamentally revealed by this issue this issue is they may be saying we're not going to differentiate between good taliban and bad taliban. they will identify those individuals who will kilpack stakillkill pakistanis. i remain skeptical. and then there are larger

structural matters. pakistan's rule of law systems have long come under criticism. even if there were a will to do things quite differently, you would have to go through the laundry list of things that have to take place that involved legislation in a country that is notorious fought to legislature late. >> why the ambivalence? before they felt this way? then there is lack of clarity, lack of decision making definition at the top. do you see this event as something that marks a new period? >> some have called this pakistan's 9/11. that's not the right analogy, at least not yet. what we saw in 9/11 in the united states was a dramatic shift in the public mood about terrorism. but also a dramatic shift within the government about how to deal with the problem. we saw entire organizations

being stood up. we saw knew ways of doing things. what we're seeing in pakistan is certainly a change in the public mood. there's no question. i used to live a few months from the public school when i live there had almost ten years ago. even by the standards there and what they've suffered through the last ten years, this is something entirely different, so the public mood may shift. but as suggested i don't see evidence that the government's willingness to assess the risks that it faces to stand up against new organizations or capabilities have followed suit. >> do they mean it this time? every declaration that this time we're going to root these people out when you see what happens afterwards it never really goes there. the ambivalence has been a

long-standing problem , hasn't it? >> i can understand the skepticism. they're not fully willing at this point to understand that this is, indeed, a water shed moment. i'll tell you why i think it is. there are a couple of reasons, which have not really entered the conversation about pakistan. one is the growth of the size of the middle class. this middle class is not just oriented in the sense that they may be conservative, they want political space. that political space has not been given to them. nor is there an opportunity to get that space. the second thing is i would like to view pakistan as part of the larger muslim world. when you do that pakistan seems to be the only country that seems to be making some progress in viable, stable, sustainable

political and economic order. that's happening because the middle class wants it. i have done some analysis of the middle class, pakistan has the largest proportion of people living outside of the country. much more than the proportion of indians outside. they're sending a lot of money back. every middle class and upper middle class family in pakistan has somebody in the united states or somebody in britain, so it is a much more--i don't know if modernized is a better word to use but it's much more oriented. >> an aspiration al family craves stability we'll be back with more inside story after a quick

break. when we come back we'll look back at the fluid situation as the country cracks down on insurgents. is the united states aally, friend or adversary? it's hard to know sometimes. stay with us. >> television icon norman lear >> we hoped we were delivering real characters... >> creator of "all in the family" "the jeffersons" and "good times" talks race, comedy and american culture today... >> you're taking me to a place in this interview, i haven't been before... >> i told you this would be your best interview >> ...and it is... it's the current one... >> every monday, join us for exclusive... revealing... and surprising talks with the most interesting people of our time... talk to al jazeera, only on al jazeera america

>> a crisis on the border... >> thery're vulnarable... these are refugees... >> migrent kids flooding into the u.s. >> we're gonna go and see josue who's just been deported... >> why are so many children

fleeing? >> your children will be a part of my group or killed... >> fault lines, al jazeera america's hard hitting... >> today they will be arrested... >> ground breaking... they're firing canisters of gas at us... emmy award winning investigative series... fault lines no refuge: children at the border only on al jazeera america >> you're watching "inside story" from al jazeera america. i'm ray suarez. you'll remember the united states went to war in afghanistan to fight the taliban government there, but not all talibans are the same. the taliban in pakistan has a distinct identity from the fighters just over the mountains in afghanistan. the group taking credit for killing 141 people in a school this week, and also the one who is attempted to kill education

activist and nobel prize laureate malala yo usafzai in 2012. today, the ttp has an estimated 30,000 members, and are seen as a terrorist organization, by the u.s. pakistan and the united nations security council. it's chief is in charge of the group and has been since 2013. his predecessor was killed in an u.s. drone attack. his time at the top has been defined by internal fighting both between tribesmen and those who want to join isil. >> they do see things differently. the afghan taliban came out and condemned the school attack this week saying it goes against their principles. just before the break christine you wanted to make a point . >> yes, one thing that we have

to keep in mind many of the pronouncements in english have given the suggestion that they've rally against the tt: if you look at the different narratives, the narrative that is coming out of pakistan's media is that the indians did this attack. it's very hard for me to believe that they've turned a new leaf when there has been this fracturing of the narrowture to suggest indian culpability. i do a lot of large survey work to understand the determinants of support for terrorism, one of the things that we consistently find is this urbane cosmo pol cosmopolitan middle and upper middle class is most likely to support the militant groups. this goes right in the face that

the support for terrorism comes from poverty. to find that w you might have a rising middle class. it might an cosmopolitan middle class but it does not mean that it's a liberal middle class. that's an important difference. >> from what i i've heard over the last five minutes i would think that we're talking about different countries. isn't that part of the problem? you have those who are most liberal, to those who support the taliban, and those who think it needs to go. this complicated character of the state makes it difficult for pakistan's neighbors to interact with pakistan in an consistent way because they're not sure when they talk with the pakistani officials if they're

going to be speaking with those who are representing this more liberal notion of pakistan or those who see pakistan's ringal interest. regional interest. there are long narratives about how other countries have left them dowlet them down . the united states with its relationship with pakistan feel it has not been forthcoming over the last 10 years. that it has decided to go after certain groups, al-qaeda now to go after ttp but not other groups.

