pakistan again becomes important. pakistan is needed again. and, therefore, we again become strategic partners but when we became strategic partners, the question that i was asked everywhere that i went in pakistan, what makes you think united states will not again use us and abandon us? it's important ladies and gentlemen when we try to take a decision to stay or quit. are we again to be abandoned? question mark. in the minds of every pakistani. so now the next blunder that i'll talk of which is very, very significant. after 9/11, after 9/11 the taliban were defeated. with the help of northern alliance. which was a minority. taliban dispersed, ran al-qaeda totally decimated. they ran into the mountains and cities of pakistan. there was no command structure. there was total disarray of al-qaeda and taliban. afghanistan now was available for the political instrument to be used. the military instrument delivered in afghanistan in 2000 and soon after 11 by -- in 9/11 by giving in to afghanistan and now political solution available to be executed

>> i think pakistan no longer sees u.s. relations with india and pakistan. we are quite happy pakistan has a good relationship with the united states and we are equally pleased indeed that is developing a close and important strategic partnership with the united states. as far as president obama's visit to india is concerned, we appreciate that visit as offering an opportunity for bringing greater stability in the region and friendship and the united states and india is not something we look upon with any sense of worry. all we would like this for our relationship to be stable as well. what president obama said in india about the u.n. permanent security council permanent membership is something that we do not agree with. but then even reform is something that is a complex process and we feel that complex process has yet to play itself out. the united states also committed itself to a permanent seat for japan several years ago. japan is now nowhere near getting that seat so this is not something we think is going to reflect in any way on the u.s.-pakistan rel

pakistan. which exists even now. so 1989, the abandonment of the region, was the first great blunder committed by the united states. not only these of the pakistan, but also the 25,000 mujahedin -- not only vis-as-vis pakistan but also the 25,000 a shot had been coalesced into al qaeda. -- the mujahedin coalesced into al qaeda. for six years, battling each other -- even the pashtuns were divided into eight groups -- and they ravaged the country. the fighting was then between al qaeda on one side and the northern allianz, minorities on the other side. this then destroyed afghanistan years.anothehr six afghanistan yeasrrs, became of ghost country. i visited afghanistan. kabul was worst than somalia. so this was kabul, a ghost city. this is what happened in these 12 years after having won a victory in the soviet union. because the strategic focus was euro-centric because of the cold war, warsaw pact, reunification of germany -- all that gains went into york. what did afghanistan or pakistan get? n

does pakistan want a talibanized government in pakistan? and do we believe in and the views of islam that the taliban holds? the answer was no. 99% of pakistanis would say no. we do not want that. with all that confidence, it was not in our interest to be supportive towards taliban. notas pakistan's interest, u.s. interest. then i went further. if we did not join, what could happen? and my answer, which i do not want to elaborate, was that it would be dangerous for pakistan. because india was ever prepared to join and certainly the united states would attack afghanistan. how did the attack afghanistan from india? pakistan's sovereignty and aerospace or land. from all points of view, bravado is good at a personal level, but when it nations and states are involved coppe, bravado is not the solution. i took the decision. in hindsight, most of the pakistan is believe it was the right decision. ttp was not there. there was dnsm. which was more serious. he was the leader. and he is the man who's stronger in this malikahn divison. ion. then there

and would threaten pakistan's and pakistan's way of life.go to school. we do not want to be isolated from the rest of the world. we want to be a progressive, modern democratic state and that is not possible by having taliban in charge next-door or in any part of our own country. and that is something on which there is much more clarity than there was in the past. i'm sure in questions and answers people asked me then why hasn't that story come out quite well guess what. there are many things happening in the world that have yet to make it to the front page of "the new york times." u.s.-pakistan relations. until recently, u.s.-pakistan relations were always the dems have a transactional approach on both sides. so pakistan with finale of united states due to the cold war and then against the soviets. pakistan provided america an opportunity to reach out to china. pakistanis felt that we were all refused and drought. the americans say the pakistanis never held up their end of the bargain on some of these transactions. we continue to have a deba

