>> and now a conversation with pakistan's foreign minister. he's expected to talk about the relationship between pakistan and the u.s. . let me say a few words of welcome.

my name is john hammer. we are glad to see today. when we have events like this where we have guests who are not familiar with csis, i will start with a little safety announcement. we are responsible for your safety. we are not worried about the foreign minister, we have people here who will take care of him but i am worried about all of you, but i think happens, you will hear a voice, and i will ask you to follow me and put you either that way over there or the door behind me. we'll take it down to the street. the stairs are right beside that door. we'll take two left-hand turns and a right-hand turn, go over to national geographic and i'll buy ice cream for everybody. we will be fine. please follow our directions if we have to do anything. it's a real privilege to have foreign minister qureshi here with us. he is a distinguished political leader for pakistan. he's held many positions and

dedicated his professional life to pakistan. we were having a brief conversation before we came down and washington doesn't have a very good understanding of pakistan. it's a little like having a documentary on television and the power or the noise goes out every 40 seconds and you're trying to figure out what is the story. because too much of our understanding of pakistan is derived from other controversies other big problems in the region. we think of agghanistan-pakistan, we call it af-pak. we talk about the india-pakistan issue of kashmir. or now increasingly china and china's role in pakistan so we have all of these kind we don't look at pakistan as a country. we look at pakistan being in the midst of a complicated

region with lots of very complex geopolitics, and we don't understand the nation. and so part of our goal today is to try to have you here unfiltered, you know, one of pakistan's great leaders who's going to talk to us today about pakistan's national interest, its national directions, and how pakistan wants the united states to understand its journey. it's going to be a good afternoon, and it's going to, i'll say, after the foreign minister gives his remarks, my colleagues, seth jones and dan runde, are going to come up and join him and they'll engage in a bit of a dialogue and then bring you into this conversation. it'll be a very important afternoon. so, could i ask you with your very warm applause, please welcome to the stage, his excellency, the foreign minister of pakistan, minister

qureshi. >> qureshi: good afternoon and thank you for showing up. president hamre for inviting me, i'd like to thank you, to speak at the center for strategic and international studies. i'm honored to be at the csis, which enjoys a richly-deserved representation as a centre of of excellence in south asian studies. i'm also delighted to be with the distinguished gathering which includes scholars, and so many familiar and friendly faces. i'm visiting washington at a critical time, both in our region and internationally. there is the unabated human rights and humanitarian crisis

in indian-occupied jammu and kashmir where 8 million kashmiris have been under an inhuman lockdown for more than five months. there is the peace and reconciliation process that's entered a crucial phase. in this fluid, uncertain regional and global environment, we believe a strong, stable, thriving pakistan-u.s. partnership is vitally important. i'm hopeful to share our perspective on where we are in the region and how the evolving scenarios impact this pivotal relationship between our two countries. the central team and consisten thread runs through the foreign

policy choices that pakistan is making today is seeking peace and promoting development. the inextricable link between peace and development is the conceptual framework link. let me very briefly remind all us friends that this took place in august, 2018. in all the months that have followed prime minister hahn's domestic priority included stabilization of the economy, improved governance, combating corruption, and pursuing social economic development calls for more than 210 million people. with serious interest on economic turn-around is already discernible. key indicators are improving. our international ratings are being upgraded. pakistan is increasingly

becoming protected as a major tourist destination for 2020. as the realities transforming the image is changing as well. in order to sustain this national development effort, we need a peaceful, external environment for a sustained period of time. let me turn to the region. iran right now is a subject upon everyone's mind. in fact, my visit to the united states is one leg of a wider trip that has previously taken me to iran and saudi arabia. i have been instructed by the prime minister to convey pakistan's message in all three capitals, that is tehran, real, and washington. pakistan will

only be a partner for peace. it will not be a part of any war in the region. pakistan has close ties with both saudi arabia and iran. we have a special relationship with saudi arabia, with a longstanding tradition of always standing by each other in times of need. we are grateful for the support we got in the early days of our government in managing the economic headwinds. similarly, iran is a close friend and neighbor. similarly iran shares a long border, an historical and

