of wall when there is war going on the army will claim a preeminent role the other is to have competent civilian government that produces economic growth impacts us history you've had by them not even his government certainly not. it will come back to. show that you actually were advisor to the pakistani foreign ministry you were in government i think the same time as you know do you feel the military were pushing you around at the time would you feel you had control over the i'm a lot more sort of positive about the experience i think that there was some really really big issues on which under the leadership of former foreign minister carter we were able to redefine the way that foreign policy is structured in pakistan there's a long history to the bitterness between afghanistan and pakistan but the redefinition of the repositioning of how islamabad and bindi relate to about a stand that happened on the not a bunny close watch and it happened not because the military was ready to jump in the military frankly needed to be convinced. you're
a political scientist at king's college london or throw a book on islamist parties in pakistan do you think the government was part of did enough to rein in the military and subsequent government to hold them to account she's talking about the constraints she was up against what's your view i think it's been it's been quite a mixed record but certainly for those that are that which you know was part of the problem was that there was absolutely no clarity of policy in the war on terror that the general musharraf regime supported was actually something that had absolutely no alternative to you know it continued with similar policies didn't question the war on terror the fundamentals of the war on terror the their reasoning strategies the success of those tracking and embolden the military and that the war on terror has. been most helpful for the military in pakistan you lack clarity and you lack the competence. when there may be bought i would have
to be much more competent and have much more clarity but i would be i would be very unhappy with myself if i'm told that we lack clarity on the foreign policy front because i like to believe that we did humongous on the foreign on directing the foreign policy we called it the region. the pivotal pakistan because we believe we don't need to have a great relationship with london or with washington d.c. but a great relationship with delhi after thirty five years no military government or civilian government in pakistan had the guts to normalize trade with india and we were told as a policy that we will not solve the problem could be solved should we change that do not underestimate the importance of that effort is the bond for heaven the bar is not high on effigy burning and parno not be. that might be correct just to deal with the so-called war on terror following last year's pretty horrific attack on the school and pushover in which the pakistani taliban the t.t.p. killed one hundred thirty two children the prime minister nawaz sharif said that pakistan would no longer differentiate between good taliban those who fight for
pakistan's interests abroad and bad taliban those attacking pakistan home isn't that basically an admission that that's what had been happening in the past including during your time in office that you guys backed the taliban as well as the so-called good talent i think primus in the past he was lumbering away for the last five years before he came into power because clearly that is the distinctive feature of the policy that we were trying to run and it is something which is recognised within the military quarters also and i have to give the military credit for being able to change that policy because it was where deep in their wins it was considered to be anyone who believed that the way it was a traitor to pakistan and they were able to change it and please say what you mean about president that idea but do give him credit for that region that and for the fact that the p.p.p. came with a complete regional focus with hillary clinton the us your counterpart at the time was she's slumbering as well in twenty eleven when she told you to your face that she had evidence that there'd been quote communication between the brutal fighting group in afghanistan and elements within the pakistan government prior to the
attack by the haqqani network on the us embassy and nato headquarters in kabul in september of twenty eleven how many times of foreign minister did you have to listen to allies of yours basically accuse you to your face to your states by. of terrorism well much too many times i had to listen to that knowledge and tell them they're all slumbering no i did not tell them there was something there were certain things which were which which hair and. beards of truth in them as of truth . which were partially relics of the past i believe which were super imposing on what the present was ok i will tell you one thing pakistan did not have the ability maybe to be able to take on every. network within the region all at the same time you know i think no one is also going to fight all of them but you don't have to sponsor and none as well and to support as their sponsoring in funding them was concerned clearly that i would like to believe that under our watch that was not the policy direction at all so when the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mike mullen told the senate in september twenty seventh that extremist
organizations serving as proxies of the government of pakistan are attacking afghan troops and civilians and u.s. soldiers the hakani network is a veritable arm of the i.s.i. was he slumbering to no he was misguided because i believe and i think history will prove us to be correct that pakistan was fantastically for all there is and the wrongs of the war in afghanistan. drone strikes what is your view of u.s. drone strikes on pakistani soil against pakistani militant and pakistani civilians are you a supporter we said that grown strange that counterproductive what is done to productive it means that they are actually fueling extremism and assisting people to attract more people towards extremism we said that they were against pakistan's territorial and we are used to the fact that you go back on the government so why do thanks to a u.s. state department cable do we hear the pakistani prime minister use of result your then boss saying in private i don't care if they the americans do drone strikes as
long as they get the right people will protest in the national assembly and then we'll ignore it how cynical how two faced with your government protesting in public against drone strikes but backing in but i guess what betty. i was the foreign minister the prime minister never said this in the room when i was in the room what is necessary to you about your status within the government no i was i was i was pretty much in every important meeting so that from the moment he said i. was foreign minister from two thousand and eleven march two thousand and eleven you know it is the end of five but what i'm saying is that i also want to find and i'm not going to i probably will you can have no problem and i'm not willing to believe that he would say a thing like this i really am not because i don't know possibly could be why not ok so when president zardari said to journalists on the record in two thousand and ten in lahore there are no differences between pakistan and the u.s. over any issue including drone attacks you're saying if you i think what he was referring to was the fact that the u.s. also believes that drone strikes are not a permanent solution and they do ok let me give you