does pakistan want a talibanized government in pakistan? and do we believe in and the views of islam that the taliban holds? the answer was no. 99% of pakistanis would say no. we do not want that. with all that confidence, it was not in our interest to be supportive towards taliban. notas pakistan's interest, u.s. interest. then i went further. if we did not join, what could happen? and my answer, which i do not want to elaborate, was that it would be dangerous for pakistan. because india was ever prepared to join and certainly the united states would attack afghanistan. how did the attack afghanistan from india? pakistan's sovereignty and aerospace or land. from all points of view, bravado is good at a personal level, but when it nations and states are involved coppe, bravado is not the solution. i took the decision. in hindsight, most of the pakistan is believe it was the right decision. ttp was not there. there was dnsm. which was more serious. he was the leader. and he is the man who's stronger in this malikahn divison. ion. then there

strategy in pakistan. our live congressional coverage resumes when the senate returns monday for general speeches. then both republicans and democrats will hold off the floor leadership elections. no roll call votes are expected until wednesday with the 1st expected vote of the week on the use of natural gas and electric vehicles. other possible boats include bills on which discrimination and food safety. watch live coverage on c-span 2 at 2:00 p.m. eastern. also on monday, a house ethics subcommittee hearing on the case against representative charles rangel. he is accused of 13 violations including failing to disclose at least $600,000 in assets and come in a series of inaccurate financial disclosure reports to congress. that is live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on cspan 3. now a discussion on strategy and policy toward iran. also i look at a new report examining u.s.-middle east relations. the report was issued by the atlantic council iran task force pretty host of this event. this is one hour and 25 minutes. >>

and helping pakistan fight terrorism and extremism instead of suspecting pakistan, ignoring pakistan.: what don't americans, or the united states, what don't wes up about pakistan? >> sensitivity of pakistan. history. the strategic partner in 1989. for 42 years, cold war, pakistan was strategic partner of the united states. we fought with you and we won a victory for you. pakista pakistani[ inaudible ] what happened in 1989, we were aband abandoned. totally abandoned. sanctions imposed on pakistan and the strategic focus shifting. you change your strategy with the orientation of pakistan. it was in the eastern part. to this question you should be asking to your policy makers. what has gone wrong? people of pakistan look at this as they have been betrayed, used and betrayed. then again on 9/11 for 11 years or 12 years from '89 to 2001, you left alone and we were fending for ourselves with 4 million refugees. al-qaeda coming and doing all the fighting in afghanistan, spoiling the environment in pakistan. now we're on 9/11. now again we're a strategic ally. now we the united states is ag

and would threaten pakistan's and pakistan's way of life. we do not want the future for our children in which girls cannot go to school. we do not want to be isolated from the rest of the world. we want to be a progressive modern democratic state and that is not possible by having taliban in charge next-door or in any part of our own country. and that is something on which there is much more clarity than there was in the past. i'm sure in questions and answers people asked me then why hasn't that story come out quite well guess what. there are many things happening in the world that have yet to make it to the front page of "the new york times." u.s.-pakistan relations. until recently u.s.-pakistan relations were always the dems have a transactional approach on both sides. so pakistan with finale of united states due to the cold war and then against the soviets. pakistan provided america an opportunity to reach out to china. pakistanis felt that we were all refused and drought. the americans say the pakistanis never held up their end of the b

and pakistan have been excellent. cooperation between our two goths has been excellent -- governments has been excellent. so if there was disquiet in the pakistani government about that, it has been more than overcome by the work that we have been doing together since then. >> we've had evidence from a number of sources that say that pakistan doesn't fully cooperate with the u.k. on counterterrorism issues. what's your reaction to that? >>ell, there is a new demand for cooperation on counterterrorism operations, very much on an operational basis. and, again, i don't think -- i can't go into the details of that in public, but certainly i would say that the cooperation on counterterrorism with pakistan has substantially improved in recent times. >> would you say, however, that it's not yet as unconditional and full as it might be? >> well, those things can be quite difficult to assess. it's often hard to be sure whether a country's giving all thinformation and cooperation that it could give. but nevertheless, i do stres

at one time pakistan was whistling in the graveyard about the pakistan the taliban. in our view it represents an ultimate threat to the state, and it is not beyond the ken of our military and diplomats to brin this home to the pakista thesis. the key to it all is to let them know we are not looking at another 10-year divorce. if they cannot be brought to understand, you cannot coerce them io doing something. >> of the way in the back, please. >> and from the congressial research service. let me congratulate the task force on a great report and the provocative discussion this morning. from my perspective, the discussion this morning has been very rich in terms of ways and means. current approaches and potential alternatives. can be difficult to think about what progress really means unless you are measuring against a very clear in that state. my question for the palace this morning is about the ends specifically for afghanistan. how good a job has the government done of defining a clear and state? what are the minimum conditions we would have to see on the ground in o