cultural links between the two countries together. some of you may not know that pakistan's embassy of pakistan in washington has also looked after iranian interests in the united states since the islamic revolution. deeply cognizant of the security and economic perils that a new war or a military confrontation entails, pakistan has been ready from the outset to support efforts for diffusing and removing misunderstandings. in last september, the prime minister took an initiative to approach the leadership of the countries concerned with the view to playing our role in facilitating a peaceful solution of differences and dispute through diplomatic means. in the recent phase, pakistan welcomes the indication given by both the united states and iran to de-escalate tensions. we clearly see space for diplomacy here and we believe

this space must be optimally utilized. in my interactions, i have consistently called on all parties to exercise maximum restraint, avoid any further escalating step, diffusing tension and agree to be constructively engaged. we hope our collective endeavors will create an effect as we encourage the parties concerned to go beyond the declared intentions of deescalation and take practical steps to preserve the peace. teetering on the brink that the world is seeing a glimmer of hope. all pakistanis know our country and region will not know a real peace until our afghan brothers and sisters are

at peace. both within and without. we know this because we have suffered with the people of afghanistan. remember that our encountering with the afghan tragedy did not begin on the morning of september 11, 2001. it began when the first soviet troops marched into afghanistan in december, 1979. it began when the first become five million afghanistan refugees came to pakistan. that's how long the people of pakistan have suffered blowback from conflict and instability in afghanistan. it is now 40 years and counting. for context, just remember, this is more than half of our life as an independent nation. let me also add that since 9/11

alone, over 70 pakistani security forces and civilians have made the ultimate sacrifice with the fight against terrorism. our economy has suffered over $150 billion in direct economic losses. the indirect costs that the war against terrorism has imposed by disrupting our national economic catastrophe is just incalculatable. pakistan and u.s. has shed too much blood and spent too much treasure. we want to honor the memory of our fallen soldiers and countrymen by successfully accomplishing the mission in afghanistan. pakistan has long argued that there is no military solution for afghanistan. prime minister khan was one of the first leaders in the region

who consistent liad voe indicated a political route towards peace in afghanistan. this is why we welcome president trump's bold initiative for promoting a political settlement in afghanistan. pakistan's positive role in facilitating the afghan peace process, including the taliban-u.s. talks, is internationally acknowledged. of there is hope today that 2020 could be the year of peace in afghanistan. while we've made significant progress, much more needs to be done. patience and perseverance are indispensable. we need to make sure that peace in afghanistan is ultimately a shared responsibility. pakistan is and will play its role but it alone cannot do all that is needed. the international community and important regional players have to play their part. at the same time, we have to be

vigilant against spoilers. sadly, be not every country in the broader region wants to see peace in afghanistan. while we sincerely work for peace in afghanistan, we must also sharpen our focus on preparations for the post-conflict phase. pakistan hopes there will be no precipitated action and that international patrol will be phased and orderly. it is in no one's interest to repeat the mistakes of the 1980's. international engagement for reconstruction and sustained development will be pivotal. it would also help create conditions for the return of afghan refugees in pakistan and elsewhere. we hope that the united states and other partners would work with afghanistan as we politically mainstream and economically develop our former tribal areas.

along the pakistan and afghanistan border would benefit both sides. there's another compelling reason for us to see peace firmly established in afghanistan. for too long, pakistan and the u.s. relationship has remained hostage with the afghan issue. we want this to change. pakistan-u.s. relations are too significant and possess too huge of potential to be confined to the afghan prism alone. peace in afghanistan will help both sides take a fresh look at all that we can do together to enrich our historic relationship. the present regional scenario also makes the challenge of securing peace more

complicated. we firmly believe the gains made so far be protected and the situation since january 3 in the region handle in a way that any negative impact on the peace process in afghanistan is avoided. having come this far, there should be no there should be zero tolerance for any setbacks. prime minister khan has always envisioned a peaceful neighborhood. after winning the elections in july, 2018, he promised that if we took one step forward for peace, pakistan will take two. he made repeated efforts to change the symbolism and substance of this historically

troubled relationship. unfortunately, they have spurnd every positive gesture, driven by myopia, ill-placed arrogance, and most importantly, domestic electoral calculations. harboring hyper-nationalism to win elections, india nearly pushed the two countries into a war last february. that is the setback from the brink is almost entirely too strained shown by pakistan and the statesman-like handling by prime minister khan of the captured pilot. alas, repeated our commitment of peace as a sign of weakness. we had hoped that after the indian elections, the parliament would display more maturity. it would recognize that

pakistan and india should be fighting hunger together rather than fighting each other. instead, the government has embarked upon the project of turning india into a hindu the adherence have established this with disastrous consequences for all in india and the world to see. on august 5, india tried to change the disputed status of kashmir and order its demographic structure. breaking all relevant international laws and violating civil u.n.

