[inaudible conversations]

beit is a privilege to cohosting with my friends we will be having a conversation thank you very much for being here as a foreign service on pakistan and the foreign secretary of pakistan a graduate of taft university in the foreign service is that all the big jobs the netherlands and we are

fortunate to have someone of this caliber at this time. there is a very challenging time between the united states and pakistan we wanted to have this conversation with the ambassador everyone is aware but we need to talk about the challenges in our relationship and have a conversation that opens a bit that don't get enough attention at all. i will turn the floor over to the ambassador please come out. it is an honor to have you. please welcome the ambassador. [applause]. >> thank you very much for coming to this session.

and for organizing this event and for what you have suggested to us. in the last one month a law has happened so if we start from that that the united states government with the national security setting that gives the united states a set of priority to identify that is occupied by china and

russia. and then it goes down the letter to north -- court the rear and iranian further liberated that interstate competition and be concerned for the u.s. administration. they identified china with the u.s. interest to displace the united states as a preeminent power. of course reinforcement from iran and north korea to have

weapons of mass distraction. it appears that they intensify from what these two announcements need from those calculationsns from that dynamic that was building up. i believe this was already in the making and especially the last two years suggesting the world led by the united states giving way to polarity.

and to remember that it came up in disarray. with the second world war. and did not know what it would come out to be but edison came out with the prediction unless they come up with a painful decisionon but then to talk a great lake -- length but

before that the longtime statesman from singapore suggested that china could be perhaps the biggest threat in the history that would require a whole new rebalance. the former australian prime minister said something similar to that like industrial evolution simultaneously combusting in 30 years.

and that would require accommodation. but you have that that the time had come for them to make an adjustment to see what is happening. so to talk about competition but only in this domain but that change is happening and for example free-trade and for decades we learned that is the

best for everyone. but is now under protectionism. but always consider the inclusion of fresh blood but now it is viewed in some circles as a security threat. and q nationalism had a major issue with islamic phobia so

clearly the world is changing and has changed me still don't know where it will finally settle but if i zoom in, i don't see the situation much different because india and china are what i call the uneasy peace and with pakistan , and then the chick -- situation continues to deteriorate.

and i ran that nuclear deal so in the world which is changing south asia gains and they continue to grapple with terrorism so when i measure in that larger context that we are in the eye of the storm therefore with a decade and a

halfal we know there is hardly one day with the next explosion that has happened. how did he face a terrible situation a long story i don't want to go into that but the effect is in the last couple of years forged that consensus and that is not acceptable. and then with military action but today we can proudly say that side of terrorism we are

choosing them and will continue to do that. because the mindset that gives rise to these are still there. that's is the situation. that we have achieved commendable success with these enemies of pakistan. and with the economic actuation on -- situation but also from europe.

so we think we are on the right track. the destination is still far all of the gains will be addressed and remain tentative and that is where i would like to bring my relations this information is very important to us and for the last seven decades and we believe that it must be currently.

but i believe this is because in the united states sometimes the country is looked at from one lens or another. sometimes rereviewed from the lens of afghanistan but since they are not making progress to be up against the barrier but perhaps it is two parts if you view in that narrow when sometimes through the lens of china perhaps pakistan being close is not a friend to the united states. sometimes it is viewed through of india that now it

is a strategic partner for the united states and is expected to play a larger role in the region and through that security lens. i believe this is a narrow approach with the potential of pakistan to broaden the lens and not through the lens that i talked about. and that would happen if that

relationship was viewed to have the very good relationship. but while that relationship has had ups and downs the relationship has been eddie. study so that people in pakistan and united states have been connected so with that relationship no doubt about it.

i was telling you even today with the united states without large body they continue to come to this country into have a steady partner very few people know about that. starting from the 50s or 60s up until now when they were actively engaged.

millions of pakistanis are connected virtually with that technology based software. but all of this tends to get on the side because of thee conversation lens to one side or the other of the security relationship but that which causes distrust united states has invested with treasure and blood and that is close to

what it was never again to be used to be a safe haven that is for the united states to be there. is it a military solution? is pakistan really responsible? these are all the questions i will leave for the q&a session because i was given a timetable of ten or 15 minutes to speak. why has this relationship oscillated so much and has been a roller coaster?