pakistan certainly wants to go after the group that is presenting the most significant threat right now. everyone understands that. no one disputes that. it's a sensible thing to do. but there are other groups that could be equally destabilizing to the region, equally destabilizing to the united states, and frankly, equally destabilizing to pakistan's own future. >> if an official meets an opposite number from pakistan, if a member of the intelligence services from the united states meets an opposite number in pakistan or ditto, somebody from the military, can they be sure that that person who they're speaking to is pulling on the same side that they are, t. >> i think my suggestion is that they can be pretty sure that the reaction that they're getting from the other side is

the reaction to be statement of truth. pakistan is no more complicated an any other countries. india is a very complicated country. the united states is complicated, so on, so forth. pakistan is very hard, and i think it is making some success. on previous occasions whenever some space was given to the military by quarreling politicians, this time i think the military is staying out of it, and letting the system develop and hopefully flourish over time, which is what makes pakistan very interesting place in the muslim world.

if you look around you'll see this is the only country making progress of its kind. therefore, it should provide with support. now coming to the united states pakistanis are very cautious of the fact that they have done well in terms of economic and social development . it's funded extremely well why? because u.s. and pakistani interests strategic interests came together. i know that the decision makers in pakistan are very keen to re-establish that kind of relationship once again. with one difference, though,

which an understanding that there are so many players you need a game to figure out what is the best solution when it comes to pakistan's relationships. >> there is more inside story after the short break. it is a contributing or complicating factor in pakistan's current struggles as the armed forces pound insurgents. we look at the aftermath of an attack on a school. stay with us. so many money stories sound complicated. but don't worry. i'm here to take the fear out of finance. every night on my show i break down the confusing financial speak and make it real.

>> we're back with inside story on al jazeera america. i'm ray suarez. are the impulses of different parts of pakistani society so contradictory that there is no way to satisfy everyone's desires, and if someone has to lose, who is it going to be? you with us the former finance

minister of pakistan , assistant professor at center for peace and security studies, and deputy director for south arab as the simpson center. we've heard the conflicts and tears inside the society, even if there is now unanimity that the attacks on the school was a horrifying thing, who is going to lose out? >> ultimately the pakistanis are losing out, which is what is so sad. the military has plans to retaliate. i'm sure some of them will be successful. there have been some small movements by civil society to respond, but ultimately this gets to the deeper question about pakistan's story. pakistan's vision of itself. this is a country that has not quite resolved during the course of 60 years whether it wants to be a country that is essentially a homeland for muslims or whether it wants to

be the ideal and archetypecal islamic state so long as it wrestles with that, and so long as those with power, the military, coptdom caught in a way that is more inclusive and frame the idea of the country as more inclusive, they're going to be stuck going after the group that is the biggest threat today without dealing with the groups that are seeping the marrow of society. >> is there a risk if there is a strong retaliation after these terrible killings at the school, that you'll actually create more sympathy for the people who carried it out? >> actually if h if we take a long look at the pakistan military operations there will be some events that galvanize public sort. it's rarely a huge majority. as the military operations continue as the numbers of

incertainly displaced persons expands, the number of body bags and all sides they continue to mount, public support wanes and public support picks up for negotiation. this has been the cyclical process. i think part of it teams from the issue that josh raises. the state does not really have a coherent story that who are these people that they're targeting. obviously there are people who understand that this is blow back for support. there are others who want to believe this is due to india, united states, israel. but the fundamental problem is that pakistan does not understand or does not see a way in how it can prosecute its interests in the region that doesn't involve the use of islamic militants. that is pakistan's problem.

it says that it is doing this. it has let go of the good versus bad, but that's not the case. i want to draw your attention-- >> very quickly. >> if you want to look back at an equally atrocious slaughter, 90 people were killed, including infants at point blank rage and 192 people injured. there with a was no national outrage about this. >> let me say, you suggested from the outset that this is a water shed moment. if you're right, what should we be looking for in the coming months that will be different that shows that this will be different in past events like the one described by the professor? >> well, a couple of things. one, if the military is going to carry out its operations seriously. not distinguish between so-called good taliban and bad taliban. my impression is talking to some of the senior guys in the military that they have decided that it is islamic extremism

that is the main problem for pakistan, the main enemy that pakistan faces. i think they are really determined at least that's the impression that i get of doing something about this. the second is christine talked about public support and so on. i come back to the rise of the middle class and what the middle class wants in terms of aspirations and so on. compare pakistan to turkey. in turkey, --if. >> they've delivered prosperity and a measure of stability since the coup-ridden turkey of the past. i have to end it there. fascinating conversation. thanks to our guests. this brings us to the end of this edition of inside story. thanks for being with us.

in washington, i'm ray suarez. let's take a look at china. china overtakes us. it's the world's manufacturer. america has to live with the china that exists.