- 3 months ago
This special report examines the escalating tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan following the collapse of peace talks in Istanbul. The discussion details the Taliban's threat of a "decisive response" against Islamabad, focusing on the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and a potential multi-front crisis for the Pakistani military. Diplomatic efforts stalled after Pakistan's demand for action against the TTP was not met by the Afghan delegation. This situation follows warnings from Pakistan's Defence Minister Khwaja Asif regarding a potential "open war" and highlights internal security challenges in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Concurrently, the report addresses Bangladesh's foreign policy shift under Mohammad Yunus's interim government, marked by the welcome of Zakir Naik and Ibtisham Ilahi Zaheer in Dhaka, alongside military meetings with Pakistan's General Sahir Shamshad Mirza. These developments raise concerns about a new security challenge for India, particularly in light of India's 'Operation Trishul' military exercise near the western border, assessing the implications for regional stability.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening. The Afghanistan-Pakistan peace talks have collapsed.
00:05The Taliban have now threatened to bomb Islamabad if Pakistan violates Afghanistan's airspace.
00:12There's a spike in tensions along the 2,600 km long Durand line.
00:17The Pakistan army is now regularly and routinely being targeted both in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and in Balochistan.
00:26But the sting is in the tail with the Taliban, the TTP and not the TTA.
00:34The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan is now telling the Tehreek-e-Labbaik.
00:38Tehreek-e-Labbaik is based in southern Pakistan Punjab province.
00:42They're telling the T-T-Labbaik, Tehreek-e-Labbaik to pick up arms in Pakistan's Punjab province against the Pakistani state.
00:50So is Pakistan now set to bleed on all fronts?
01:04Taliban threatens to bomb Islamabad.
01:12Afghan-Pakistan peace talks collapse.
01:15Pakistan defense minister threatens an all-out war.
01:26Taliban declares open season on Pakistani forces.
01:37Urges the Tehreek-e-Labbaik to rise against the Pakistani forces.
01:43Pakistan's two-and-a-half front war is our top focus on India first.
01:50There's an old saying, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
01:57And Pakistan's Field Marshal Asim Munir is now all set to pay a very heavy price for that lunch that he had at the White House.
02:04And the price is the blood of Pakistanis.
02:07Why?
02:08Because during the peace talks, Afghans were taken aback when Pakistan spoke of a deal with a third country
02:15for the use of their airspace to target terror.
02:19So what's the price of that free lunch?
02:22Air bases and overflight for US assets in Pakistan.
02:26The strategic depth that Pakistan lost in Afghanistan.
02:30And that's where I shift to the other big story we're tracking here on India first.
02:35The strategic depth.
02:36Pakistan has lost Afghanistan.
02:37But is it hoping to gain that in Bangladesh?
02:41There are top Pakistan army officers in Bangladesh.
02:43As is Lashkar-e-Taiba, a close confidant of Hafiz Mohammed Said.
02:49And the preacher of hate, Zakir Naik.
02:52Zakir Naik is all set to receive red carpet treatment in Dhaka.
02:57Naik is a fugitive from law in India.
03:00Afghanistan has accused Pakistan of sabotaging the peace negotiations.
03:03They've threatened to target Islamabad next time their airspace is violated
03:07or cities like Kabul and Kandahar are targeted.
03:11Even the Qatari and the Turkish interlocutors were taken aback
03:14by tensions between the Taliban and their erstwhile benefactors, Pakistan.
03:21There were multiple points of tension, multiple points of friction,
03:24including US having access to Pakistani air bases and airspace
03:29to launch strikes across the border into Afghanistan.
03:32Now, will this lead to that 2,600-kilometre-long Durand line
03:36once again being set on fire?
03:39And are tensions flaring up even inside Pakistan?
03:43Whether it's in Khaybar, Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan
03:47with a threat of this fire now threatening to singe parts
03:51of Pakistan's Punjab province.
03:53Massive escalation in Pakistan-Afghanistan tensions
04:19with Kabul threatening to bomb Islamabad if Afghan airspace
04:24was violated by Pakistan again.
04:27A threat that has sent a chill down Pakistan's spine,
04:32especially after Pakistan's Field Marshal Asim Munir's free lunch
04:36at the White House with Donald Trump.
04:39Sources in the negotiations told Afghanistan's TOLU News
04:42that Pakistani negotiators wanted Afghanistan to cooperate
04:46with a third country using their airspace for drone
04:50and fighters to bomb terror camps.
04:55Sources said Taliban had specifically asked Pakistan
04:59to stop the violation of its airspace either by Pakistan
05:03or any other party.
05:04But Pakistan categorically refused, citing a prior promise
05:09made to a third country, the United States of America.
05:13Afghanistan was taken aback and refused.
05:17Earlier, Pakistan's Defence Minister Khwaja Asif
05:20had threatened Afghanistan with an all-out war
05:23if a peace agreement was not inked.
05:27Afghanistan has accused Pakistan of inappropriate behaviour
05:30and not being sincere about peace during negotiations.
05:35Kabul claims it promised it will not let its territory
05:38to be used for terror against any country
05:41but is reported to have refused a written commitment.
05:48Afghanistan has demonstrated over the past four years
05:51that its territory will not be used against others.
05:53It remains committed to the policy that Afghan territory is not
05:57and will not be used to threaten or harm others.
06:00Pakistan-based Tehrik-e-Taliban up the ante
06:07calling on radical Islamist outfit Tehrik-e-Labek
06:10to take up arms against the Pakistani forces
06:14in the southern part of Pakistan's Punjab province.
06:19For Pakistan, that is still to recover
06:21from India striking nine terror bases
06:24including Mureetken Bahawalpur,
06:27six radar stations including Pasroor
06:29and Malir cantonment at Karachi
06:31and 11 air bases including Noor Khan, Sargoda, Jacobabad
06:35and Raheem Yarkhan.