a statistics for one for forty seven people who were on the hit list what they called the high value targets between yemen and pakistan the u.s. according to the most conservative reports killed one hundred one thousand one hundred forty seven people how is that. what does that say to you about propelling extremism i agree with you i'm saying to you i think drone strikes about the problem is your government in private didn't seem to think that what i'm saying is the president when he talked to reporters the president told michael hayden cia director president of the ari collateral damage worries you americans it does not worry me in reference to not in the rooms not in the in the room i was on. they take all these issues but they don't tell you what i'm saying is i refuse to believe you are in the public to say drones about while they're in the back going what i'm writing your own program thing is that it is. i mean if you're serious thank you thank you thank you what i'm saying is that it is not possible for me to believe that things change so much. because of my presence in
the room or not so what i'm saying is that some of these things could have been misrepresented or mr ported. misrepresented misreported what is your view on the relationship between the pakistani government and drone strikes i think if you take away the question of mr presentation we're still left with the fact that in actual fact drones intensified during musharraf regime we have when if you were drones then during the. president bush and president obama had a very difficult different perspective on daunte and presence as president obama happened to be there president. musharraf time president bush happened to be the president who believed and maybe troops on the ground putting your president can say no thanks we don't want these do you know they have a stick we have a parliamentary resolution which was probably unprecedented in the history of pakistan which clearly stipulated that no one in pakistan nor one in pakistan is authorized to give any acquisitions to drone strikes until the parliament ratified
documents from the cia and twenty thirteen showed that the i.s.i. was helping the cia picked all get for drone strikes in practice is this is this is the parliamentary resolution and let's go to. just moving on from the wider issue of drone strikes at home or touches. there is this constant accusation that pakistan is playing a double game on the one hand it's saying we're with you in the war on terror with sacrificing our soldiers we're fighting against the taliban and other groups on the other hand they're supporting those groups are turning a blind eye to doing how do you respond to that challenge the country is supposed to fulfill its own interests and pursue its own interests above and beyond any other country's interest so the issue this whole concept of a double game comes from the standard presuppose that assumption that somehow pakistan's game should be to fulfil what people that live in washington d.c. want but since game is not going to realize the united states and take twenty billion dollars from the u.s. first of all it wasn't twenty billion dollars second of actually but sun was forced because by and by by the admission of the former president of pakistan the military dictator musharraf and by admission of u.s.
authorities themselves they threatened to bomb pakistan back to the stone age the blame for drone strikes has to be it has to be on the party that's conducting the drone strikes and also the part of helping the drone indeed i mean that is a victim of drones in order to promote a crackdown is helping the u.s. or those. who do it so. i don't think there's enough proof that. you've heard what the sheriff said and i said what's your response well on the drone strikes i mean pakistan could easily deny the airspace and recently there was a t.t.p. commander who was killed on the afghan side with intelligence provided by the pakistanis so i mean that that is that case and when it came to militants they targeted the ones that they they fought the ones that they had to the appease the ones that they could they ignore the ones that didn't touch them and they did and they discreetly supported the ones who fought across their borders this was part of a strategy to try and maximize influence in the region did it work. because some people to what you have the t.t.p.
not blowing stone but we have to be of the certainly what was blowback it depends what situation you're looking at and i think this is actually the reason why yes you do try regional but box one remains massively isolated internationally and regionally you know interesting one doesn't tire from hearing how much blood the world has given in terms of trying to reform. three thousand five hundred or even less than that the total number of soldiers who have lost their lives in that time in pakistan six thousand soldiers and policemen have lost their lives in the same period i bet they were fighting people that they created themselves i bet at the same time they were funding them they were giving them arms and ammunition and money and the same kind of fighting the whole the whole you're conceding you're conceding that the people who died fighting the pakistani armed forces were fighting people that they helped create you conceding no i'm not at all conceding that i'm saying how remarkably sadistic do you think we are to be able to even give us an argument like this it's a stock in the evidence that you refusing to see maybe pakistan's draw is to
protect its own people before the united states and. that it will give you know what i think is an area i mean the statistics are off the supposed approximately four thousand people who died only seven hundred twenty six have been named all of those only about one hundred sixty nine are legit militants they are disproportionately affecting civilians as foreign minister you never you never took this up the only issue is that you get to. where you want on nearly not only me as foreign minister for you to say that's not really not i'm not i'm going to be a leader because i believe. in ensuring that there was no double feasting on pakistan's wrong policy because i take myself seriously and i take the trust and the responsibility of the people of pakistan that is put in me talking of as an elected member very seriously let's take a sort of double face in the accusations that are made against your government you were the defacto foreign minister during the u.s. raid. bin laden's compound in about about in may twenty eleven in which he was
killed when you got the news that bin laden was killed were you surprised shocked even that he had been found in pakistan. or was your reaction more like they found him in the place we kind of knew he was but we didn't want anyone to know. which one was it what was your reaction of illinois. it was completely i think it would be underselling it also i mean we went in we don't know what happened and we were we went still we don't know how to react. your own former cabinet colleagues defense minister. said in october the president zardari and the head of the pakistani army than general kiani both knew that bin laden was in pakistan did you know you know in the room no he was not in this he was not in the defense minister was in the defense minister the fact is the defense minister was not in the room and i wasn't and that's a fact and i can assure you the defense minister doesn't know the first thing about what the former defense minister doesn't know the first thing that was done in the country and was he pointed out something. like bettors it was used on the defense