and would threaten pakistan's and pakistan's way of life. we do not want the future for our children in which girls cannot go to school. we do not want to be isolated from the rest of the world. we want to be a progressive, modern democratic state and that is not possible by having taliban in charge next-door or in any part of our own country. and that is something on which there is much more clarity than there was in the past. i'm sure in questions and answers people asked me then why hasn't that story come out quite well guess what. there are many things happening in the world that have yet to make it to the front page of "the new york times." u.s.-pakistan relations. until recently, u.s.-pakistan relations were always the dems have a transactional approach on both sides. so pakistan with finale of united states due to the cold war and then against the soviets. pakistan provided america an opportunity to reach out to china. pakistanis felt that we were all refused and drought. the americans say the pakistanis never held up their end of the

they have taken the war inside pakistan to the palestine 3 pakistan are -- taking it to the pakistan. they are very much part of a religious war inside pakistan between the radical elements and the more traditional majority of pakistan which believes in sufi islam. what to do about the afghan refugees whose camps inside pakistan form the official -- c.m.e. in this case can get rotation much more easily than across the border, whereas it is much harder for the coalition forces to be able to do that. and yet the focus has been when we talk about the war and pakistan on what pakistan can do and what it has done to help with the fight. . . pakistan can do and what it has done to help with the fight. who is fighting the insurgency inside pakistan? it is primarily the army. that may be the wrong way of doing it, because history dictates, as we are now learning even afghanistan, the ones you have community-based police, you can isolate the military from local population and win their confidence and respect d beble to provide good government administration and the local level, and build on t

but you live from pakistan. one of the key military figures speaks you live from this base, saying that there can be a cease-fire and nato with draws. why are taxpayers in the west paying for schools and hospitals thousands of miles away in afghanistan? >> there is a powerful national security imperative to help afghanistan get to the point where it never again becomes a refuge for international terrorism. >> also coming up in this program -- cholera reaches crisis in haiti. attacks on relief workers are hindering the aid effort. pressure on the islands to except the bailout to restore market confidence in the euro zone. we report live from the summit in brussels. >> it is early morning in washington, midday in london, 4:30 in the afternoon in helmund province. in a rare interview, a spokesperson for one of the insurgent leaders has told the bbc that the group could offer a ceasefire if foreign forces withdrew to their base if it is a credible offer. it was made from pakistan, where the group fighters retreated

and pakistan, pakistan, female literacy rate is about 35%.ernment said that 60%, but they say would've literacy? pakistan is going to double in population in the next 27 years from 175 million to 350 million people. and now we think there's a problem there is now in the country is grappling with these things, just think of one generation what could have been. and the only thing that pakistan is never really done until recently is to make that initiative is guaranteed in the constitution that every single child should be old to go to school and put more funds, effort and initiative into that attack. i guess i'm fortunate bad news. in the last three and half years, tolerance and other groups have bombed and destroyed, shot down over 2400 schools in afghanistan and pakistan. it's interesting though is about two thirds or three three fourths are girls schools coming up with schools. bury group of big bad men so terrified of a little girl going to school? i mean, with the big deal about a little girl walking to school? way she poisoned? white issu

they have taken the war inside pakistan to the palestine 3 pakistan are -- taking it to the pakistan army. they are very much part of a religious war inside pakistan between the radical elements and the more traditional majority of pakistan which believes in sufi islam. what to do about the afghan refugees whose camps inside pakistan form the official -- c.m.e. in this case can get rotation much more easily than across the border, whereas it is much harder for the coalition forces to be able to do that. and yet the focus has been when we talk about the war and pakistan on what pakistan can do and what it has done to help with the fight. who is fighting the insurgency inside pakistan? it is primarily the army. that may be the wrong way of doing it, because history dictates, as we are now learning even afghanistan, the ones you have community-based police, you can isolate the military from local population and win their confidence and respect and be able to provide good government administration and the local level, and build on that to the next level further up. what happened in afgha