06:38Trouble is only mounting along multiple fronts
06:42including the AFPAC border
06:44and inside in Khaybar, Pakhtoonghua, Balochistan
06:48and possibly in the southern Punjab province.
06:53Is Pakistan geared up for a two and a half front war?
06:57Bureau report India today.
06:59So, on the 25th, Pakistan's Defence Minister Khwaja Asef told reporters,
07:06failure to reach an agreement during talks in Istanbul
07:09would mean an open war.
07:11Today, Taliban made it clear,
07:13any attack by Pakistan would result in the targeting of Islamabad.
07:18Is Pakistan's Western Front actually now becoming its Achilles heel?
07:23Is Pakistan bleeding from multiple wounds along the LOC?
07:27Remember what happened on the 10th of May
07:29and even subsequently including at Lipa Valley.
07:32It's burning and facing trouble along the Durand Line
07:36inside Khaybar, Pakhtoonghua, in Balochistan
07:39and now you heard the TTP,
07:41Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan commander
07:43asking the Tehrik-e-Labbek.
07:45Remember, several Tehrik-e-Labbek activists
07:48were butchered by the Pakistani security forces
07:50in Pakistan's Punjab province,
07:52in Lahore and Muridke.
07:53So, they're asking the TLP to take up arms
07:56against the Pakistani state.
07:59Now, I have the finest experts joining me on this broadcast
08:02and these are analysts who've dealt with this region for decades.
08:06Joining me on India first is Tilak Deveshar,
08:11author, former member of the National Security Advisory Board,
08:15was Special Secretary at the Research and Analysis Wing,
08:18Ambassador Vivek Karju,
08:20former ambassador to Afghanistan for a very long time,
08:23was handling the Pakistan-Afghanistan and Iran desk.
08:26Sushant Sareen is a very well-respected
08:29Pakistan-Afghanistan watcher,
08:30senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.
08:33In a moment, we also hope to be joined by John Rosmando,
08:38geopolitical and national security strategist from Washington, D.C.,
08:41and Daniel Block, senior editor,
08:43foreign affairs magazine from New York,
08:46will join us on this broadcast.
08:48So, let me begin by asking you, Mr. Devashir,
08:50your assessment of Taliban saying,
08:53next time they are targeted,
08:56Islamabad will be hit.
08:57Is this a very serious threat from Afghanistan to Pakistan?
09:02Are they taking this battle right into the heart of the enemy camp?
09:05Or are these just empty words?
09:08Thank you, Gaurab, for having me on your show
09:11and grieving to fellow panelists.
09:13No, I think Pakistan should take this very seriously.
09:16You see, when the Taliban says,
09:18they will bomb Islamabad,
09:20they are not talking about Egil bombing.
09:24They are talking about suicide bombers.
09:27You see, the only defense that the Taliban have against air attacks,
09:31in fact, during the,
09:33when the U.S. was in Afghanistan,
09:35the only defense that they had against drones
09:37was the suicide bomber.
09:41And by different accounts,
09:43Taliban has over 5,000 suicide bombers.
09:46So, I would,
09:49if I were a Pakistani policymaker,
09:52I would be very, very careful
09:53of how you deal with the Taliban.
09:56You know, these vague comments by Khwaja Asif
09:59of open war,
10:01he doesn't know what he's talking about
10:02and the kind of repercussions
10:04and the blowback
10:05that Pakistan will have to face
10:08if they try and,
10:09you know, mess around with the Taliban.
10:11And I'm shocked, really.
10:13You know, people suspected
10:14that the Americans had bases
10:16in Pakistan.
10:17But this is an open admission
10:19in Istanbul.
10:21And Pakistan says,
10:22we can do nothing about it.
10:24We have an agreement with the third country
10:25and the third country
10:27can go and bomb Afghanistan at will.
10:29I mean, I think this is fairly absurd.
10:32You know, that you,
10:33you are not in control.
10:34You're not, you're not sovereign anymore.
10:36You don't have control
10:37over your own air bases.
10:38You can't control
10:40what the U.S. is doing in,
10:42or going to do in Afghanistan.
10:43And you accept,
10:45expect the Taliban
10:46will just sit back
10:47and take it lying down.
10:50Ambassador Karju,
10:51is that also your assessment?
10:53You know,
10:53the Pakistani Punjabi leadership,
10:56are they reading the Pashtuns
10:58on both sides
10:59of the Durant line
10:59very,
11:00are they reading them wrong?
11:02Is Afghanistan indicating
11:03that they're not a proxy
11:05of Pakistan's ISI?
11:07This is,
11:07is this posturing
11:08or is this very, very,
11:09is this a serious threat
11:11to Rawalpindi?
11:12I think Taliban
11:17never have been
11:18Pakistani proxies.
11:19That is what
11:21they were indicating
11:22to us for decades
11:23ever since they came up.
11:26But there were
11:27compulsions that we had
11:29and that led us
11:32to follow a certain
11:33policy course
11:35in Afghanistan,
11:36which I think
11:36was correct
11:37at that stage.
11:39Today,
11:40I agree
11:41with Tilak
11:43that if
11:44I was a policymaker
11:45in Islamabad,
11:47I would be worried.
11:48Question is,
11:50how worried
11:51should I be?
11:52One,
11:54yes,
11:54of course,
11:55the Taliban
11:56have instruments
11:57to the TTP
11:59to cause trouble.
12:01But I think
12:02their capacity
12:03to cause trouble
12:04in Khyber Paktoonkwa
12:05is far more
12:07than it is
12:08in Punjab.