minister of government. it's up to the government to appoint the defense minister by appointing someone and this is the defense minister who said he found out about the raid because his daughter called him from the us almost that's how he was going to let me let me do this you go the little you want to point this person as and then that they were in control of. the army in the room is just risk and i just responded at least briefly and i completely agree with you on this one defense minister in pakistan is the most ineffective minister who knows nothing about the defense or the foreign policy of pakistan that is the fact that he's not you know not guest of the show this. book out of it was interesting because if thank you with a bit of them point so you are saying nobody in the government had a clue about bin laden being back there even though he was in a military town in a pub compound down the road from a military academy and the military had no clue he was
a seriously so the people in the room in this room i can tell you present the diary prime minister used to. myself as the minister of state for foreign affairs secretary for in the first military chief i said chief six people in the room right either all of them had to be fantastic actors must get job in hollywood or at least bollywood because they all made a great pretense of being still and shock like i explained to you and not knowing how to react if they knew how to react when we give us the statement like we did because we don't know how to react you give us a statement out which we had to almost retract the next day. so when u.s. defense secretary leon panetta told congress at the time in may twenty eleven that pakistan was either involved or incompetent in terms of bin laden's whereabouts i'm guessing you're going to go with incompetence guilty for being incompetent ok so when cyril almeda the pakistani journalist said in the piece at the time if we didn't know bin laden was in about about we are a failed state if we didn't know we are a rogue state if the united states of america could not find that osama bin laden it's that make it a rogue state or a failed state i think we rushed too quickly to call pakistan and the likes of
pakistan the failed state of the focus on us tougher because the video was living down the road from the pentagon i think we would judge the united states you know you may you might as well what the fact of the matter is that there was a lot of intelligence agencies bitter around ok so if they didn't know and we didn't know we were all in the same page we are all in one last question before we have to take a break perception we do accept the people see pakistan in a pretty bad way when it comes to the subject of political violence extremism terrorism i think many pakistanis accept that many pakistanis see pakistan at a pretty bad place but they all happened after nine hundred seventy nine pakistan was at a very good place when you put in extremism into the thought process into the minds and bodies of pakistanis then them to be with the in and then said ok done with it extremism thought take out where was the exit strategy what the hell man i mean what they're really going to take a break where in part two we're going to be talking to him about the intractable conflict in kashmir we're going to hear more from our panel of experts and we're going to hear from our audience here in the oxford union that's after the break.
on the streets of greece anti immigrant violence is on the rise there or you have to go. and increasingly migrant farm workers are victims of vicious beatings. is helping the pakistani community to find a voice the stories we don't often hear told by the people who. live them undocumented and under attack this is zero on al jazeera. al jazeera is a very important source of information for many people around the world when all the cameras have gone i'm still here go into areas that nobody else is going to talk to people that nobody else is talking to and bringing that story to the forefront. of struggles.
between police look at it is pretty much what it's pretty much full of pleasure. out of the goodness of the with the only possible but i mean the right of what used to be an intimate look at life in cuba today is what. your people think but the government that you pay your money cuba on al-jazeera. hello i'm david gopal and then these are top stories and al-jazeera another of donald trump's allies has been given immunity in the investigation into michael cohen this time it's alan why solberg he said chief financial officer of the trump organization who the wall street journal describes as trump's longtime financial
gate keeper well vi's oberg has already been called to testify in the inquiry to cohen president trump's former personal lawyer and pleaded guilty on tuesday to campaign finance violations saying he paid hush money to women who alleges that they had affairs with trump cheriton so yes more. if always sober did was testified to a grand jury in order to give evidence against michael cohen which may or may not have led to michael cohen pleading guilty about a conspiracy to break campaign finance rules though. it might not be as bad as some are suggesting because of that's over it's done he's given his testimonies he's told prosecutors what he knows about the trouble goes ations wrote all this and it's over a real beginning to get so my reporting suggesting that's exactly what did happen he talked to he said what he knew about the current case he hasn't been called bug the family of us republican senator john mccain says he's talking all treatment for brain cancer mccain announced he had the disease last year his family say he's
quote surpassed expectations for his survival eighty one year old mccain has been a vocal opponent of u.s. president almost from. zimbabwe's president emerson man to god is calling for unity after the country's top court upheld this disputed election when the main opposition party challenged the results saying the july thirtieth election was rigged in favor of money gaga led to violence to street protests but in a unanimous decision the constitutional court found the vote was free and fair ecuador says it's open to humanitarian corridor for venezuelans to reach proof before it introduces new entry restrictions on saturday the un has compared the mass exodus of migrants from venezuela to the refugee crisis in the mediterranean growing numbers are fleeing the economic meltdown and political turmoil in
venezuela into neighboring brazil and colombia well those other headlines stay with us now head to head continues next. thank you. welcome back to head to head on al-jazeera we've been talking about pakistan with the country's former foreign minister hinna rabani khar who's here with me in the oxford union we've been talking about drone strikes the role of the military the raid on bin laden let's talk about kashmir the former president of pakistan general musharraf once said that kashmir runs in our blood and we will never budge an inch on it recently general right he'll sharif the head of the pakistani army has called kashmir pakistan's juggler vein hasn't this obsession with kashmir in this kind of hyperbolic rhetoric done more harm than good to pakistan over the past seven decades especially in recent years. maybe i don't think you can underestimate or take away the importance of the question you are portrayed as