they have taken the war inside pakistan to the palestine 3 pakistan are -- taking it to the pakistanhey are very much part of a religious war inside pakistan between the radical elements and the more traditional majority of pakistan which believes in sufi islam. what to do about the afghan refugees whose camps inside pakistan form the official -- c.m.e. in this case can get rotation much more easily than across the border, whereas it is much harder for the coalition forces to be able to do that. and yet the focus has been when we talk about the war and pakistan on what pakistan can do and what it has done to help with the fight. who is fighting the insurgency inside pakistan? it is primarily the army. that may be the wrong way of doing it, because history dictates, as we are now learning even afghanistan, the ones you have community-based police, you can isolate the military from local population and win their confidence and respect and be able to provide good government administration and the local level, and build on that to the next level further up. what happened in afghanistan w

that is also from pakistan. there is a person who used to be a part of the taliban. >> where does he fit into the story? >> he is the person who leaked the story. he called in saudi arabia but he did not mention their names. that person leaked this story because this package is coming from yemen. it will not be long before they are caught. maybe they have already been caught and they are not showing the picture. >> another thing, when american media covers only one topic, their international coverage is reduced to terrorism, what they're doing, they are perpetuating terrorism. >> that is why i am asking is technology making the world a more dangerous place? there is a lot of publicity surrounding these attacks. is that encouraging? >> i would not call it technology. it is all media forms. a terrorist, by definition, is someone who wants to terrorize society. if one person out of millions of pakistanis want to set off a bomb, and they get all the coverage, that is what they are looking for. of course they are per

they laid out terms for a truce across the border in pakistan. the republic of ireland is insisting it will work with european authorities to overcome its huge budget deficit. >>> the indonesian province has long been at odds with the central government in jakarta. separatist insurgents have been active there for decades. now ritual harvey has gained rare access to the capital. -- now rachel harvey has gained rare access to the capital. >> their rich in natural resources and ripe with resentment. they're physically and culturally different from other indonesians. this meeting is trying to chart a new path for them. the central government granted them autonomy status to stave off calls for independence. despite millions of dollars of investment, all tammy has failed to deliver the prosperity and empowerment people demand. it community leaders are urging more dialogue to work out something better. we have heard people calling for a referendum on independence. the idea of a meeting is to reach consensus so that they are all speaking with one voice.

pakistan has paid a high price for supporting nato in afghanistan. if it is and -- ignored, it could jeopardize a deal. >> pakistan would be excluded only with the implications of this. that is something that nobody would want. >> pakistan is eager for the endgame across the border. forces no if nato goes too soon, there could be greater instability. >> you are watching "bbc world news." the afghan women that want to play football where the taliban was carried out public executions. heavy rain and strong winds have caused serious flooding and disruption in the southwest of england. search and rescue has been used to free people trapped in their cars and homes. residents have been warned of the risk of more flooding during the night as heavy rain is forecast. our correspondent reports. >> this county is used to water. the intensity of rainfall in the early hours of this morning seemed to catch everybody out. by breakfast time, rescue helicopters were searching for anyone in danger. roads became rapids. flood water cascaded down, bringing with it tons

pakistan has paid a high price for supporting nato in afghanistan. if it is ignored, it could jeopardize the deal. >> they would ignore pakistan at their own peril. there may be implications for afghanistan that no one would want. >> pakistan is eager for the endgame. its forces know that if nato goes too soon, there could be greater instability. >> the republic of ireland is insisting it will work with european authorities to overcome its huge budget deficit. so far, it is resisting a bailout. remarks suggest it is more, not less likely. officials from the u.s. and imf are to spend 10 days in dublin preparing the case. hear, the chancellor george osborn has offered british money to help. >> the crash in ireland's economy is summed up by 30,000 empty homes. gathering dust. after the irish property bubble burst in the money ran out. the caltech boom may have -- irish boom made them a problem child. it is making borrowing more expensive for some parts of the eurozone. >> ireland is our closest neighbor and it is in britain's national interest that the