12:09Second,
12:11I,
12:12the theological
12:13differences
12:14between
12:15the Afghan
12:16Taliban
12:16and the TTP
12:18as well
12:19as the
12:19Labbeck
12:20are very deep.
12:22Therefore,
12:23I do not think,
12:24I think
12:25these things
12:26have to be
12:26analysed
12:27soberly.
12:28So,
12:29therefore,
12:29I do not think
12:30that it is
12:32a given
12:33that Labbeck
12:34will listen
12:35to the TTP
12:36and rise up
12:37against the
12:38Pakistan state
12:39despite
12:40all the
12:42troubles
12:43between the
12:44Labbeck
12:45and the
12:45Pakistan state,
12:46especially
12:47the Pakistan
12:47security forces,
12:48that is
12:49something
12:49that we
12:50will have
12:50to see
12:51because
12:51theology
12:52here
12:53matters
12:54a great
12:54deal.
12:55And last...
12:56Sir,
12:56the Barelivis
12:57will not
12:57come and
12:57listen to
12:58the Deobandis.
12:59Is that
12:59your assessment
13:00on TLP
13:00and TTP,
13:01sir?
13:02You see,
13:03these are
13:03very complex
13:04issues.
13:07One can't
13:08just simplify
13:09them and
13:09put them
13:10in black
13:10and white
13:11boxes.
13:12The kind
13:12of nexus
13:13that exists
13:14on some
13:15issues,
13:16on some
13:16other issues.
13:18One needs
13:19to have
13:20far greater
13:21information
13:22than to
13:23sort of
13:23shoot from
13:24the hip
13:24here.
13:25But yes,
13:26you are
13:26right.
13:27The differences
13:28between the
13:28Deobandi,
13:29Wahhabis,
13:30and the
13:31Barelbis are
13:32substantial.
13:33And one
13:34always has to
13:35take them
13:35into account.
13:36Lastly,
13:37I think the
13:38Taliban too
13:39know that
13:39Khwaja
13:40Asif,
13:41and they
13:41know it
13:42well because
13:42their relations
13:43with the
13:44ISI have
13:45been intimate
13:46for almost
13:4630 years.
13:48So they
13:48know that
13:49people like
13:49Khwaja
13:50Asif are
13:50windbags.
13:52They don't
13:53have to be
13:53taken seriously.
13:55I for one
13:55have never
13:56taken Khwaja
13:57Asif seriously.
13:58Yes,
13:58I think he's
13:59foolish because
14:00as the
14:01defense minister,
14:01he should be
14:02far more
14:03restrained.
14:04But they
14:04would not
14:04take him
14:05seriously.
14:05my last
14:06point.
14:08And here
14:08at the
14:09moment,
14:11both sides
14:12have,
14:15how should
14:16I say,
14:16have leverage
14:17against the
14:18earth.
14:19Because let
14:20us not
14:21forget that
14:22Afghanistan is
14:23landlocked.
14:25Its greatest
14:27access is
14:28from Pakistan.
14:29It's from
14:30Pakistan.
14:30Yes,
14:31it can get
14:32access.
14:33It has
14:33access from
14:34Iran.
14:35It has
14:35access from
14:36Central Asia.
14:37But it's
14:39really Pakistan.
14:40And this is
14:41the leverage
14:41that the
14:42Pakistanis have
14:43always applied
14:44from time
14:46to time
14:47and for
14:48extended
14:49periods.
14:50So it's an
14:51evolving situation.
14:52This is the
14:52last one.
14:53It's an evolving
14:54situation and
14:56we shouldn't
14:56jump to any
14:57conclusions at
14:59this stage.
14:59But when you
15:00look at what's
15:01happening on
15:01ground,
15:02Sushant Sareen
15:02and the
15:03number of
15:03Pakistan army
15:04and security
15:05personnel who
15:06have been
15:07bleeding ever
15:08since Taliban
15:09took control
15:10of Afghanistan
15:11would seem to
15:12indicate that
15:13Pakistan is in
15:14serious trouble
15:14not just in
15:15Khaybar Pakhtoonghua
15:17but also in
15:18Balochistan.
15:19And Taliban
15:20equally good with
15:20information warfare
15:21putting out
15:22videos of
15:23vehicles of
15:24Pakistani
15:25officers being
15:26set on fire,
15:27equipment
15:28confiscated,
15:29camps attacked,
15:30soldiers taken
15:31prisoner or
15:32killed or is
15:34your assessment
15:35that Asim
15:36Munir is
15:36opening a
15:37second front to
15:38please the
15:38Americans?
15:40No, I
15:41won't say that
15:42he's opening a
15:43second front to
15:43please the
15:44Americans but I
15:46would certainly
15:46agree with the
15:48assessment that
15:48Pakistan is in
15:50a state of
15:51crisis or is
15:52going to get
15:52into a state of
15:53crisis.
15:54Look, this is
15:54not a typical
15:55conventional war.
15:56This is going
15:57to be a
15:57subconventional
15:58kind of a
15:58war, a
15:59war of
15:59attrition.
16:01And as
16:01we know from
16:03our experiences
16:04for example in
16:04the northeast to
16:06some extent and
16:07to a greater
16:08extent in
16:09Kashmir, these
16:11are areas which
16:12take a lot of
16:14troops if you
16:14really want to
16:15maintain a
16:15security presence.
16:16Do the
16:17Pakistanis have
16:18that level of
16:19troop mobilization
16:20which they can
16:21put on the
16:21western front when
16:23they have already
16:23agitated the
16:25eastern front with
16:26their sponsorship
16:27of terrorism
16:27against India.
16:29Now at one
16:29level if you
16:30look at the
16:31game that the
16:31Taliban are
16:32playing, please
16:32remember Gaurav,
16:34the Taliban with
16:35their very
16:36rudimentary kind
16:37of propaganda
16:38machinery were
16:40able to defeat
16:41the mighty
16:42Americans and
16:43the mighty
16:43Europeans and
16:44the NATO in
16:46the information
16:46game.