and how do we broaden and strengthen it? how can we broaden the lens? thank you very much for your attention b-17. [applause] >> i will turn the floor over to my colleague. >> thank you for your comments it is an honor to welcome you here it has been two and a half weeks since i started. so let me begin from the school at taft university so

before we move on to a range of questions to raise the elephant in the room to deal with a whole range of issues of peace negotiations. but first let me turn to pakistan support and your response would be helpful in part but there is no question that pakistan has made countless sacrifices in blood that the experience in afghanistan i was in pakistan as a told you earlier during parts of the swat campaign. and very cognizant of those

soldiers and of those that have died over the last several years but yet certainly both democrats and republican government senior officials from u.s. agencies continue to point a finger making issues of the tele- band and connie network with command and control if i quote president trump to give safe haven to the terrorist with little help no more. i guess it is worth noting that u.s. officials willot also

argue pakistan officials will regularly deny support in public and private so i want you to have a chance to respond to these concerns to report to some militant groups be fair. basically we provide support to some state and nonstate actors we are aware of that. so can't we have an honest discussion? to this broader discussion on the afghan side in particular? so facing how pakistan came into contact until 1979 there

was no such thing as pakistan we were living our own life. but then when the forces came into afghanistan united states and pakistan but then they came to provide an army and once the soviets left and after 911 once again for where

they were bombed heavily on the texas border but to be part of the t international coalition but now was the alleged target and as they began to turnn their guns hardly a day would pass with a weighted have one installation on the security establishment

20,422,014 all hell broke loose and then they said enough is enough. and then they got together and forced a national consensus we would allow anybody to use pakistan but they would not have moved without this consensus otherwise coming as a distance from the ground. also those militants who come

to tribal areas somehow reach at that time that action of the population. and we got rid of them. and this is the duty you have to have equally strong and effective to explore -- explored the flawed narrative because if you kill innocent people on the streets that

means from outright so to have an opportunityro for us was killing 137 schoolchildren with those soldiers and officers to send a message to them. this is why to go through the

one area to clean up those areas because we could eliminate that. but there are safe haven into somebody says the military intelligence supports the militant then i would ask them and then you tell me that supports both people.

if the pakistanis are happy we are happy. but we are still happy because we were able to defeatea them. and then the taliban and our message to them and then to deny them the accommodation but since we keep hearing this

at one the people of pakistan to believe that perhaps look at the last four years to improve the situation every six months i goes to the dominican. why would they live there if we are breathing down their neck ask they are not short of funds because it is booming.

and since 911 and then there are other players. so when we compare these two situations is that only because the taliban? is that the problem in afghanistan? but what about those security forces who fight for their

country? to have this green on green or green on blue attacks? i think people see we are the bohemia will --dash why the people have not caused the problem. . . . . continue to live in pakistan e-mail enough t--3 million of tm

and today they are used to recruit. if you want to stabilize afghanistan suffer pakistan also we want to see if it does not stabilize. we think that this was to be done.

they are going to write them up and have a conversation for about a half an hour and then we will read them and about four or five or six of them. they would say you are crazy why do you want to work on this issue and work with pakistan. there is a lot of distrust in washington, so everything i heard you say i know that you are speaking with great passion and i believe you.

the statements are not being believed so what do we do about the situation where we don't trust each other and is it fair and possible to say is that one thing for the civilian government to say onet thing and they heard you say very forcefully. there was a watershed moment i know that for a fact.

both have deep states by the w way. whatat do you say if someone sas it's one thing for the civilian government to say something but there is a whole other game going on. what is your reaction to that? >> i have heard this so many times and we have made it a point that the only narrative that was built to prove the

point when the secretary visited a couple of months ago, the entire administration came together to meet him to drive a wedge between. this time around when president trump on new years we decided not to respond that they. >> i'm sure l that it was a very long day for you carry a >> said the next day the committee that compromises of the top leadership prepared.