a figment of pakistan's imagination and crazy pakistanis going crazy over kashmir ok we have resolution forty seven of the security council of the un to prove on the request of the indian government went to the security council the security council asked for a certain number of things to be done which included the holding off of the site will which would determine yes it was in one thousand forty eight to be precise and then there was another resolution one thousand nine hundred eighty and then there was another one and this is been a constant theme would you agree that the military's role in kashmir policy especially in terms of backing various insurgent groups has been a very violent insurgency kill tens of thousands been since the late one nine hundred eighty s. do you think that has been a way for the military to control foreign and defense policy in pakistan subverted even have a bloated budget beyond what really should have pretty much a lot of economic work and academic work even by indians proves that the kashmir insurgency in some ways was instigated by the government of india more than by
pakistan that they made it happen to deal with my specific point about the packers i mean to since over the last twenty five years the military. he will have a different view on any issue which has to do with territory then a politician because they would try and find in nonmilitary we need to deal with the situation and that's why within the constitution the military has a certain role and the parliament has a certain role and executive has a certain but even more militarily the certain provocative things you can do when you went to india yourself in twenty eleven as foreign minister you kicked off your visit not by meeting your indian counterpart or bt with the elected indian government but first by meeting with kashmiri separatist what's the harm in that you don't think pakistani foreign ministers meeting separatist groups before they meet there is provocative at all absolutely not you didn't they are part of your shop there will be a lot when you wrote their part of the dialogue why is hafiz mohammad saeed founder of a group in pakistan and internationally leader of the now rebranded jamaat ud dawa he has a ten million dollars bounty on his head is on the un on the us terrorist watch
list and yet lives a pretty normal free middle class life in the city of lahore he holds public meetings he goes on t.v. how does that work started a lot is concerned believe me we had zero love loss for them and after state i don't think i believe is irrelevant this man is wandering around saying some outrageous things doing press conferences got police protection why i think he's been tried i don't think that there is a free man right now and clearly the courts let him go did the judiciary in pakistan is free and our system is very similar to that of india so please when you you have a few empty of anti terror laws that allow you to round up hundreds of people all the time just as there are several hundred people detained without charge in pakistan many people who say you detain lots of people you don't like i'm going to go you don't detain them they'll draw their own conclusions from that i'm just going to say that this is not somebody i'm willing to protect in any way on this show or. you did not look i did absolutely try my absolute level best to make
sure that he was not somebody that the state of pakistan associated with any which way you are i think you are now is the wrong minister in two thousand and eight when the mumbai attacks happened i was in pakistan has been a q. sponsoring those attacks you were in you were foremost in twenty eleven when american citizen david headley pleaded guilty to helping militant groups and carrying out those attacks which killed one hundred sixty people he testified that quote operated under the umbrella of the i.s.i. and coordinated with each other the i.s.i. provided assistance to law school financial military moral when you heard him say that did you kick start an investigation into the side to see if those claims were true i think we were briefed as to the credibility of those claims and he was considered to be a double triple type of an agent sort of a reason to investigate his client who had very little credibility reefed does not invalidate the briefing is where you told you this morning is what we asked for and they just said we didn't do it and you said as i said we i think we directed a change of policy which is throwing at you. over the things that are you asking did you hold an eye into account we tried to push as much as possible i still
believe today i believe at that time that it was in pakistan's best interest to get a resolution to the trial it was in our best interest. i can remind you of the fact that the some truth i express trials are still ongoing and then get them and us have a very similar judicial process because unfortunately we cannot push the judicial process is when you are independent my point was that when you want to bend the laws to arrest and detain people you do not own that we go to the parliament and these don't say that maybe i would hold you accountable for that we go to the parliament hold me accountable but on the other side. i don't want to blow this matter well let me let me let me explain please explain the difference between pakistan of the one nine hundred seventy s. or six or it is when military regimes was there was that the military did not need to get laws passed through parliament to get those powers now they have to go to parliament that is under the protection of pakistan and under the action in aid of civil power regulation the military has the power to round up people they suspect in counter operation and they had to go to parliament to get right and they didn't
round up half as moment so it is my point they didn't run that is something that's really what i was making about the legal process and one last question before i go to our panel president zardari said in. two thousand and thirty five thousand pakistanis have been killed in militant attacks many of them a lot of people would say by fighters coming home from kashmir in blow back people who were trained radicalized in kashmir they came home brought that expertise the ideology that violence with them is at a point you would share no i would share it on the other border and i think you are selectively choosing to do that on the eastern border because the reality was that it was on the western border it was the arms and ammunition and the money which had come from all over the world which had gone to train people to go in only from afghanistan global finance against me ok let me as i do said that it was our policy to ensure that there was nobody no instigation on that end because we were trying to pursue the part of negotiations let's put that point to our panel. time magazine's pakistan correspondent for six years blowback from kashmir do you believe there's been blowback from kashmir from oh there's certainly been groups in