16:48They were
16:48worsted.
16:49The Americans
16:50no matter what
16:51they tried,
16:52nobody was buying
16:53what the
16:53Americans were
16:54selling as
16:55insofar as
16:56the insurgency,
16:57the 20-year
16:58insurgency in
16:59Afghanistan was
17:00concerned.
17:01The Taliban were
17:01able to hold
17:02their own,
17:03number one.
17:03Number two,
17:04the way they
17:04are reaching
17:05out.
17:05I agree with
17:06what Ambassador
17:06Karju is
17:07saying, that
17:08there are
17:08theological
17:08differences,
17:10that TLP is
17:11a violent
17:12political movement
17:14or party,
17:15whatever you
17:15want to call
17:16it, but it's
17:16not an armed
17:17one.
17:18But when
17:19has theological
17:20differences
17:21prevented people
17:22from entering
17:23into tactical
17:24adjustments if
17:25push comes to
17:26shove.
17:26We've seen
17:26Hamas, a
17:28hardline Sunni
17:28organization taking
17:30equipment and
17:31money and
17:32everything from
17:32Iran, which
17:33is a hardline
17:34Shia state.
17:35We've seen
17:36many such
17:37accommodations and
17:38tactical alliances
17:39being made
17:40across the
17:41spectrum of
17:42militancy and
17:44insurgency.
17:45So why not
17:46out here?
17:47Whether that
17:47will happen or
17:48not is another
17:48debate.
17:49state, but
17:50the TLP is
17:51definitely going
17:53to be a very
17:54major threat if
17:55it does come
17:56to an armed
17:58kind of a
17:59rebellion against
18:00the Pakistani
18:00state.
18:01Please also
18:01remember that
18:02the TLP
18:03represents the
18:04Punjabi
18:05underclass.
18:06These are not
18:07the well-heeled
18:07Punjabis of
18:10Pakistan.
18:10This is the
18:11underclass, which
18:12is the majority,
18:13and the TLP
18:14has emerged as
18:15the single
18:16largest religious
18:17political party
18:18in Pakistan.
18:19But their
18:20leadership has
18:20been killed,
18:21a large number
18:22of their
18:22cadre have
18:22been killed,
18:23they haven't
18:24been able to
18:24utter a word
18:25since the
18:26massacre took
18:27place in
18:27Mureetke and
18:28Lahore.
18:28Does that
18:29indicate that
18:29the Pakistani
18:30Punjabi,
18:31not the
18:32underclass,
18:33has been able
18:33to push them
18:34to a corner?
18:35So Shansareen,
18:35quick 30 seconds
18:36before I bring
18:37in John
18:37Roshmundo
18:38and Daniel.
18:40I think the
18:41TLP is on
18:42the back foot
18:42because the
18:43leadership is
18:44nowhere to be
18:44seen right now,
18:45but the cadre
18:46would certainly
18:46be itching
18:48for revenge,
18:48as we have
18:49seen,
18:50violent outbursts
18:51every time
18:51they have
18:52come out.
18:52Just one
18:53more point
18:53if you
18:53allow me.
18:54You know,
18:55the Taliban
18:55in these
18:56negotiations,
18:57very often
18:57we look at
18:58the Taliban
18:58as these
18:59medieval kind
19:00of characters,
19:01but frankly
19:02when they
19:03negotiate,
19:04they do
19:04drive a
19:05very tough
19:05negotiation.
19:06So if the
19:06Pakistanis
19:07thought that
19:08they can
19:08order them
19:09around with
19:09the Turks
19:10and the
19:10Qataris at
19:11their back,
19:12that they
19:12can order
19:13the Taliban
19:14around and
19:14get them to
19:15sign on the
19:15dotted line,
19:16they have
19:16another thought
19:17coming because
19:17the Taliban
19:18are now asking
19:19the Pakistan
19:20that okay,
19:21fine,
19:21you don't
19:21want our
19:22land to
19:22be used,
19:23you don't
19:23allow your
19:24air to be
19:25used against
19:25us,
19:26we will not
19:26allow our
19:27land to be
19:27used.
19:27Second,
19:28you have to
19:30give us
19:30commitments that
19:31there will be
19:31no ISKP
19:32activity into
19:33Afghanistan from
19:34Pakistan,
19:34which is a
19:35clear acquisition
19:36which they are
19:36holding against
19:37Pakistan for
19:38playing footsie
19:39with the ISKP
19:41guys and
19:41giving them
19:42some kind
19:43of basing
19:43rights inside
19:44Pakistan to
19:45be used
19:46against insurgents
19:47in Pakistan
19:47and against
19:48the TTP and
19:49Taliban targets
19:51inside Afghanistan.
19:52So the Taliban
19:53also have agency,
19:54they also know
19:56how to play
19:57this game,
19:57they have dealt
19:58with bigger
19:59powers than
20:00Pakistan in
20:01the past,
20:01so let's see
20:02how this proceeds.
20:03Okay,
20:04John Rosmundo,
20:05there is no such
20:05thing as a free
20:06lunch,
20:07would that be
20:08clear to
20:08Field Marshal
20:09Asim Munir,
20:10if he was
20:10invited to
20:11the White
20:11House and
20:12given lunch
20:13by the
20:14American
20:15President,
20:16Pakistan has
20:17to pay a
20:18very heavy
20:18price for
20:19that lunch,
20:20basing rights,
20:21overflight for
20:23American military
20:24hardware and
20:25Afghanistan says
20:26they were taken
20:27aback by
20:28Pakistan saying
20:29they cannot
20:29stop a third
20:30country from
20:31targeting Afghanistan.