people are very conscious that this is what the lobby tried to do. we are saying to you this comes out directly from the civil and military leadership and most from august 21 also from the same national security committ committee. the people of pakistan are proud of the armed forces and from the

piece that they have returned. we had always said that it was imposed on us but the leadership decided if it is important and n bring it on, and we did. i think today we are all speaking with one voice so what is our message, the method is we meanwhile, we need peace in afghanistan. we have achieved success and we can defeat.

we think the united states and pakistan can work together to achieve common milestones. if you don't hear about al qaeda today which was responsible for 9/11 because they worked together day in and day out to eliminate that al qaeda there is no reason that they shouldn't continue in the same spirit to finish what was started but ifo the path chosen isn't working together that wouldn't be able e to make that much promise so

this is the method that is coming out of the civilian leadership and military leadership of pakistan. we need to work together to finish up what you started. n not stupid one against another. >> i want to turn to trade issues both regional trade and also broad trade if one looks at the significant initiatives inom the region we can take a look for example which is significant and includes upwards of 68 countries, 4.4 billion people, 40% of the world's gross domestic product for the ports

and projects and one important component of that is the economic order so i wonder if you could lay out from your standpoint with thee vision is towards the regional trade and how that sits with china as you noted earlier the national security strategy both labeled from the standpoint as a competitor so what is the vision for the regional trade and how does that fit with the u.s. development efforts with a country that is now viewed increasingly by the government here as a competitor clicks.

theit transformation has happend very recently. the genesis of theco economic transformation and shifting of priorities is important to understand and bear in mind. why they were experiencing this growth when the president came to power.

each had billions of dollars. this summer they came up with this idea that what if the chinese are focusing on the investing part of china and we have the priority the idea of the economic corridor had to be accepted.

it was an option for pakistan and china because if you want to come to you would probably go over for 5,000 kilometers and then another 8,002 come here. in the best economic sense you should analyze the link to that which would link china to europe so that is what moves them in that direction.

it was also the underlining effort but in good time this should bring prosperity extending should it become peaceful because if you grow up from. there is the collectivity that included road and rail and the fiber optics and the former

domain of connectivity. part of the deficit at that time was in the infrastructure. they have growth and i would like to applaud that book and show how did you visit pakistan work together to change the entire area.

it's something that is little known. in the last few months alone if the american company had gone ahead for the securities and exchange commission they are situating themselves to benefit. >> just to share from this group was the growth rate in the last couple of years because i don't think people know. >> i think it has gone from 3% or so to now the prediction is

6%.. last year it was over 5%. the massive investments we are now moving on to make all along the corridor. all along they are not a zero-sum game.

we do not see that as a zero-sum game. they should stay engaged and there are millions that have ended the economic investment is the most important. >> my friend who is here is going to be collecting cards. i need to collect them and sort out questions. i want to turn if i may. there is an election year coming up and there are several things i want to mention about this. there has beenha a reduced perception in the united states of heavy military engagement in

the society both economically and politically, but it's notable in my mind that there've been several moments where the military has since left it's very. something important to note. correct me if i'm wrong there was a number of judicial decisionst made on the current

mandate although that is changing in several months so could you comment on the current domestic political situation and i'm not so sure that i want to ask what you think will happen but if you could talk a little bit-. if you could talk about the elections that are coming and what that means in terms of some of the things we have been talking about and the economic opportunities and what does it mean on a number of different fronts because i think it is important coming back to what you're saying if there is an of the civilian and military government

>> i think it is democratic. the reason for that is a [inaudible] he was deeply committed to the rule of law and left the entire democratic fashion and therefore it is deeply ingrained that we have to follow that now. it is true the democratic process p was interrupted for a time. since 2008 likely to compete.

they are noisy by definition, everywhere and we are no exception. but it doesn't mean disruption. i'm also being investigated the

united states i believe that this is another area. the values of democracy and with law and freedom and ability that your country has advocated for over 240 years is a beacon of light for everyone including my people because they also believe in peace values and i think we are moving in that direction. we are getting there. and as to who would make it-- >> i'm hanging on your every word, ambassador.

of course i believe in voting. i voted last time. we do get our option through the advanced. the question about the regional trade in china.