security council resolutions in the process. india has been seeking to break the will of the kashmiri people by imprisoning them in their homes and imposing a communications blockade that continues to this day. thousands of kashmiris, particularly young boys, have been imprisoned, ing tortured, even children as young as 9 have not been spared. the indian narrative that kashmir's internal part is firmly refuted by being on the security council agenda. if this were not the case, why would the french president raise it with the indian prime minister? equally insulting, the intelligence of the world community is bizarre in the argument that it is for economic development of the kashmiris. yes, economic development being delivered at gunpoint by over 900,000 occupation troops. if not addressed, the crisis in kashmir has the potential to

become a flashpoint between the two countries with strategic capabilities. when the kashmir crisis began in august, prime minister khan warned the world about the government's nexus with the fascist ideology. initially, some of our friends felt we were exaggerating. today, prime minister khan's warning is being vindicated by inside india and everybody recognizes that. the mask has slipped and the reality of the world view is fully exposed. the internet's shutdown in kashmir is already the longest ever imposed by a democracy. if today we can the passage of

the citizen amendment act and the national register of citizens are raising fundamental questions about the ideals democracy that india's founding father advocated. it is perhaps symptom attic of the divergent tragedy of our two countries that when the indian supreme court was handing over the land on which the historic mosque had once stood in iodia, the same of hindu religious fanatics that had raised the mosque to the ground in 1992, pakistan was opening the corridor. indian state terrorism and oppression of indian occupied kashmir and the government's incitement of religious hatred and presency

frenzy in india have dangerous implications in the region. let's not forget, this indian government has history of externalizing its problems. you only need to cast your mind back to the episode. in the runnup to the elections last year when india sought to deceive the world by never ending stream of lies. we fear we are once again reaching such crisis. every other day, some new indian politician or military official makes a veiled threat against pakistan. meanwhile, we all follow reports of capture of indian police officer singh whose footprint is now being seen in some major terrorist attack, which india itself orchestrated and blamed on

pakistan. we have been consistently wanting the world to know about another false flag operation against pakistan in a they were occupied by two mill stands on his way to delhi. celebrations should not be lost on anyone. our government wants peace in the neighborhood. we want we need peace in order to focus on achieving our domestic agenda for economic reform and development. but we will not pay for any peace with india. we know that president trump is profoundly worried by the kashmir situation and we welcome his repeated offers of mediation in resolving the kashmir dispute.

the united states alone commands the moral respect in south asia to resolve the longest dispute on the u.n. agenda. as prime minister told president trump last july, the united states will have the gratitude and prayers of over two billion people in south asia if it did so. we hope president trump is successful in realizing his goal and can make a lasting contribution with substantial peace in south asia. that could be his enduring legacy. pakistan-u.s. relationship has always served our mutual interests. we often hear u.s. officials say pakistan has much to gain by working with the united states. that is undoubtedly true. but what is also true is that the united states also has much to gain by working with pakistan. that is what history

of our relations teaches us. we appreciate the assistance the united states has historically provided us in the areas as diverse as agriculture, energy, defense, and education. the united states played a critical role in building our agriculture base as well as defense capacity during the 1950's and the 1960's. but pakistan also contory butted contributed immensely by helping the united states during the cold war, including by facilitating u.s. -china which decisively tipped the balance in favor of the free world. pakistan would not have achieved the success it did in

fighting terrorism without assistance from the united states. but equally, al qaeda would not the shadow of its former self today if pakistan had not helped with the campaign against its leadership leadership. despite our shared frustrations with with progress in afghanistan, let's not forget that the terrorist organization that attacked the united states on the horrible september morning in 2001 is diminished today. this is our joint success. pakistan desires a relationship with the united states that is based on mutual respect, mutual interest and mutual benefit. while we continue work with the united states for peace in afghanistan and for security in post-afghanistan war region, our relationship should be larger than afghanistan and counterterrorism. it is also a concern for us