can pakistan do more to fight extremists within its boarders? >> on president musharrive, they allowed guns to take off from pakistani airfields and so they were being slightly disingenuous when they were criticizing the united states. but that particular position has not changed with the government of pakistan. they have not leveled with the people of pakistan about who allowed the drones to come in, while trying to take control of the drones for themselves, which is not likely to happen in the near future. now pakistan does need to do much more to fight militants inside the country but there is the bigger issue of what to do about the afghan militants that are seeking sanctuary inside of pakistan and that's a critical issue for the u.s.-pakistan relationship and that's not resolved satisfactorily. >> and when do you think it will be resolved? >>> president obama's recent trip to asia is getting mixed reviews from some quarters. expectations were high for a trade deal with south korea in an agreement to regulate international currencies. both f

in pakistan. since then, of course, britain is one of the countries that has led the way in responding to the disastrous floods in pakistan, and so i think the u.k. and the u.s. and our allies have to communicate that as effectively as possible. and alongside a close relationship with india, to build a long-term strategic partnership with pakistan. those things go indices pence my together. >> president zardari said he wanted to address this committee, and we will facilitate th >> restarting the middle east peace talks topic at today's state department briefing. is rarely premise or benjamin netanyahu presented a u.s. plan to his cabinet sunday that would freeze israeli west bank settlement construction for 90 days in exchange for 20 warplanes. later, state department spokesman p.j. crowley talked about the possibility of nuclear talks with iran on december 5. >> secretary clinton had a very productive meeting with foreign minister oz of the lithuania this morning. she thanked is delaney affords c

pakistan. >> i'm absolutely convinced that the country that has the biggest stake in pakistan's success is india. >> reporter: the president was also asked at the town hall, how the mid-terms will impact his agenda. >> it also requires me to make some mid-course corrections and adjustment and how those play themselves out over the next several months, will be a matter of me being in discussions with the republican party. >> one other point, dan, we're not exactly sure of our next destination, as abc news and compton was first to report that white house officials are concerned because of the volcanic ash of indonesia, the white house may not be able to bring in key equipment and personnel to protect president. so, stay tuned on that one. dan? >> will do. >>> one more political note, new york city's mayor, michael bloomberg has fired a broadside straight at the incoming congress. he was in hong kong. he told the wall street journal quote, look at who we're electing to congress, to the senate, they can't read. i'll bet a bunch of these people don't have passports. we're about to start a tr

bin laden is probably in pakistan. the taliban insurgency leadership is in pakistan. and i recount how the intelligence people have paragraphs and communications interpreted that the taliban insurgents go from afghanistan back into pakistan. get trained, repardonarmed, r &r weekend, load up trucks with the weapons and they weight in pakistan check points to go into afghanistan and kill american and other coalition soldiers. i quite lyon minute net that, the cia director. as panetta sums it up, this is a crazy kind of war. >> host: steve from michigan. you are on. >> caller: yes, good morning. i got a couple of quick questions. one i'd like to find out if you are telling, are you a democrat or republican? and number two, i'd like to find out how you voted, i think it was in 68 and 72 when next son -- when nixon was being voted on. >> guest: fair and good question. because i live in the district of columbia, which is democratic, i am a registered democrat, but i'm avowed neutral. to put that into practice, i take my young daughter into the voting booth. she votes for me

pakistan, not afghanistan. vice president biden makes a very compelling series of arguments that we should focus on pakistan, that we have enough force, enough intelligence capability, control of the air over afghanistan, that the taliban cannot and will not come back. >> host: there was a lot of discussion this week about your comments about hillary clinton and joe biden on the next ticket. i guess somewhere, you've been in this county long time, with all the substantive coverage in this book were you surprised at how much attention to blowback there was about the contours of the next presidential race? just back you know, it's reported just that one of her advisers, mark penn, told her, look, it may be in 2012 obama is in trouble, and he needs to put you, hillary clinton, on the vice presidential ticket. it's been kicked around. look, it's politics. if you look at the numbers, hillary clinton has strength with photographs, workers, seniors, latinos and women. and obama may need them. now, the white house is r