20:33Well,
20:34the one thing
20:35that we have
20:35seen for the
20:36past two
20:37decades has
20:38been,
20:39you know,
20:39the TTP's
20:40effort to
20:41destabilize
20:42Pakistan,
20:44and we
20:45know that
20:46the Afghan
20:47Taliban and
20:48the Pakistani
20:48Taliban are,
20:50you know,
20:51virtually aligned
20:53together,
20:54and so
20:55the Taliban
20:57in Afghanistan
20:58has a lot
20:59of leverage
21:00inside of,
21:01and reach
21:01inside of
21:01Pakistan,
21:03and Asim Munir
21:05has to pay
21:05attention to
21:06his backside.
21:10Yep.
21:11Yep.
21:11And Daniel
21:12Block,
21:12that's exactly
21:13what Asim Munir
21:14doesn't appear
21:14to be doing.
21:15Taliban are
21:16telling Pakistan
21:17that TTP
21:17is their
21:19problem on
21:19their side
21:20of the border.
21:21They need to
21:21sort out the
21:22mess within,
21:23in Khyber
21:23Pakhtoomkwa.
21:24Would you
21:25agree with
21:25that assessment?
21:26Is Pakistan
21:27failing to
21:28address the
21:28problem inside
21:29its territory
21:30and blaming
21:31Taliban for
21:32its failures?
21:36My sense
21:37is that both
21:37things can be
21:38true.
21:39It can be
21:39the case,
21:40as it has
21:41been for
21:41years and
21:42years,
21:42that Pakistan
21:43has an
21:43enormous amount
21:44of difficulty
21:44securing its
21:46own internal
21:46security,
21:47that it really
21:47struggles to
21:48assert itself
21:49over all its
21:50territory.
21:51It can also
21:51be true,
21:52my understanding
21:52is that this
21:53is true as
21:54well,
21:55that the
21:56group that's
21:56contending with
21:57it, this
21:57group has
21:58kind of
21:59safe haven
21:59in Afghanistan
22:00and that
22:01makes it
22:01really difficult
22:02to deal with
22:04internally.
22:04So I think
22:05both elements
22:06can be true
22:06at once.
22:06It can be
22:07true that
22:07the Taliban
22:08in Afghanistan
22:09is making
22:10it very hard
22:10for Pakistan
22:11and that
22:11Pakistan,
22:12in addition
22:13to that,
22:13just has
22:14trouble securing
22:15its own
22:16borders and
22:17monitoring what's
22:18happening within
22:19its own
22:19territory.
22:21Mr.
22:21Devashir,
22:22does Pakistan
22:22have the
22:23resources?
22:23It has,
22:24you know,
22:24one division,
22:25I believe,
22:26in Khyber
22:27Pakhtoomkwa,
22:28one in
22:28Baluchistan,
22:29but clearly
22:30not enough
22:30troops to
22:31sort out
22:32the insurgency
22:33within and
22:34protect its
22:35borders.
22:35So what
22:36are options
22:36for Asim
22:37Muneer
22:37except
22:38grin,
22:39bear it
22:39and accept
22:40the conditions
22:41of Taliban?
22:43You're right.
22:44You know,
22:44because I was
22:45reading somewhere
22:46that Pakistan
22:47has now
22:47committed to
22:48send about
22:4920,000 troops
22:50to Saudi Arabia
22:51after the
22:52agreement that
22:52they signed.
22:53They have
22:54committed to
22:54send, I
22:55don't know,
22:55how many
22:55thousands of
22:56troops to
22:56Gaza
22:56as part
22:58of the,
22:58you know,
22:59force.
23:00International
23:00assistance force.
23:02Yeah.
23:03And then
23:03they have
23:04problems in
23:04Baluchistan,
23:05problems in
23:05Khyber.
23:07They have to
23:07have deployments
23:08in Punjab
23:09because they
23:10don't know how
23:10the TLP is
23:11going to react.
23:11And then,
23:12you know,
23:13the kind of
23:14panic in
23:15Pakistan today
23:15because of
23:17Operation Trishul
23:18which India
23:19is launching
23:19on the 30th
23:20till the 10th
23:21of November.
23:23You know,
23:23every channel,
23:24every channel
23:26is running
23:26around scared
23:27trying to find
23:27out what
23:28is India
23:29doing.
23:30So,
23:30Pakistan army
23:31today is
23:31really spread
23:33out very thin
23:34and I think
23:35that if
23:36Pakistan thinks
23:37that it can
23:38take on the
23:38Taliban seriously
23:39at this stage,
23:41when it is
23:42spread out so
23:42thin,
23:44I think
23:44Aasip Mureen
23:45must be a
23:46super general
23:47maybe.
23:47Really,
23:47needs to be
23:48a field marshal.
23:49But I don't
23:50think so.
23:50Pakistan has
23:51the wherewithal
23:53or the capability
23:55or the capacity
23:56to be able to
23:57tackle the
23:58multiple problems
23:58that it's facing
23:59now,
24:00especially in
24:00the next 10
24:01days when
24:02India is
24:03launching
24:03its own
24:04Operation Trishul
24:05on the
24:06Rajasthan-Gujarat
24:07border.
24:09And this is
24:10where the
24:10Pakistani
24:10Navy Chief
24:11Sushant Sarin
24:12just visited
24:14the Sir Creek
24:15area from
24:16their side.
24:17They are
24:18trying to
24:18push up
24:19some additional
24:19forces.
24:20They don't
24:20have those
24:21additional
24:21forces.
24:22They've got
24:22as many
24:23forces as
24:23they can
24:24deploy in
24:26the Sindh
24:27province as
24:28they can in
24:29Punjab province
24:30and they
24:30sometimes fear
24:31this could be
24:32deception that
24:33this could be
24:33the deception
24:34the real thing
24:35could happen
24:35in POJK.
