just as discussing tension is what i'm gonna stand and how this affects to power balance in the region stay with us. please.

u.s. led attack on syria is a gross violation of international law furthermore western public still have not been presented with evidence the syrian government used any chemical weapons

a new phase of the syrian proxy war is need go sleeping opened another war of choice. to emerge to there was a real person around them to plant the seeds in order before syrup to your brain so that the drugs. in this new month it appears are passed by stuff i think. you'll be pretty as a buddhist but i have no. don't want to stop the jumping to salvation. he told me news on the source reveals a ballet she should own fault was she going to. play matchmaker that jane brought a new kind of generous mistress.

now we're back with him but on conmen of pakistan's national assembly and leader of pakistan movement for justice discussing islam about relations with the united states and their impact on the afghan peace process mr han you said that pakistan should fight terrorism for its own sake is pakistan fighting terrorism for somebody else at the present moment. well it started off by just one started off fighting the u.s. war i mean there was as i said there were no. pakistan there were no militant taliban in pakistan we did not have the terrorism we had six dead in terrorism but

that was just nothing compared to what happened once we joined the u.s. war on terror after nine eleven and then we had a spate of suicide bombing which was more than any other country i mean pakistan suffered. the sort of terrorism which nor the country suffered and that was appointed two thousand and eleven where you know the people wondered about the future of our country we were falling apart so it was thanks to our security forces that they eventually control this fanaticism and terrorism which was because we were considered bridges with the americans so all the anti americanism. turned against pakistan so people were attacking pakistan's security forces because they thought we were collaborating with the u.s. so the anger against the u.s.

born by the brunt was borne by pakistan afghan politicians are openly saying that pakistan is supporting the taliban it's become somewhat of an open secret and even some former pakistani officials are admitting to that like feeling how can pakistan fighting terrorists with one hand and then supporting them with another. well the two different things one. that the so-called taliban who are attacking pakistan pakistan the forces security forces who are indulging in terrorism in pakistan on the other hand of the of london. who are fighting in afghanistan know what. dunn says is that the dead are isn't coming into pakistan as. from of honest one no one is stunned as saying the. government do of honest on or that they cannot win in afghanistan because of the insurgents which is of. going in from

pakistani borders my point is that clearly first of all there is a huge. understand some say forty percent some say fifty percent which is not in the control of the of the government so why would all these taliban have to come to pakistan if there is so much space available for them to operate from within of honest that's number one point number two given that the lord is going to be peace and of understand and unless there is a political settlement so should not the of one government and the americans. do use their influence on the of one taliban to get them for peace talks so surely pakistan no should not be drawing more people and creating more problems for for a country that has taken the most beating most suffering in the water and dead or

rather it should be helping in the dialogue and the peace process with its influence on the of one taliban is pakistan actually capable of getting its multiple militant groups under control on the afghan border in kashmir and the national community saying that pakistan tolerates militants but does pakistan have enough strength to eradicate them if if you wanted to i mean the pakistani taliban are even listing you and your family as targets can they be stopped. the pakistan taliban have their strength has been greatly reduced ever since the american footprint reduced and of honest on the level of fanaticism when down in our country no longer world war pakistani security forces are supposed to be collaborators of the americans hence the recruitment for pakistani taliban went down

and the fanaticism went down and so by just any security forces a borderless controlled. what is called the t.t.p. the pakistan taliban problem is that of honest the know if one is done is secure settled stable then there would be peace in pakistan the problem is that because of one is done is unsettled we keep having attacks from of honest on the pakistani soil right now because the pakistani forces have control of the pakistani areas more or less though there are still incidents but much fewer. problem in kashmir that for the last twenty five years there are almost six hundred to seven hundred thousand indian troops and if there are violations of human rights the local population has turned against the indian army. the the people have risen up against india in peaceful protests now in india blame spark a stand for what is going on in kashmir in kashmir it is an indigenous struggle

this is not a struggle fueled by pakistan. why don't they give the kashmiris right to decide what they want what is the democratic right to decide the future but they do not give them that right they're using the forces to suppress that. democratic freedom struggle and they blame pakistan for what is going on in kashmir which again is unfair so we have two. fronts one is india blaming all what is happening in kashmir on pakistan. the other is the u.s. government blaming for the instability. in of what is done on pakistan that's the problem with pakistan right now unfortunately with pakistan has failed we did not project a point of view internationally or on the diplomatic level we have failed to really project what is happening and and at the same time the second phase is pakistan has given and the u.s.