he wouldn't play for pakistan again. he's intent on settling -- he's only 24, but he's intent on settling in england and not playing anymore internationally. >> the whole thing is a mess. terrible. mike, thanks very much indeed. now, arguably the most iconic brand in british cinema, its name is synonymous with a horror genre. and you guessed it, hammer films are back. the franchise has been resurrected. filming is currently underway on the reproduction, and we found on the if there is still a place for hammer in today's cinematic landscape. >> it began in the 1930's. vintage horror hammer gained legendary status with the release of cult cinema classics like these. but in the 1980's, british production has faced a crest of its own. the market for horror movies became saturated, audiences appeared to be losing their hunger for hammer, and the final nail in the coffin came when the company lost its u.s. investors. >> basically what happened was the formula, in a sense, ran out. the hammer approached film making became quite

at one time pakistan was whistling in the graveyard about the pakistan the taliban. in our view it represents an ultimate threat to the state, and it is not beyond the ken of our military and diplomats to bring this home to the pakistan thesis. the key to it all is to let them know we are not looking at another 10-year divorce. if they cannot be brought to understand, you cannot coerce them into doing something. >> of the way in the back, please. >> and from the congressional research service. let me congratulate the task force on a great report and the provocative discussion this morning. from my perspective, the discussion this morning has been very rich in terms of ways and means. current approaches and potential alternatives. can be difficult to think about what progress really means unless you are measuring against a very clear in that state. my question for the palace this morning is about the ends specifically for afghanistan. how good a job has the government done of defining a clear and state? what are the minimum conditions we would have to see on the groun

city to us this is a balancing act. >> we give pakistan $8 billion a year.oes over there with another half a billion. >> they are >> pakistan has 120 nuclear weapons. the last thing we want is to have an overthrow of that government which is very unstable. >> let me offer dissent. the brazilians want in, japanese, indians. i don't think anything get in. if they get in, you have a total security paralysis. as getting in bed with the indians against the chinese, we are not in the business of containing china. these countries have their problems with the chinese which are not our problems, the south china sea, east china sea or china's occupation of parts of india, frankly you antagonize the packs. they are already paranoid and antiamerican. >> the theory is that you can exert influence on india and try to get india an pakistan to work together but -- >> let's go. the group gives obama and a. i think that's uniform. >> yes. >> no. >> no, i don't go along. i think it was a good trip. >> you gave an a. >> yes, i did. >> b. >> on the trip. >> i'm not talking about

they're in pakistan. >> oh, pakistan. >> tell me about pakistan, and number two, what are we doing inhanistan? >> you're asng me what i would do? >> yes. >> look, the war is really in afghanistan. the bad guys are in pakistan. they're on the border over in the northwest territories in pakistan. the pakistanis won't go in there. we're being very successful there as a matter of fact. this president, and i'm not the guy to say that this president has done anything correctly as far as strategy is concerned. but he's put more ordnance on the top of bad guys on the board r between afghanistan and pakistan, has killed more taliban and more al qaeda people. has targeted the bad guys more than anybody else. if we keep doing that. we may be successful. not in making afghanistan a free democracy, that will never happen. you're right. if we keep doing what we're doing in the northeast of pakistan, the northeast of afghanistan, the north northwest of pakistan, we may be able to destroy the enemy. i think that's what the president is trying to do. >> i agree with you. pakistan is where the real fig

in pakistan.ince then, of course, britain is one of the countries that has led the way in responding to the disastrous floods in pakistan, and so i think the u.k. and the u.s. and our allies have to communicate that as effectively as possible. and alongside a close relationship with india, to build a long-term strategic partnership with pakistan. those things go indices pence my together. >> president zardari said he wanted to address this committee, and we will facilitate that. foreign secretary, you said you'd like to sit in private, and so could i ask the public if they will vacate the gallery? be thank you very much. >> you've been watching a british foreign affairs committee looking at pakistan and afghanistan. members heard from the british foreign secretary, william hague. we have more british programming every wednesday with prime minister's question time. it airs live starting at 7 a.m. eastern right here on c-span2. while the u.s. senate gavel back for legislative work today following an

in pakistan. since then, of course, britain is one of the countries that has led the way in responding to the disastrous floods in pakistan, and so i think the u.k. and the u.s. and our allies have to communicate that as effectively as possible. and alongside a close relationship with india, to build a long-term strategic partnership with pakistan. those things go indices pence my together. >> president zardari said he wanted to address this committee, and we will facilitate th tuwane universitys an hour and 15 minutes. >> they're going to talk about the -- i'm going to introduce the moderator to say that he is the father of lee howard, an incoming freshman here this fall. it's a delight to have john harwood here and when you talk about people in journalism, john has got everything that you would think. he was started with the washington star, graduated magna consume lad di, and i graduated thank the lordy. [laughter] he's been on nsnbc and meet the press and everything you think of when you think