militants who have fought in kashmir and then subsequently fought inside pakistan and those documents and the people from j. from j yeah from from these other groups you can find them they've been on pakistan's kill list of you know boxers most wanted list so that you know at that point and in terms of his point about genuine want to resolve it bilaterally through trade where would you responsibility well it's an intractable problem because. ones too. raise the kashmir issue because it embarrasses india pakistan can assert some moral authority over india in that way but the problem is a pox and so isolated it's the only country that is actually saying this they can't get anyone else on board by contrast the indians know that this is an inconvenience a source of embarrassment but they also know that the economically strong enough to ignore pakistan and to make sure the other people ignore pakistan which are if. you were invited to the pakistani foreign ministry says that pakistan has been trying
to use caution to embarrass india and india managed to shrug it off i'm guessing you disagree with them this is a problem kashmir is india not pakistan it's a it's even if we accept the indian claims over kashmir particularly if we accept the indian claims of a catch me then it's an entirely indian problem to solve yes pakistan made some very very poor choices in supporting various militant groups at a certain point in time especially during the ninety's but other than that blemish the record the pakistan hasn't actually there's actually something that as a pakistani i'm proud of i'm proud of the fact that i belong to a country that stands up for people's rights particularly when it comes to kashmir because that's the one place where nobody else is willing to stand up not the british not the americans not the saudis not the iranians not the burmese or the other parties but only the pakistanis let me put the point to dr homer if there's a political scientist at king's college london or throw a book on is the most politics in pakistan do you believe that pakistan's role in kashmir has been a wholly positive one on the support of oppressed peoples at the popular level
there is immense support for that and of course it is an issue that in which the indian government has played a very reprehensible role as well my concern is being and particularly with regard to this or that it that with actually without since they did not question the war on terror narrative since the let the military play out its responses to the war on terror since they actually lead to a militarization of all policy in that in that way they have. i'm doing it on a platter to india because now every time we have a conversation about me india says oh but your country is a terrorist country and you know you need to actually fix terrorism response that very briefly do you believe the pakistani military has no interest in a solution just because along with its going on it gets resources it gets status it gets to control policy do you think the pakistani army is actually in a slightly complicated situation with that because on the one hand they have more to generations of soldiers with the whole question of course meat and independence
because. and at the same time we see that the people of kashmir are not necessarily now looking to join with pakistan any more let me let me put that specific problem is not exactly massive fans of your country poll in two thousand and ten found that only fifty percent of pakistan administered kashmir pakistan or mr kashmir want to be part of pakistan only two percent of the people in indian administered kashmir i would i would be very happy if the people get the choice to choose between india pakistan or in the independence of independence i would be very happy if they choose an independent state all to go with. just they are always that policy that is absolutely the policy that is the right question india pakistan independent exactly just before you do is clarify for me explain to me is the current position of the pakistani government to have a referendum in kashmir with three questions on the on the ballot paper what i'm saying is pakistan is committed to the people getting the right to choose. that that is. the are completely committed to the united nations security council
doesn't have his emotional stress so i'm wondering if. i'm that's not part of the resolution what i'm saying is that as far as as far as the kashmiri people is concerned your view is absolutely my view and i was here when you were in office as was my view when ok let's go to our audience for being very waiting very patiently here in the oxford union let's go to the lady in just a third on the from here yes your party champions democracy but feel student substance implemented even within the. on party one but two follows the next you yourself are from a political family how do you expect there to be meaningful change in the country if the people in charge of that change got there because of who they're related to rather than what they've done for the country. i don't think you can single pakistan in that hillary clinton will be following president bill clinton there are many many examples all over the body and she served as a senator and secretary of state what below will bhutto do before you i'm going to leave you the university student the time yes you know this great town in pakistan
you know his mother is right there so it's there i know i think i think clearly the fact of the matter is that in pakistan and in all developing countries it doesn't matter where you were born ok i have been born to a privileged background and i will not take that away from the fact that oh yes i believe every step of the way here i got there because i was the daughter of a father was already a politician that is the fact that is the reality how will it be changing that by giving opportunity to more people who are not maybe as privileged as i have been right institutionalizing those changes for instance in parliament today there are women who are nominated to political parties and many women from middle class background even more middle class background make it to parliament so they can institutionalize those changes so pakistan you know don't judge pakistan for he does today judge pakistan for we're just on. when he was appointed as to run the party he was a university undergraduate what was your reaction when you heard that news we still
like you were when you had the below no no i was not really shocked not at all i think it was a great leader i thought it was the most unexpected thing to do i'm being honest with you it was the most expected thing to do the pakistan people's party presence is just a name that's a fact ok let's go back to the audience because the gentleman here in the front row hundreds of the muslims in pakistan have been killed simply on grounds of faith whether it's in their mosques their homes or place to business how can pakistan in call kate a culture of tolerance when your own const. to sion and laws explicitly target and with the muslims making it a crime punishable by three years present or by death under the blasphemy laws for an embassy to call themselves a muslim isn't it time pakistan repealed these laws and did it state sponsored persecution of these ok i'm embarrassed to be a pakistani when i remember the fact that the vite in our flag represents the right of minorities and guy doesn't mohammad ali jinnah even before august one hundred