24:36When you look
24:37at the
24:37Pakistani media,
24:38when you listen
24:38to some
24:39of their
24:39commentators,
24:40they seem
24:40to be in
24:41tailspin.
24:43So,
24:44Gaurav,
24:45even if
24:45there is no
24:46kinetic action
24:47which takes
24:47place from
24:48India,
24:48I think the
24:49possibility that
24:50something like
24:50this could
24:51happen,
24:52I think that
24:52is a great
24:53leverage that
24:54we now have
24:54over the
24:55Pakistanis.
24:56That,
24:56you know,
24:57we can
24:58actually start
24:59building up
25:02force levels
25:03along the
25:04borders,
25:05keep the
25:05Pakistanis
25:06busy out
25:06there,
25:07even as
25:07the Taliban
25:08bleed them.
25:09And frankly
25:09speaking for
25:10me,
25:11as an
25:11Indian,
25:12how does
25:12it make
25:12a difference?
25:13Because it's
25:14not as though
25:14the Pakistanis
25:15are these
25:16really nice,
25:17sweet boys,
25:18you know,
25:18who are very
25:18well disposed
25:19towards us.
25:20The Pakistanis
25:21have come and
25:22killed thousands,
25:23tens of thousands
25:23of Indians with
25:24the terrorists
25:25which they have
25:26thrown out here,
25:27right?
25:28And if they are
25:29getting a taste of
25:30their own medicine,
25:31I am not going to
25:31shed any tear for
25:32these guys.
25:33They deserve
25:33every bit and
25:35more because of
25:36the kind of
25:36terrorism they
25:37have done,
25:38the kind of
25:38double games
25:39they have played,
25:39the kind of
25:40treachery they
25:40have done.
25:41And because
25:42they have done
25:43all that
25:43treachery,
25:44they are now
25:45fearing that,
25:47you know,
25:47even if the
25:47Taliban were to
25:48give them some
25:49kind of an
25:49assurance,
25:50it's not worth
25:50anything because
25:51the Pakistani
25:52word has never
25:53been worth
25:53anything.
25:54The Pakistanis
25:55have given us
25:55written assurances
25:56including in
25:572004 when they
26:01said that we
26:01cannot allow our
26:02territory to be
26:02used.
26:03Has the
26:03Pakistani
26:04territory not
26:04been used
26:05against India?
26:06So the
26:06point is the
26:07Pakistanis are
26:08getting a taste
26:08of their own
26:09medicine and
26:09the Americans
26:10as usual are
26:11going to be
26:12backing them
26:12because there
26:13is an abused
26:14wife syndrome
26:15that the
26:15Americans suffer
26:16from.
26:16So they will
26:17continue to
26:17back the
26:18Pakistanis no
26:19matter what
26:20they do.
26:20And frankly,
26:21it's no skin
26:22of our nose.
26:23Let them go
26:24out there,
26:24let them get
26:25bleated again.
26:26I don't care.
26:27But I think the
26:28Pakistanis are
26:29getting what they
26:29deserve,
26:30frankly.
26:31Okay.
26:31Daniel Block,
26:32would you want to
26:33respond to this
26:33that Pakistanis
26:34may go running
26:35to US President
26:36Donald Trump
26:37and say they're
26:37getting hemmed
26:38in on all sides,
26:39they're fighting
26:40Taliban,
26:40they're fighting
26:41terror and they
26:42need weapons to
26:43fight terror.
26:44And like last
26:45time, the
26:46Americans will
26:47arm them with
26:47F-16s and
26:48air-to-air
26:49missiles in the
26:49name of
26:50battling terror
26:51even though
26:51Afghanistan does
26:52not have an
26:53air force.
26:54I mean, the
26:57thing with
26:57Trump as
26:58always is it's
26:58so hard to
27:00say what he's
27:00going to do.
27:01Right now,
27:02obviously, he
27:03is fond of
27:05Pakistan or
27:06seems to be
27:07fond of
27:07Pakistan.
27:08There's an
27:08effort to warm
27:09ties with
27:10Pakistan.
27:11I think a lot
27:12of that has to
27:12do with the
27:13fact that
27:15Pakistan nominated
27:16him for a
27:17Nobel Peace
27:17Prize after the
27:19conflict with
27:20India, between
27:20India and
27:21Pakistan ended,
27:22and the United
27:23States, obviously
27:24it's heavily
27:24disputed, appeared
27:25to play some
27:26small role.
27:27We really don't
27:27know how big a
27:28role it played
27:28in that.
27:29But anyway, after
27:30that whole
27:31incident, there's
27:33a certain soft
27:33spot for the
27:34Trump administration
27:34right now with
27:35Pakistan.
27:36But that said,
27:36this is Trump.
27:37I mean, he
27:39could agree to
27:39a deal and
27:40then completely
27:41change his
27:41mind.
27:41Somebody in
27:42Pakistan could
27:43say something to
27:43him that he
27:45doesn't like and
27:46he could say,
27:46nope, sorry,
27:47you're gone.
27:48He could start
27:48to arm the
27:49Pakistanis with
27:50some weapons and
27:51then they could
27:52not do what
27:52he wanted or
27:53exactly what he
27:54wanted and he
27:55could say, you
27:55know what, we're
27:55totally done with
27:56you.
27:57We hate
27:58Pakistan now,
27:59we're on to
27:59other things.
28:00He could look at
28:01some trade dispute
28:01with Pakistan and
28:02say, actually, I
28:03don't like that and
28:04you're not getting
28:04any weapons or he
28:05could demand some
28:06kind of economic
28:07concession in
28:08exchange for
28:08weapons that
28:09Pakistan is not
28:10willing to make.