that there is a growing tendency to view pakistan-china relations through the lens of contemporary geopolitics. i want to remind you that pakistan's relationship with china is maybe as old as our relationship with the united states. fitting pakistan-china relationship disports the picture. for too long, we have lamented lack of connectivity between the regional economies now in the form of cpac. we have a project that will help pakistan's economy develop economic development goals and provide impetus to economic integration in south and central asia. far from being suspicious of cpac, supporters of peace in

the region should welcome the project. for all the talk of transitions, realignments, the logic for a strong pakistan-u.s. relationship is inarguable. besides securing peace in afghanistan, we have strategic convergence on preserving safe and stability in southeast asia and that includes investment ties. pakistan is a nation of over 200 million people, 2/3 of whom are under 30 years of age. we sit at the crossroads of china, south and central asia. pakistan has a market of another three billion people. the economic potential is immense. the u.s.

is our major trading partner and a significant source of revenues. we would like to create more trade and investment opportunities for both countries. indeed, when president trump and prime minister khan met in washington in july, president trump had spoken of increasing trade by 20 times. pakistan is an energy-deficient country. the u.s. is emerging as a big energy supplier. this new found had reason for our two countries to cooperate and collaborate. meanwhile, one million-plus pakistani americans remain a bridge between the two countries. pakistani americans have always been high achievers in the areas of professional endeavor. but what has struck me this time, many more young pakistani americans are politically

engaged. that is not the case earlier. as a politician, i'm always happy to see young people who have a passion for public service and civic engagement. this innate yearning for democratic participation among young pakistani americans is a reminder of the many values that stem from their identities. in this commonality of values that is ultimately the bedrock of any strong relationship, friends are precious commodities. one does not turn one's back on old friends just because one has made new ones. let me reiterate, in our common pursuit of security, stability, and prosperity, pakistan and the united states have much to gain by working together.

i thank you for your attention and will be happy to take any questions if you may. (applause) >> thank you, foreign minister. have a seat in the middle. we'll flank you. (inaudible) >> my ambassador is an advisor at csis and has been a real partner. we wouldn't be able to do the work we do on pakistan without the ambassador. foreign minister, thanks for being here and thanks for your very complete speech. i think it was i think it was

very complete and covered a lot of issues and i agree with you when we make new friends, we shouldn't turn our back on old friends. i think that's a very important message for us here in washington as we as things change in the region. seth and i have several questions for you. i wrote an article on thehill.com about our relationship and i suggest we need to base our relationship with pakistan on something other than afghanistan. i really liked your phrase, our relationship with pakistan is being held hostage with afghanistan. that's an eloquent way of saying it. i think it's right. one which we can reset our relationship is through economic ties. i think we're agreement on that. i think and you talked about

some of the opportunities. i don't think we talk enough about all the opportunities that the united states has with pakistan. you talk about energy. i hope you might talk about several others because i think you are an avid agriculturist. talk about agriculture, tourism. >> perhaps there are others as well. i think that's where we need to be resetting our relationship and you indicated that in your remarks. >> qureshi: let me begin with agriculture. we are an economy with a lot of potential. we have a history of operation in agriculture. the first green revolution that came back in pakistan in the 1960's was helped by the united states. we got seed from here. we got scientists from here. and we jointly collaborated for the ordinary pakistani working the land. i think we, today, need another

collaboration. because pakistan, look at the location. pakistan is sitting right in the middle of an area which has high has insecurity. advancements in agriculture through seed development, through new research can immediately enhance our productivity. with the present activity, we are generating enough for ourselves and we can have surplus with new technology and research. we have the potential of

reducing for the wider region. you have the gulf on one side. you have central asia. and u.s. investments for the food processing industry, can, you know, pakistan can be a hub for your products going out to other countries. >> daniel: i would argue you could double or triple your production, that's not an unrealistic statement? >> qureshi: that's a realistic statement. if we bridge the gap of productivity between the average and the progressive farmer, our productions get doubled immediately. >> daniel: i am an enormous fan