forty seven said that you are allowed to go to your mosque you are allowed to go to it is not the business of state he said to question your religion i'm embarrassed that we've done to minorities what we've done in pakistan i will accept it so just to be crystal clear in terms of policy levels things like a pakistani goes to get a passport has to declare that what he is a non muslim that's an outrageous i think that is completely unrequired that's my personal view ok let's go back to the audience judgement here in the second row with losses hi i'm david frum and action censorship the pakistani supreme court recently called for reform of the blasphemy laws and we welcome this first step given the way in which the law is used disproportionately against muslims abused to fulfill personal vendettas and in a way that encourages extradition punishments including killings but isn't it about time that pakistan all together abolished a law that is both counterproductive and who inconsistent with the basic right to free expression freedom of religion liberty of conscience ok can i correct your facts before place on to that it is not disproportionately. bent towards
minorities and i'll give you a simple fact apparently in the period of two years and this is when i was in government of this is like two years back there were about three hundred. under the blasphemy law which were put there out of that there were nine or ten which were against minorities in the rest of them were apparently against muslims and there's not a single person within pakistan who has been punished under blasphemy law ok so the blasphemy i'm not going to try and justify blasphemy law with your colleagues were . so your colleagues were murdered yes. to both of them were quote unquote government did nothing yes at that time our government believed that that was not the time to propagate this issue further because they could not get any results or what have you i'm just telling you i feel that in this year in two thousand and fifteen the supreme court judgment on that particular issue it basically indicates the stance that i mean what did you change the law during the sheriff's regime
during which time there was a real effort to try and change the law there was huge resistance against it ok and they don't we don't write that again a reality we need to get pakistan out of this atmosphere of extremist thought and people fighting we created this circumstance or reason and i think this would be a natural step but i'm going to stick only about you would have a very. genuine question was it because you feared for your life a lot of politicians saw but someone says that time it wasn't feeling for your life as well as much as for us all people being killed no no i'm talking about them talking about someone to see at that time people were scared for their lives people were being killed right in their intent or everybody was scared for their lives i want to be able to really really get some audience questions back and let's go to a gentleman here i said a question about afghanistan and pakistan have any interest in seeing the democratic afghanistan and do pakistan's leaders have any vested interest in the continuation of the global war on terror i think it's the wrong question to ask i
mean pakistan is probably the country which is the most affected because of instability war and strife in the understand whatever happens in afghanistan within minutes within seconds permeates through the borders and entered into our country so we have zero interest in strife in the one in fact let's go back to get some rest in the short run this lady here in february two thousand and fifteen general musharraf admitted to guardian during the karzai regime. government government was working against afghanistan. ordered into service intelligence to train the taliban and undermine afghan governments the question is why does controversial policy or fluff and hatred toward afghanistan i would not believe general musharraf is dumb enough to say something like that on record even if he was doing it so i cannot receive it. well here and here i have i would i just don't more dishonest government no i was clearly not anywhere close to the foreign policy or security blanket every time there's
a difficult question you're either in the room or not in the room the first you let's get you to let me go to let you go yes you're the boss is my name came on i thought i met you in two thousand and twelve. and i asked you three questions afterwards i sign off says approach me and they asked me why i had asked you those questions so i had this time i work out perched by anyone so my question is you can you sit back and you say that you don't justify civilian deaths but recently. the leader of the taliban afghan taliban has been known to be injured and is being treated in a possible which is in pakistan baillargeon was found in pakistan. is in pakistan. died in pakistan so how can you justify civilian deaths there are three million afghans who are living in pakistan pakistan has tried very hard to put a biometric system in place pakistan has tried very hard to fence the border pakistan what three one hundred ninety six or even if that number three hundred
ninety one border of course to check the movement off at pakistan and one funny then what does one to put one hundred nine border post so we have tried very hard to convince our one friends that it is in our interest both of our interests to ensure that this border is manned properly so you stop blaming us for whatever happens you say gather tools to do that thank you thank you. ok to the local something that's affected me and my family a very personal level is the systematic and ongoing genocide against shia muslims in pakistan in july twenty third teen there was an interview where you said that your government had a deep and abiding commitment to find those responsible and to prevent those going forward so can i ask what you specifically have done when you were in government to prevent those attire. and why those have been so those actions were so unsuccessful because we still see increasing attacks and genocide again i'm not going to justify that that is part of in some with
a related thing to the minorities because we have created this this is the mainstream which is sunni and muslim and everybody else is a minority and some is ok and we feel that what i'm saying is past policies in previous times have created this atmosphere where people are free to kill but right that's true policies have done the earth but do we have here is your government between between twenty eleven and twenty thirteen i believe more than a thousand years were killed in pakistan that was when you were foreign minister what practical steps did you takes ok we're going to protect this minority is being killed you know we were we did try our best to give as much security because that's what you can do these are bad root deep rooted problems which cannot be done away with india's or months or even years you know i believe what is happening in pakistan what started happening in pakistan ten years back you terms of you have this huge military fighting all sorts of places being competent people out there with. the relentless killing of shias that has gone on for a long time and pakistan has suffered