war on terror. by just the un is not the sponsible what is happening in afghanistan you have said that if hundreds of thousands of nato troops couldn't change the situation in afghanistan additional troops the u.s. is sending there annually is only going to prolong the agony. do you mean to say that afghanistan is finished as a state and should be left alone die peacefully. no not at all i think of lot of stan as a very proud history its people have suffered more than probably any other country because they've been suffering almost forty years they've been suffering the. conflict strive instability and so if any people deserve peace it's people over what is done and the only where that can be achieved is of all the neighbors said sit on the table and bring the taliban and the of one government on the table that's the only way unfortunately that is. the until very recently the americans

were not willing to talk to the avant other one only of knowledge that is they have accepted that there should be dialogue but this one dimensional policy of of just using military beans to achieve peace it had fairly long time back there was a time when obama came to power and there was a holbrooke was the the rep and of honest on and he almost got the talent to sit on the table for a dialogue but unfortunately this. spearheaded by the bitterness that. is what is this peace talks and actually that led to more bloodshed. trump initially tried the same thing again hoping that you know by attacking the taliban they would bring them to the table but that's failed and now i think there is a consensus everywhere that the only way peace can be achieved and of honest on is

through dialogue and all the neighbors sitting on the table but that's the most important thing. to help the people of honest on so. how many cars i tell me in a recent interview that pakistan's policy towards his country is defined by its rivalry with india why is it so bad for pakistan and afghanistan becomes india's. friend. it's because. the signals coming from india extremely aggressive ever since mr nolan there modi's prime ministership . his stance towards by august on is not only aggressive but the whole. foreign policy is to isolate pakistan and some of us in this country think that they wouldn't mind budgets on splitting you know breaking away but just

on from from the rest of the country so clearly budgets done is watered that if india on if their face and don't do fronts meeting you know along the eastern border and then if i just on becomes an indian satellite which is the big fair with the secular to do security forces then pakistan is struggling on two fronts so it's out of this insecurity that. god's eyes right the policy is. determined by security issues yes so both countries india and pakistan saying how tense their relations are have military plans for a conflict where certainly pakistan adopted a doctrine of using low yield nuclear weapons in case of a major war with india as islam about really ready to use nuclear weapons on the indian subcontinent. that is the nightmare scenario and that's why it's very

important as all right differences india and pakistan to sit on a table and have some sort of roadmap to resolve the issues problem is i repeat again the prime minister narendra modi has policy ever since he's gone into power it's extremely aggressive and it is hostile towards pakistan which obviously pakistan being much smaller that in. it has made the country very insecure oh the governments and secure security establishment isn't secure bearing in mind that we are two nuclear armed countries the best way is that we sit down and resolve our differences but unfortunately so far india in the response has been good and very aggressive and whatever happens the moment any sort of talks start or have in the past one deadliest incident then the

whole process we're back to square one what we really need is a strong determined leadership in both the countries. a leadership that has the ability to take the pressure from that from that small lobby in both countries which it does don't want peace and. whatever happens whatever little incidents happen there the two countries stick to a roadmap of peace and the peace has to be a resolution of the kashmir issue so unfortunately at the moment i don't see the dialogue happening but in the future it is the only solution that the two countries sit together and resolve the issue of so that we can live side by side a civilized. all right mr han thank you very much for this interview good luck with the elections oil or talking to iran con man or a pakistani national assembly and leader of pakistan movement for justice discussing the rift between islamabad and washington and its implications for the

peace process in afghanistan that's it for this edition of cell phone call saying next time. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have it's crazy confrontation let it be an arms race in this on off and spearing dramatic development only really i'm going to resist i don't see how that strategy will be successful very critical time to sit down and talk.

to. the philippine city of angeles when the u.s. military moved out the six tourists moved in. and now a whole generation of fatherless children is growing up. a dad and within one month a simple simple than an eagle. eyed very decent general idea like this and i know you know. that son. sorry it isn't the first time the t.v. crew you see or think takes you were in won't answer is moment now and that it's real or is this. that's it you know you want my god. they know that. you can take the deal of above that you can take the burden of guilt to

such a woman you know. oh i love doing that i did it you did it did you. eat meat. you know. you never know what's around the corner you never know what's in the pub you're going to walk into a place that excitement is that not knowing that's where the adrenalin much comes from. and you can use a nice blend definition and extremes will fully support. the violence is a pov and it's almost a schizophrenia gang culture where you can do all these things and behave like badly.

important people of course colorful all for the purpose both muscle for the last. punishment and infirm for an old man knocked out of here all done for less than the start. of a broader when the piper young really did a poll down going to slip. meaning in reason is that at least if you don't and the involves it's constantly evolving. like. i.

was. the british prime minister finds of criticism earlier on and a barrage of questions over his decision to bypass parliament before ordering the attack on syria not just following orders from america we have acted because it is in our national interest to the prime minister is accountable to this parliament not to the whims of the u.s. president i come up to another use tonight after he speaks exclusively to an italian journalist who says he's facing death threats from the math over his investigations into organized crime i know that there are five mafia clans the one . i live with five men five caribbean here you follow me day and night. the german music industry is slammed for handing out a top award to

a rather infamous for their anti semitic lyrics. i got a big love at nine pm moscow time this month in the sixteenth of april this is art international with me kevin owen first the u.k.'s prime minister to reason may has been forced earlier today to justify her controversial decision to join the us and france in striking syria without seeking the approval of m.p.'s first the intervention against assad's government has led to a lengthy and impassioned discussion in parliament. it is right that parliament has the power to support or stop the government from taking planned military action a significant body of information including intelligence open source accounts state that barrel bombs were used to deliver the chemicals mr speaker does for example

the humanitarian crisis in yemen entitle other countries giora gates themselves the rights of bomb saudi airfields especially given their use. banned cluster bombs and white phosphorous regrettably we had no choice but to conclude that diplomatic action on its own is not going to work it is clear that diplomatic and nonmilitary means have not been fully exhausted where we not just following orders from america we have acted because it is in our national interest it prime minister is accountable to this parliament not to the whims of the u.s. president i so i have a simple question to ask my right of a friend given the confusion of some who are a bit uncertain about who is the greatest threat to world peace does she think that it is russia or america.