of the pakistani -- the fruit, the mango. blow your socks off. blow your socks off, delicious. so foreign minister, there are other things too. let me take advantage. we spend so much time. we are we're going to talk a lot about security. let me double click on this a little bit more. talk about talk about tourism. country brands change. if we were sitting in this room 25 years ago and i said, let's go visit croatia, people would say, no, i don't want to go to croatia. now they are dying to go to croatia. or say, i want to go to colombia. i went fishing in colombia nine years ago. there is enormous tourism in your country. >> if i can interrupt for the audience. i mentioned to you earlier, foreign minister. last time i was in the swat was about 10 years ago and the security situation there was was a tough one. there was active combat. but one of the things when i left swat at that time that i promised myself, the next time i would come back would be to

go skiing. >> daniel: i'm going with you. >> that's an example of my commitment to tourism in pakistan. >> qureshi: well, i can assure you, the dramatic improvement of law and order and all over the country is a case in point. where you can actually go and ski. it is possible. pakistan has been identified as the 10 top destinations of tourism in 2020. people are hospitable. the only problem was the security environment. that has changed and it's changed for the better. what we need is investment in infrastructure. obviously as the numbers go up, as the appetite grows, investors will be attracted. we are talking to the turks. they have done well in tourism.

we've been talking to the malaysians. they generate over $20 billion to tourism. why can't we do it? i think that is possible. and increase the gamut. they are taking on the motion of tourism, i think, well not just create jobs, because it will help jobs. it will also change the image of the country. what we are suffering from is an image problem. people that travel to pakistan, congressman, all ordinary citizens that traveled to pakistan, once they have returned, they returned with a different view, with a different image. what they read, what they see on television, when they go and meet people

and see for themselves, it's a different story. >> daniel: let me repeat, country brand can change. indonesia, 1998. people are i like going to indonesia. great place. panama, 1989. i like going there. a lot of people go there. croatia, 1995. great place. i've been there on a tour boat. colombia, 1999. today, i was i went fishing, deep sea fishing. there is no reason in the world that the country brand of pakistan can't and won't change. and i actually think with the right investments and right political leadership the country brand is going to change. i want to give the floor. the one thing i always thought, foreign minister, is that pakistan could be the saudi arabia of hydropower. you

talked about liquified natural gas. we have gas. thank goodness for that. you have enormous potential energy sources in your own country. talk a little bit about that. i think that's another investment opportunity. >> qureshi: we have a huge potential for hydrogen ration. you hydro generation. you identified a number of sites in the valley that can generate energy. stored water for agriculture. we have what we have is we have a lean period and we have a water surplus period. what we require is storages for the lean period. so investments in hydrodams is the way forward. there is a huge potential. it's cheaper, environmentally friendly, and we don't have to import. the energy that we have, you know, to overcome the deficiency in the crisis we were facing was installation of it is very expensive. does not pollute the environment. it's very

expensive. that's affecting our cost of production. so here is a step where we can move very quickly. unfortunately, there was some political wrangling on which projects to undertake and whatnot to undertake. i think we've overcome the hump and now we've identified a number of sites where there is a political consensus and the council of common interests which is a body that represents different federating units of the country have agreed to. that is the potential. here again, investments and technology from the west can be utilized.

>> daniel: i am going to sand over to seth, but we are i am going to hand over to seth but we are going to take questions on index cards and pencils. start thinking about questions and seth and i will sort them out and ask the questions to the foreign minister so my colleague will be passing them down. pass them down and get pencils and we'll collect them in about 10 or 15 minutes. seth, over to you. >> let me first just echo one of the statements you made earlier and dan did as well, that the conversation, including in washington, over the past two decades has focused predominantly on security. and i think it is long since time for that conversation to shift to business, commercial ties, trade, and that's an important and a much healthier long-term relationship. so i fully support that. we should have had this conversation long ago. but let me turn to one of the issues that we are here for and

have been talking to folks in saudi arabia and in iran itself about and that is the increased tensions with your neighbor, iran, particularly u.s. -iranian tensions. you have talked recently, either in peon or by phone, to the iranians, to the saudis, to the russians, among others. and so two questions that your thoughts would be very important here is, first, what are your concerns about escalation here and how serious, from your perspective, would escalation be as it impacted gulf of the strait of hormuz or broader tension in the region? and the second question is, one of the things you and others