what are the steps on how pakistan and the afghan government and the u.s. might take to ensure peace in afghanistan. it's driving the drug trade and its driving militancy. so what are your prospects for peace and what role should pakistan play the first one is

about the decision to withhold aid and the reaction and the specific steps on the settleme settlement. >> we think that the big gear that was quoted half of that was with respect to the reimbursement for the expense that we had anchore incurred foe predetermined objectives. they would be doing themselves the same.

the economics have over the years for a long time.

our leadership has had in that way. but the relationship is based on mutualee respect so that is our response to this phenomena.

it basically means it allows the people of afghanistan to engage in the serious reconciliation.

his advice was with the 58,000 this is exactly what happened. they have been suffering some kind of military solution so you need to have a genuine political reconciliation.

they should come back and in any case there are bad guys who live and acros cross borders and cand things. yeah i have is not easy. we started that it should be done by 2022 and then we will be setting up 900 posts to control

the border, but we cannot do it alone. we need support from afghanistan to do the same on the other side of the border. to go back has been lost and now the security damage is a part of the solution i believe. for example, india has been given a role in afghanistan to create a situation and therefore

the 200,000 engaged on the western border and remained engaged if afghanistan remains or can be used by others to create instability so there has to be a regional consensus not to allow anyone to create instability and that is also an equally important part. >> i have several questions from the audience. the first one is there a timeframe set up for afghan refugees.

we think that there are situations that the u.s. government. it's with getting land ownership rights to those that come back.

go to europe and elsewhere. let me stay on this issue we talked about.

pakistan would very much want to push the taliban and haqqani. we don't want them to bring the relations with your country. let me tell you that in the two consecutive years they made enormous efforts to bring them

to the table in the first effort was in 2015. the television for the first time such with july 7 because i was the foreign secretary. >> i was there and so were those as observers. led by the national security establishment there was

commotion as too what would happen and then another year had passed in a fresh attempt was made that the group was formed. the ruler and the leader of the taliban we had five session and we had a position with which we agreed they go back and use the links and then come back and on the 21st of that month they crossed over from iran so after that come the pakistan believed

we have lots of leverage or that it had gone down that much. the only way forward is for all of the countries to continue to exercise what influence they have too pushed afghanistan. >> two other questions given the historical animosity between india and pakistan what is the prospect of energy cooperation.

we need to have good neighborly relations to maintain that for that to have both countries to stay engaged in the dialogue but at this time if the leadership feelss they are not ready for a dialogue and pakistan they review is pakistan needs to take action and as they are supporting terrorism, we tell them we have done more than any other country to defeat terrorism and we expect you to do that an in the commitments tt they have given to the people of pakistanan but when you suspend

dialogue you actually give the militants with a bond. every time they come together, something happens and then in a way the agenda is being served by the suspension. if they stay engaged and work together to renew the space of militants botho in pakistan and india. i think it is a problem that we need to solve by cooperating with each other and not by the.

maybe more broader specifically. iwith a price tag of $50 million there are lots of scenarios thinking 15 or 20 years out what are your hopes for pakistan economically, socially and politically.

the investment that the chinese have got to pakistan both of them are in the private sector. these are joint ventures and in many of them, many of those projects and others are also participating in and i believe that the future that i see is a pakistan both the united states and china. that is the only future that i see fors my country. we go back in time and it would be such a loss if we were to squander such a relationship

because we don't see eye to eye on one particular issue. it would be a o tremendous loss. i think that it would serve both countries will if we continue to look for solutions for pakistan, the united states and china. >> please join me in thinking that the ambassador for being with us today. ask [applause]

i described at the time and i still describe it as a bizarre moment it was a surprise when he called me over but he's the president of the united states and you're in the oval office if he says who are you, come over here, you don't really ask. >> journalist and former watching tim correspondent katrina talks about covering president donald trump and supporters for the media during and after the 2016 presidential election season in her book "in america.

>> it was incredibly evocative and does what it says immediately what he is talking about and playing on the motion was built on a swamp and it's a horrible people that live there and replacing it with better people and that is something that whether they believe ten or not that he could fulfill that or not, they were prepared to take a chance. >> vice president mike pence is in israel where he's meeting with the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. the parliament announced the new embassy would be open before the end of 2019. at the top his remarks protesters briefly interrupted the session. this is 30 minutes. [applause]