or can i say to my right honorable friend. look pretty confident on the face very way to dinner to do in london part of our team in the u.k. their shoes across that you know each other do a lot of facing the heat didn't she take us through it. she certainly did i mean this was the first time that to resume had to face parliament after those airstrikes carried out by the u.k. u.s. and france on saturday and she was certainly grilled the opposition leader jeremy corbyn asked her to publish legal the legal basis for carrying out those airstrikes trey's m a claim that she had consulted with the attorney general and here's how she explained why that evidence could not be shared with the rest of parliament i think this was a limited targeted strike on a legal basis that has been used before and it was a decision which required the evaluation of intelligence and information much of which was of a nature that could not be shared with parliament. now tereza may mention that the

targets that they write it specifically housed chemical weapons and actually the opposition leader again jeremy corbyn pointed out that the o.p.c. does he had in fact inspected two facilities already here's what he had to say. in relation to the strikes against bars are you on him or facilities the prime minister will be where. you carried out inspections on both those facilities in two thousand and three and concluded i quote that the inspection team did not observe any activities inconsistent with the obligations under the chemical weapons convention. trey's in may also said that it was highly likely that the assad regime carried out the chemical attacks jeremy corbin of again he pointed out that some other rebel groups particularly. had used chemical weapons in the past and

he called her decision illegally questionable so she was grilled in parliament she certainly had some very challenging questions and there looked to be a lot of unhappy m.p.'s purely because she did not take. this question of the air strikes to parliament and given the choice of whether to go ahead on not. for that we're still in the u.k. as well the mail on sunday newspaper has published a poll revealing that the british public was overwhelmingly opposed to the prime minister's decision to bypass parliament and if you go of a survey conducted before the missile attack that less than a quarter of the british public supported military action almost twice as many people were opposed to the operation in as in favor of it let's get some reaction from peter for joining us on the line now former ambassador to syria peter hey there thank you why do you think treason may didn't seek parliamentary approval as a convention seems to know dictate you think of blair back in two thousand and three cameron over the libyan no fly zone twenty eleven cameron again were

unsuccessful bid of a syrian twenty thirty which he afraid to go to parliament. i'm sure she had very much in mind. president bush twenty thirteen feet cameron. you will not have want to take any risk of that happening again it could be catastrophic for the government but she needn't have worried the irony on the basis of the appalling intervention by. all sides government and opposition on the basis of what and that today she need not have worried they would have voted for military action the extreme the worrying when one thinks of the future and when this whole thing happens again

do you think she may be. got through this by the scale of what the attack actually ended up that so we heard in some cases a couple of days building up to the weekend that the american president wanted kind of shock and awe what turned out was far from that is that why maybe she's she's got more cross party support than she does. not that so much of the reps shoot videos which. produced a collect through his syria among m.t.v. and many other people in the elites in this country but not among the general population you mentioned ordinary people are less easily bamboozled than our elites in parliament and in most of the media. i'm quite sure that popular opinion remains opposed to the strikes and even more opposed to any future

strikes but. a lost cause. treason against said she had evidence of assad's guilt that she couldn't crucially share with parliament you know rather hope that she could have shared something more categoric wouldn't you. you would but given that given the state of opinion in parliament and they can literally get away with murder. the murder of three separate syrian sickly through who were killed as long as she have the majority on those long ago most of the parliamentary labor party is more interested in undermining their leader jeremy corbyn then in opposing mrs may then literally she can get away with murder. talking to jeremy colvin there he's been staunch in his criticism for what's going on here along the way you telling me that. he

doesn't have public support he does public support here what the. organ does have popular support he is the voice of good people on this issue look at the opinion poll. in call of contacts and on social media it's hard to find think all voices raised in favor of the strike no popular opinion is very clear the against and call been. almost the lone voice. who's with popular opinion so back to parliamentary opinion again cross party parliamentary opinion if the same thing would happen again or president trump decided some kind of further action was needed as he said the gun is loaded cocked ready to go if there's something he sees that's alleged at syria. even whether it's

been proven or not he was to go in again you think he'd have the support of britain and british parliament again to go in. very sadly yes without a shred of doubt there were n.p.v. even on the labor side who. just that does this again we must be ready to go in only one thing one thing can stop this rush in thing again rush to over the cliff and that is for the truth about these videos to emerge and i'm very hopeful breaking news that perhaps as early as tomorrow we will get testimony from western journalists currently in damascus and it will be shown. that the whole thing is a fabrication well we'll see what tomorrow brings for now former you can buster to syria peter ford thank you for making the time to be with us so it's nice to see you thank you mean time.