have talked about is a term called maximum restraint. what does that mean in the sense of what steps have you been talking to individuals about that could decalate the situation? >> qureshi: well, it goes without saying that aspiration is not just dangerous. it can be disastrous. middle east, in that part of the world has seen enough conflicts. from the impression that i drew from the engagement that i had with different foreign ministers was the region does not want, does not need another conflict. and when there were statements made on the iranian side, which would not escalate in nature, and the address of the president on the eighth of

january which also talked of de-escalation i thought had created space for diplomacy. and that space should be utilized optimally to avoid a conflict in the region. of so nobody wants another conflict in the region. the second part was >> what is >> seth: what are dress clatory steps you would consider? part of the de-esscalatory steps you would consider? people would want to know the perspective you heard from tehran, how do they view de-escalating the situation? what did you hear from iran? >> qureshi: i think they are in no mood for conflict. they do not want a war. they feel that enough blood has been shed.

and i think they are also saying that, a, the sanctions imposed are hurting the ordinary irani. secondly, the policies that they have being pursuing have now in a way pushed them into some kind of an insulation and that's not good for them. so it's time to re-engage. if it's time to re-engage, they would have to revisit some of the policies that they were pursuing. what i deduce from the conversations that i had over there, that they are willing to

do that. they are willing to stop all countries in the region, and they have said, ok. these are the five areas which are areas of difference we have with other countries in the neighborhood. and we are willing to sit and talk about all of them. we are willing to sit and talk about the past. obviously when we talk about the past, it will be bitter. we'd prefer to talk about the future. if that realization is dawning, i think it should be encouraged and pressure has been exercised. a clear message has been sent. but pressure beyond a certain point can be counterproductive. they can get into a reactionary mode and i think that should be avoided. >> seth: your country of pakistan has 70% of your population are young people

ands a a percentage of as a percentage of your population of young people, you have the highest percentage of young people of any country in the world. >> daniel: that is either a demographic dividend. if you have if folks have education and they're trained and then there's jobs for these young people, it's an enormous demographic dividend. we've seen that in the 1960s. you can say that china is going through its demographic dividend now and it's about to end. so really, pakistan is about to hit could hit if it plays its cards right, invest in education, training, skills and jobs and investment. on the other hand, young people can use their energy for four things. they can either use their energy for participating in the

formal economy in jobs. they can use their energy for education. they can also use their energy, depending on the country context of joining gangs in places like central america or here in the united states. or joining various kinds of bad actors. or they can migrate. seems to me in my hypothesis where they can put their energy, those are the four places. i'd like them to put their energy into door number one or door number two. so what steps are you taking, your government, what steps are your government taking?

we talked about investment. we talked about the economic opportunities. that's a part of it. but how are you thinking about education and training to make sure that the united states has a shared interest with pakistan that a more than 100 million young people and more than that channel their energies in a way that other parts of asia channeled their energies and that's the enormous demographic dividend for pakistan and the world, how are you getting ready for that? >> qureshi: youth is our interest. they are very bright. many of them have been to universities abroad. they are exposed. they are very supportive of democracy. you know, they have strengthened democratic values. they believe in freedoms. freedom of expression. they are critical. they are objective. and they are full of potential. so how do we harness that potential and convert it into a positive effort? for that, our government has a clear agenda and that's why i said our focus when we came to government was peace in the neighborhood.

why do you want peace in the neighborhood? we want peace in the neighborhood so that we can invest in people. we can invest in education. we can invest in health. we can invest in improving the quality of life of ordinary people. clean drinking water, sanitation, these are the challenges that we are facing. and peace could be a dividend that could allow us to focus on these areas. training. vocational training. that's where we have to focus on. not just giving them degrees. but giving them skills that they can be gainfully employed.