a massive sort of blow repeatedly over the last six months. and militants and terrorists have been killed in police encounters in pakistan more than once so there's there's no question that there's blowback against those policies but the point is that these these issues are going to take a long time because of you know it let's go to the lady there is waiting there and yes to the public. so my question is related to the army's interference in the pakistani government it's a very basic thing when will pakistan be free from interference in governance and become a credible nation for itself for its neighbors and for the rest of the world when pakistan has had longer then it is as i said under constitutional rule pakistan is on its way to the. you need to give this country time i am the first one to accept that pakistan has suffered greatly because of these constant military takeovers are the we haven't had to run
a constitution going to go through he went into a decade we're a very very young nation democratically we are tiny be appealing even in the current give us time ok let's take the question here for the children in my name as a religion i'm from baluchistan in a decade over fourteen thousand people have become the victim of inforce disappearance with journalists intellectuals students. bodies being dumped on the roadside and my question is i believe you have to believe that your government was complicit in the atrocities or you have just adopted a silence on those atrocities into the which is it when they come into prisons and he announces ceasefire that last for six months so clearly we are complicit in two thousand and ten we give the first broad clemency for anyone who wants to come for dialogue you know i have no reason to doubt what you're saying but sixteen thousand doesn't look like a correct number because the commission that was formed the book it doesn't hundred
persons or you know close to that and out of that there were under which were taken to the commission is one hundred eighty seven ok last question. from india how are you planning to bring peace. considering again that is just on a pivot endorsed on we just want them to have the right to choose get to move the to agree to that i will get promised in the us to have to agree to the same. eighty and perhaps optimistic note depending on which angle you look at it we're going to leave it there in a rabbani khar thank you for joining me on the head to head thanks to our panel and audience here in the oxford union head to head will be back next week and we'll be talking about india which i'm sure he will be pleased to hear we're talking about india and head to head next week so do join the program again then good night thank.
hello there we've had some welcome rain in sydney around four point two millimeters of the stuff doesn't sound too impressive does it but actually for the entire month we've only seen around five point six millimeters and so it is quite a decent amount we could do with some more though because this month in oldest you would normally expect around eighty one millimeters of rain so we could do with plenty more wet weather and we are going to see that as we head through the next few days of saturday and sunday we'll see some showers not only in sydney but also in many southeastern parts of queensland and down through the eastern parts of new south wales and into victoria plenty of showers here then further towards the west fine and dry for us in perth at the south coast or of western australia though may just have a bit more cloud and maybe one or two showers here perth they should be dry over towards new zealand our area of low pressure continues to spiral away towards
oblivion and behind it it should be a lot drier and bright if in new zealand over the next few days still not going to be that warm though we're only looking at a maximum of around ten in christchurch that will rise eventually as we head into sunday this time getting to around thirteen to the northern parts of asia and we've had two storms with us the first one cimarron continues to work away from us as does soon like plenty of rain though following it. they're not intrinsically linked to the slave trade where you are so i'm consistent and insurance companies there's no way to separate back and of terror from the labor on the plantation from the profits that lou produced. had asked in europe industrialized slavery and amassed its great wealth the resistance began to take full on from sugar to rebellion episode to have slavery roots on al-jazeera.
where they're on line this isn't some abstract issue we need to be attached to their stops or if you join us on sect rather than stopping terrorism it's creating a base is a dialogue and just the community is want to add to this conversation we need a president who's willing to be a villain or a short while everyone has a voice i bought in civil society i did but i never get listening to by those in the corridors of power joining the global conversation. on out to zero. this is zero. hello and welcome i'm watching the news hour live from london coming up a mother trump ally gets immunity and this time it's alan weisel where he's the
chief financial officer of the trump organization. zanu p.f. supporters celebrate as zimbabwe's top court confirms president lot of guys are victory dismissing opposition claims of breaking. ecuador opens a humanitarian corridor to help hundreds of venezuelans reach group before new restrictions begin on saturday. the major new study says even the occasional alcoholic drink is bad for your health. and in sport all the latest from the asian games for japanese teenager kaku ikea becomes the first swimmer to win six gold medals i just think. donald trump's week appears to have gotten worse and neither one of his allies has been given immunity in the investigation to michael cohen and this time. he's the
chief financial officer of the trump organization with the wall street journal describes as trump's longtime financial gatekeeper. has already been called to testify into the inquiry into cohen president trump's former personal lawyer and pleaded guilty on tuesday to campaign finance violations saying he had paid hush money before the election to women who alleged that they had affairs with trump. well alan lives of our house work for the trump family for more than four decades serving us on trump's executive vice president as well as c.f.o. for the trump organization since two thousand is also the treasurer of the charm family's charitable foundation which is being investigated by the state of new york and on thursday david packer c of the national enquirer his publisher was also given immunity in the cohen case to discuss his role and hush money payments is fine if a former u.s. associate deputy attorney general and he says granting immunity well help
prosecutors learn more about what's happened it is an absolute crime for a corporation to make any contribution to a political campaign they can't spin one cent providing that assistance directly to a candidate and so granting immunity based upon the public record that seems as though substantial sums were paid from the trump corporation to pay off or to reimburse mr cohen for payments made to these the porn stars or the playboy bunny for the purpose of influencing the outcome of the election so that being a campaign contribution and that is what basically muster cohen is already pled guilty to the corporation is equally guilty including those who operate the corporation will you grant immunity because under the united states constitution