. >>> pakistan's president is criticizing president obama for not adding a visit to pakistan during this long ten-day tour of asia. in an interview with the "wall street journal," president musharraf says this after being asked if obama made a mistake in deciding not to visit his country. >> certainly he cannot look favory again in pakistan. y i -- i wouldn't say it's a mistake, that is his decision. yes, one would have preferred that he should have gone to pakistan to give new importance to -- give due importance to pakistan which is fighting terrorism and extremism and a strategic partner with the united states on this issue. >> musharraf said many pakistanis view the president as now siding with india since he spent so much time in that country. he added that the president's support of india's bid for a permanent seat on the u.n. security council will not be viewed favorably in pakistan. the white house has declined to comment yet on mr. musharraf's remarks. >>> efforts to restart stalled peaks may have hit a -- peace talks may have hit a roadblock after a clash over a plan to build 1

and pakistan but for the war effort not ganna stand well i think in the case of pakistan for example there may be some real calls for accountability like how could this happen and president zardari may be well jeopardized by this sort of thing same in yemen so i think in the long term. study of this we will not know the full effects of this for probably six months to a year because these things will take time to reverberate. in the end though as we've talked about before i don't believe the current policy that the obama administration has in place regarding the war is going to see a victory so. to the larger issue of the war nothing really that they related as you know chase you know that if you look at fifty two million dollars taken out of country by one of president karzai senior officials that should raise a few to a few eyebrows but again it will have an effect probably not is afghan yeah it is corruption in the afghan government or in afghanistan in general a new topic absolutely no i think you know iran is definitely one of the very interesting. just i circles vicious circles

look on the predator drones we've had three times as many as predator drone strikes in pakistan unders quite passive. we need to take further steps to get the pakistanis to take care of this business and i think that we're starting to do naep mean when the history's written on all of this and we fulminate about iraq and other things the real challenge and in almost all of the terror plots that we see in america have come out of pakistan, and that passive approach by the previous administration that really let things go to hell in pakistan, that's been reversed. and that's one thing that many republicans, conservatives, really don't have much of an answer to. >> well, men -- >> including george bush himself. >> -- i wish that i had more time because i love this issue taken needs more attention. i to the thank pete and brian. i appreciate you being here. >> great, thank you. >>> when we return i'll have some thoughts about my week filling in for chris math use. you're watching "hardball." only on msnbc. if you live for performance, upgrade to castrol edge advanced synthetic oil. with ei

pillai, described pakistan's involvement. "it was not just a peripheral role. they were literally controlling and coordinating it from the beginning till the end." counterterrorism officials argue over how close the link between lashkar-i-taiba and pakistani intelligence really is. lashkar was originally set up to fight on pakistan's behalf in kashmir, territory claimed by both india and pakistan sebastian rotella says there's plenty of evidence of some sort of connection. >> the debate among western and indian anti-terror officials is, what is the extent of that role? are we talking about a few isolated individuals within the intelligence service who go rogue or exceed their grasp, who have some awareness, but are playing a half-active, half- passive role? or, as other voices would argue, can an attack of this magnitude, of this sophistication-- two years in the plotting by a group that is so close to the security forces-- really be carried out without at least the knowledge of people higher up. >> suarez: pakistan says it's gotten more aggressive with lashkar

and pakistan. the only other country that the u.s. has endorsed so far is japan. and their allies, right? so india i think... this far exceeded the indian expectations but it has gone a huge way in shoring up indian trust with the u.s. because one thing we have to understand is that for 50 years the u.s. and india were on really different sides of the equation during the independence period. it's a huge progress that they've made over the last five years. to the point where india and the u.s.... the u.s. has the largest number of military maneuvers with india today, more than any other country which is itself, you know, so you have to look behind the sort of general sort of, you know, dragging of the feet and not much happening. but there are impacts, in fact, important steps that are being taken military and economic. so i think it was... this is something that will go a long way to cementing relations between the two. >> suarez: can the united states be expected to put its real diplomatic muscle behind that endorsement? >> it's an enormously complicated process.