how many jobs can government offer? every government department is saturated. so the private sector >> daniel: nine in 10 jobs in the world is private sector. >> qureshi: the private sector has to be the engine of growth. one has seen i was in japan and many european countries. there is a grain population over there. they are looking they are looking for people who have skills to keep their economic momentum going. are we ready? are we preparing to fill that need? i think our government is focusing on that. we are focusing on that. we are focusing on education. we are taking a fresh look at our curriculum because having

successfully defeated terrorism, we have to have a strategy to reverse extremism. in order to reverse extremism, the best weapon to do that is education. and if we can educate our young minds, give them gainful employment, i think we are on the right track. we have seen youngsters, pakistani, whether they have come to the u.s. , they have gone to europe, england, they have done well for themselves. they have been peaceful. they have been law abiding, and they have, you know, from nothing, many of them have been success stories. if there can be success stories abroad, why can't thereby success stories at home? the potential is there. we did not spend enough time, enough money, enough attention on the social sectors. we need to do that. for that we need peace on both sides. on the western side, we worked and hopefully we have our fingers crossed. there is a ray of hope. on the eastern side, we want normalization, but it seems the indian side is not looking at

things as objectively as they should. we have no designs of we want settlement issues through dialogue. >> daniel: are we collecting the questions, team csis? >> seth: let me pick up the issue of peace, particularly to the west, which you noted. >> daniel: sorry. i'm getting my east and west. for the television audience what do you mean by east and west? >> seth: afghanistan. >> daniel: the question. >> seth: i want to talk about afghanistan, and i think anybody who has looked hiss

tore cloor at the historically at the region, and you mentioned december of 1979, pakistan was impacted immediately by the soviet invasion and the refugee flows and the threat to pakistan itself when that invasion came and the u.s. worked closely with pakistan after that in support of the mujaheddin in afghanistan. the u.s. worked closely with pakistan in the days and months after 9/11 in afghanistan. there have obviously been periods of tension since then, but i think we are now at a period where there is a prospect for settlement. so what i so what i wanted to ask are two questions here. one is, how serious because this is a subject of some discussion here how serious from your perspective are the taliban about negotiations? they seem quite emboldened on the battlefield. how serious are they about

negotiations? and the second issue is, what do you see as some of the key areas where additional progress needs to be made, whether it's ceasefires, the afghan constitution, ties to terrorist organizations, where do we need to move and focus energy? we came very close several months ago to a meeting at camp david and that was called off. but if we were to try to get back to that period, what would you suggest? >> qureshi: in my view, the taliban are pragmatic in their spot. they're not foolish. they also they're also fatigued. let's not forget they've been fighting. >> qureshi: we all are. they've also been fighting for too long. and i think there's a realization, in my view, that if we expect things to go back

to what they were, afghanistan has changed considerably. and they would have to adjust to that new change. you cannot anymore deprive women from education. >> daniel: there's three million girls in school. >> qureshi: that's not doable and that's not acceptable, right? today there is democracy and people are getting used to democracy, right? you can always argue about how fair, how credible the election process has been. but it can always improve with the passage of time. so you cannot move away from that. what they should be encouraged to do is, if they are so popular, if people so like them, they should be part of the mainstream. and get themselves elected, participate in politics, use the ballot box, and advocate for what they are advocating.

let the people mandate what they're doing. and i think that realization is setting in. give up violence. if the they continue to do what they'll be doing what they've been doing, there will be a stalemate at best. there will be no winners. everybody in the region will lose. and they will not gain. so this new, new realization is setting in. and this should be encouraged further. >> seth: if i can peel back this one layer. as we look at past peace

processes, we have seen groups like those in el salvador and we've seen groups like the i.r.a. in northern ireland participate in the peace process as part of negotiations. or after negotiations. so is it your sense that the taliban would be interested or would be willing or some senior members of the group would be willing to participate in elections in the country, serve in ministries, not in a solely taliban government, but one that was shared more broadly? >> qureshi: you see, today, the way the country is divided, it seems to fulfill that one faction can dominate the rest. you have different ethnicities living there. you have your uzbeks and others. so they will have to, if they want their country to stabilize and prosper, they will have to reconcile. and that's why it is the process is not just peace, it's peace with reconciliation. reconciliation to a new

reality. and that is what is required. one. secondly, as you said, you were there and then you left. we feel that this time there will be even if there's a successful agreement, challenges will remain there. so the united states and its friends and coalition partners will have to have a more responsible withdrawal and they should remain engaged, not to fight, but to rebuild. >> seth: so the u.s. should remain engaged? foreign minister qureshi: they should remain engaged because if they do not remain engaged, afghanistan will not be able to sustain >> seth: that was the mistake