unlike in great britain there is a so-called fifth amendment that enable someone to remain silent in the face of questioning if they believe an answer could incriminate themselves or their close company in crime but by granting immunity now they will compel a complete confession of whether and how in the circumstances in which these payments were made. meanwhile trump has abruptly canceled his top diplomats trip to north korea secretary of state micro paya had said on thursday he planned more talks in pyongyang but trump has told him now not to go saying on twitter there had not been enough progress indeed nuclearization talks this is the first time he's publicly admitted that talks have stalled after june meeting with the north korean leader kim jong. castro is following events for us in washington so heidi let's first talk about the issue of eisenberg now being given immunity how big of a development is this for trump. well it is the cap of just an
extraordinary week of legal woes that is laying out the feet of the president your description of weisel burke as the financial gate keeper for trump and for his business and personal interests is spot on this is a man who is not only the chief financial officer of the trump organization but he is the only non member trustee who is overseeing the president's personal interests in his companies while he's in office not to mention was reportedly assisted in preparing trump's tax returns the fact that he is cooperating with prosecutors is only the latest of the number of people who have flipped and have gained immunity in order to seal the case against other trump associates michael cohan the former personal attorney of donald trump of course he pleaded guilty to eight
criminal counts on tuesday one of them including campaign finance violations that implicate the president himself that's two men add to that another name david pecker a longtime friend of trump the publisher of the national enquirer tabloid who told authorities told prosecutors that he and cohen together worked at the behest of then candidate trump in order to pay this hush money to those two women who are alleging affairs with trump and not to forget we also have paul mann afford another big name to remember he is the former campaign chairman of the trump campaign he was found guilty also on tuesday to tax and bank fraud so the fact that all of these close associates and perhaps the closest people you can get to trump outside of his personal family the fact that they have been convicted or cooperating with prosecutors is an extraordinary turn of events and certainly adding cause for worry
to the president. and heidi we need to ask you about the latest move from the state department which says president trump has ordered it to quote we direct more than two hundred million dollars of economic aid for projects in gaza and the west bank can you tell us more about that that's right this was announced in a very terse lee worded letter delivered from the state department to congress today it says that the those that money more than two hundred million dollars will will be redirected to other priorities this money was intended to go to n.g.o.s in the inn for palestinians to benefit from food assistance medical assistance and civic aid and it is a decision the cancellation or rather the redirection of this money was a decision that was long or shadowed and reportedly made by trump's son in law gerry cushion or who has decided that this would be the best way to lay the
ground for his wall expected middle east peace plan which we still have no details about however many are saying this will probably have the opposite of the intended effect the palestinian authority has not communicated with u.s. officials since donald trump decided to recognize roussillon as israel's capital and moved the u.s. embassy there in may and many are fearing that not only will this harden the palestinian authority stands against the u.s. for peace negotiations but could also open an even stronger foothold for hamas to control the region. thank you very much right ali abunimah is the co-founder of the independent online news site electronic intifada you can tell us more about this and he joins me now from chicago can you tell us what kind of an impact this loss of funding will have on the palestinians.
well it may have some impact since there are some health programs in food assistance programs and the condition of palestinians is a very severe because of decades of israeli occupation i don't think that the material impact will be as severe as the cuts the u.s. has already employed mantid from under the u.n. agency for palestinian refugees which have really inflicted. great suffering on some of the most vulnerable palestinians in the west bank and gaza strip and in refugee camps in other countries but i think the political message of these cuts is to tell the palestinians that the american approach now is of putting essentially a gun to their heads that they must go along with whatever the americans and of course israel dictates or the u.s. will cut their funds cutoff humanitarian aid go along with israel's
siege which they deliberately inflict suffering on palestinian civilians and of course. you know it's hard to see how the united states thinks this will help them get their way i can't imagine there is a single palestinian who is going to say oh well we really want that to usa id money so let's give up our rights in jerusalem or let's give up the right to return there is no not ticked to it it is just the logic of bullying and bludgeoning palestinians ok right said that case if they aren't going to. you know we've heard this usa dare or lack of usaid are there any other nations or any other organizations that can fill this funding hole. well two things to send about this one is the u.s.
a id the so-called bilateral assistance is always political you know the u.s. doesn't provide support out of the goodness of its heart this is aimed at achieving american political aims so a lot of this funding was probably not doing much good for palestinians anyway so i think a lot of palestinians will say good riddance to funding that was aimed at sort of promoting specific political agendas i think the other important point that needs to be race is that the u.s. has not cut off funding to the palestinian authority security forces and it's important to know that because the palestinian authority security forces then main goal know their main mission is to help israel to manage the occupation and to control the palestinian population so really the message here is the u.s. is saying we won't fund things like food assistance and education but we're very
happy to fund repression and occupation the abba naima thank you very much from the electronic and intifada which is the new site thank you thank you at least one hundred eighty nine people have been injured during protests on gaza's border with israel the demonstrations are called the great march of return and that been going on for months that israeli government accuses some of the demonstrators of being terrorists who want to cross into israel and carry out attacks trout stratford said this from the gaza israel border. this is the twenty second week in a row that we've seen these protests on friday along the gaza israel we've seen a lot of gas fired in the last couple of what sounds like live ammunition as well i think it's fair to say though that there are less people here this week than we have seen in recent weeks how massa says that the protesters have every right to continue these demonstrations and will continue them i must say is until israel's