28:10I know I'm
28:11throwing a lot of
28:11things out here
28:12right now.
28:13I agree, but a
28:15country like
28:16Pakistan on a
28:17bent knee, they'll
28:18pawn a part of
28:19their own territory
28:19to the United
28:21States, give him
28:21give Donald Trump
28:22pasni, give him
28:23a couple of
28:24golf courses in
28:25Sindh and
28:25Balochistan,
28:26Ambassador
28:26Karju, maybe
28:28even in
28:29Islamabad and
28:29Ravalpindi for
28:31Pakistan, their
28:32army is just a
28:33property dealer,
28:34they'll give a
28:35coroner plot to
28:36Donald Trump, but
28:37is that a cause for
28:38grave concern for
28:39India that America
28:41in this situation
28:42could be arming
28:42Pakistan in the
28:44times to come?
28:45I say the
28:47Pakistanis have
28:48this long
28:49tradition of
28:50trying to
28:50please their
28:52benefactors.
28:53We know what
28:55the kind of
28:56red carpet
28:57treatment, the
28:58kind of
28:58facilities, land
28:59and everything
29:00they gave to
29:01the Arab
29:01sheikhs.
29:02We know that
29:03from our own
29:04experience and
29:05that was
29:06Butto started
29:07it and Zia
29:08continued with
29:09it and it
29:10went all
29:10through.
29:11So if they
29:11are doing it
29:12to Donald
29:12Trump, it's
29:13part of a
29:14tradition that
29:15they have.
29:16Second, I
29:18think we've
29:19got to be
29:20concerned, but
29:21not overly
29:22concerned.
29:23I, for
29:24one, know
29:25my assessment
29:27is that the
29:28Pakistanis are
29:29under great
29:30pressure and
29:32that's good.
29:33It's good.
29:34They consider
29:35India as a
29:36permanent enemy
29:37and so if
29:38someone who
29:39considers you as
29:40a permanent
29:40enemy is
29:41under pressure
29:42then that's
29:42good for us
29:43strategically.
29:44That's one.
29:45Two, of
29:46course they
29:47will bleed.
29:48The Taliban
29:48will make
29:49them bleed.
29:50But the
29:51Pakistan army
29:52even if it
29:53thins out
29:54will have the
29:55capacity to
29:56hold the
29:58Taliban and
30:00I doubt
30:01whether it
30:02will be ever
30:02a situation
30:03where the
30:04Taliban can
30:05come in and
30:06hold territory.
30:06My last
30:07point.
30:08The real
30:08problem with
30:10this which
30:11the Pakistanis
30:12will face
30:13and which
30:14they are
30:15beginning to
30:15face is
30:16anger against
30:17the Punjab
30:18and that
30:20anger will
30:22now is
30:23manifesting
30:23itself of
30:24course in
30:25KP very
30:26openly.
30:27It is
30:27manifesting
30:28itself in
30:29Baluchistan.
30:30their pockets
30:31in Sindh.
30:34And I
30:35think in
30:36the Punjab
30:37and that's
30:37something which
30:38we have not
30:38mentioned and
30:39you haven't
30:39mentioned.
30:40Imran still
30:42has a reservoir
30:43of support.
30:45And the
30:46Pakistan army
30:47is very very
30:48concerned about
30:49the reservoir
30:49of support.
30:50So this is
30:51an army which
30:52is now under
30:54enormous pressure
30:55and that's good
30:56for us.
30:56Oh absolutely.
30:58Absolutely.
30:59Mr. Devashir,
31:00your assessment
31:01will Taliban
31:02tensions have
31:02consequences that
31:03are not
31:03restricted just
31:04to Khyber
31:05Pakhtunkhwa or
31:06maybe an odd
31:07attack in
31:08Baluchistan but
31:09have wider
31:09consequences in
31:11Pakistan's
31:12Punjab province
31:12especially with
31:13KPK links and
31:14Punjab links
31:15Imran Khan
31:16factor?
31:17Yes, certainly.
31:20You see, there
31:22are so many
31:23oppressed
31:24nationalities in
31:25Pakistan.
31:26You have the
31:27Baloch, you
31:28have the
31:28Seraikis, you
31:29have the
31:30Sindhis, you
31:31have people in
31:32AJK and
31:33POK and
31:35Gilgit
31:35Pakistan.
31:36All of them
31:37will take this
31:37as an example
31:38if they perceive
31:39an opportunity.
31:41Now it depends
31:41how serious the
31:43situation gets.
31:44And there are
31:45people waiting in
31:46the wings to
31:47take advantage of
31:48the Pakistan
31:49army being on
31:50the defensive.
31:51There are
31:51people in the
31:52Pakistan army
31:53itself who are
31:56not too happy
31:56with Mureen
31:57trying to get
31:57a five-year
31:58extension.
31:59You know,
31:59another five-year
32:00extension for
32:01Munir means
32:02about 20
32:02left union
32:03generals over
32:03a period of
32:04five years are
32:05going to retire
32:06and not have
32:07a chance to
32:08make the
32:09top spot.
32:10So there are
32:10many, many
32:11items in the
32:12fire.
32:13It's a lot
32:14of moving
32:14parts.
32:15I think we
32:15just have to
32:16wait and see
32:16that how does
32:18the Taliban
32:19Pakistan situation
32:20actually get
32:24activated on
32:25the ground.
32:25What exactly
32:26do the Taliban
32:26do?
32:28One other
32:28thing, Gaurav,
32:30if I ever
32:30mentioned,
32:31you see the
32:32control points
32:33between the
32:34two or the
32:35border trading
32:36posts between
32:37the two
32:37countries have
32:38been blocked
32:38for the last
32:39two weeks.
32:40Yes.
32:41So the prices
32:42of all commodities
32:43in Pakistan
32:44have gone up.