in the 1980's. >> qureshi: yes. do not repeat the 1980's. do not learn from the 1980's. they will need investments they will need money investments, they will need money. how will they support their existing infrastructure without international help? >> seth: so we've got some really good questions, we've got some time to take some of them. why don't i start and then so we have several questions about how does pakistan see itself vis-a-vis the relations between china and the united states? >> daniel: you talked about it. i think, especially in the light of cpac. >> qureshi: well, there's a history to u.s. -china relationship and let's not forget, pakistan played a constructive role in bringing you together. in fact, that is what gave you the strength, that gave the strength to the free world to check the onslaught of communism, right? pakistan, it's not a zero-come game. we've had, as we have very close relations with china, and we have a historic linkage with the u.s. pakistan can be a binder, not a divider. for example, the project that you're discussing, the cpac project. here it's not a project, the economic zones we're building along the project, they're not exclusive

for chinese investment. by all means, we would encourage and we want european and american investments there. you come and see for yourself, see the potential, and take advantage of that. so it's not that the americans and the europeans are not welcome there. you are welcome. and you can be part of that. and you can benefit from investment. so pakistan can be an important bridge builder. we were, we still can. >> daniel: great. seth, why don't you ask him a couple of questions. >> seth: yep. let me start with this one. the

first question here is noting the protest movements that we've seen in iran. i would also add lebanon, iraq and a few other countries. and so the question here is, how does pakistan view the sustained protests, including in iran, and are you concerned at all about similar protests at some point in the future in pakistan? >> qureshi: well, depends what kind of protests. people protest because for economic peace, at times people protest because they want jobs. at times people protest because of price hikes. obviously, you know, we are interested in stabilizing the economy so that our youth is gainfully employed,

we can check prices, we can check inflation and we inherited a very difficult situation when we came into office in august, 2018. all major macro economic indicators were wrong, were pointing in the wrong direction. we have successfully negotiated a new program with the i.m.f. and it's moving in the right direction. hopefully things would improve and things would stabilize and that cause for protest will vanish. then there are other kinds of protests. there's an ideological in nature. we, as i said, we are dealing with them. we have initiated a program of reform. reform of our seminaries. why? because you're dealing with a

mindset. and we are introducing modern education in them. we are introducing vocational education. so that boys more than girls are being educated and they are quite a big number being educated there. they have a few father they have a future for themselves and they cannot be picked up as gun fodder by extremist elements. so we are conscious of that and we're planning accordingly. >> seth: so this is another question and i'll just read it. in december, 2018, the state department designated pakistan a criff particular concern country of particular concern. what's your reaction, what steps is pakistan taking to address this? >> qureshi: particular concern vis-a-vis? religious freedom? >> seth: yeah, religious freedom. >> qureshi: i think we were baffled when we saw that.

because if you come to pakistan today and, you know, as i said, you're welcome to do so, you will see we are a multiethnic, multicultural society. we're a pluralistic society. and you will see minorities protected under law by the constitution. and a general attitude is accommodating. you can see churches functioning, you can see temples functioning. there's a big initiative, a big message for the sikh community to come over and visit their holy shrines. they're welcome to do that. so there's nothing of the sort.

there is no single discriminatory law in place. in fact, in fact, if you look at things today, why are people in india today protesting? they are protesting against a new piece of legislation which they feel is discriminatory in nature and the discrimination is based on religion. on religion. only the muslims have been focused. the christians are allowed, sikhs are allowed. but only muslims, you know. and that is creating a lot of frack us over there. and many hindus with a progressive mind have said, this is wrong. this is not what secular india stood for. and this is what this regime is changing the color, the view and the image of india in pakistan. in fact, if there was some concern, that concern should have been expressed there and not here. there is no justification for this concern. >> seth: last question. what is the solution in your

mind to the kashmir challenge? in two minutes or less. >> qureshi: ok. it's a complicated question and you want a simplistic answer. the simplistic answer is, you're a democracy. you believe in democratic values. why don't you advocate those values exercised in kashmir? give them the right of self-determination. let them decide what they want. do they want to be with india? are they happy there? so be it. and if they so decide, we should, you know, stop harping on that. do they want to be with pakistan? if so, accept it. let democracy you have promised

the indians have promised the international community that they will give them the right. you believe in democracy. let's find a democratic way out. >> daniel: ok. please join me in thanking the foreign minister. this was great. please come back. (applause)