32:45And how
32:46long will the
32:47people who
32:47are already
32:48facing the
32:48brunt of
32:49inflation face
32:50this kind of
32:51inflation?
32:52So the
32:53longer this
32:53abroglio lasts,
32:56the more
32:56problematic it's
32:57going to be for
32:58the Pakistani
32:59public.
33:00And all over
33:01Pakistan, not
33:01just confined
33:02to Khyber
33:04Pukthoongua.
33:04I was watching
33:06a report that
33:06prices of both
33:08onion and
33:09tomatoes has
33:10gone through
33:10the roof in
33:11Pakistan.
33:13People anyway
33:14couldn't afford
33:14non-vegetarian,
33:15the majority,
33:16and now they're
33:16saying we can't
33:17even afford
33:17vegetables.
33:18John
33:19Rasmundur,
33:19Pakistan, in
33:20your assessment,
33:21is it in a
33:22position to
33:23handle these
33:24fires on
33:24multiple fronts,
33:25especially with
33:26the collapsing
33:26economy and
33:28tensions with
33:29India?
33:29Well, I don't
33:31think that it's
33:32an ideal situation
33:34to deal with
33:34these problems.
33:36I mean, if they
33:37were to decide
33:38to go and
33:39invade
33:40Afghanistan, we
33:42saw what's
33:43happened to
33:43everyone who's
33:44invaded Afghanistan
33:45in the past
33:46many centuries.
33:49It would be a
33:49failure.
33:50The Taliban
33:51would probably
33:52also launch a
33:53campaign of
33:54terrorist attacks
33:57all over
33:57Pakistan.
33:58and if
34:00facing up
34:01against India,
34:02Pakistan is
34:03not in any
34:04situation where
34:05it can really
34:05afford to
34:07engage too
34:08many targets
34:09at the same
34:09time.
34:11And given
34:12the situation,
34:13Sushant Sareen,
34:13Pakistan perhaps
34:14would want the
34:15Americans in
34:16Afghanistan, they
34:17would want
34:18Americans to
34:18intervene, have
34:20the Bagram
34:20airbase, because
34:21that would not
34:22only ensure that
34:23Pakistan gets
34:24more money,
34:24once again opening
34:25the Karachi route
34:27to Afghanistan,
34:28but also have
34:29a say in
34:30dealing with
34:30Taliban, that
34:31would be
34:31worrisome.
34:32Taliban clearly
34:33wouldn't want
34:33that.
34:34I don't see how
34:36the Americans are
34:36going to get
34:37Bagram.
34:38See, it's one
34:39thing wanting
34:40something, it's
34:40quite another
34:41being able to
34:42get it.
34:43So I don't
34:43think Bagram is
34:44really going to
34:45go the American
34:45way.
34:46How are they
34:47going to get
34:47it?
34:47Unless you're
34:48invading
34:48Afghanistan and
34:50then carving out
34:51a portion and
34:52then taking care
34:53of Bagram and
34:54handing it over
34:55to the Americans,
34:56how are you
34:56going to do
34:56it?
34:57So it's
34:57not possible.
35:00I don't see
35:01it happen.
35:01And I don't
35:02see any case
35:03in which the
35:04Taliban will
35:05agree to
35:06lease out
35:07Bagram to
35:07the Americans.
35:08No way
35:09that's going to
35:09happen.
35:10The Taliban
35:11will lose the
35:12next day if
35:12they were ever
35:13to agree to
35:13that.
35:14Secondly, I
35:15think, Gaurav,
35:16let's not kid
35:17ourselves on
35:18this whole
35:18American policy
35:19in the
35:20subcontinent.
35:21I think
35:22that's changed
35:22irretrievably.
35:23It has nothing
35:24to do with
35:24Donald Trump
35:25anymore.
35:26I think we
35:26are going to
35:26be fooling
35:27ourselves if
35:28we think
35:28that the
35:29American policy
35:30in the
35:31subcontinent
35:32will come
35:33back to
35:33what it
35:34was.
35:34It's not
35:34going to
35:35happen.
35:36The Americans
35:36have clearly
35:37declared us
35:39in some ways
35:40an adversary,
35:41in some
35:41cases enemy
35:42number one.
35:44They might
35:44be using
35:45nice words
35:46about us.
35:47But I
35:47don't think
35:48that relationship
35:49will ever go
35:49back to what
35:50it was or
35:51what we
35:52assumed it
35:52was.
35:53I think
35:53that is
35:53broken.
35:54How far
35:55they get
35:55in bed
35:56with the
35:57Pakistanis
35:58is entirely
35:58to the
35:59Americans.
35:59They can
36:00get into
36:00bed today
36:01and change
36:03the concubine
36:03tomorrow.
36:04That is
36:05entirely to
36:05the American
36:06liking.
36:07So, I
36:07think we
36:07should not
36:08kid ourselves
36:09to imagine
36:10that love
36:12fest between
36:12us and the
36:13Americans is
36:13going to
36:14come back.
36:14That's not
36:15happening.
36:15So, it's
36:16high time
36:16we start
36:17looking at
36:18our strategic
36:18options.
36:19And that's
36:20not to say
36:21that I
36:21should break
36:22off my
36:22relationship
36:23with the
36:23Americans.
36:23Far from
36:24it.
36:25But I
36:25don't think
36:26we should
36:26keep limiting
36:27the damage.
36:28The last
36:2830 seconds
36:28that I
36:29have on
36:29this part
36:29of the
36:29show,
36:30you agree
36:30Ambassador
36:30Karju,
36:31our ties
36:32with America
36:32will never
36:33be the same
36:34again.
36:34And a lot
36:35will also
36:35depend on
36:36how the
36:36Trump-Xi
36:37Jinping
36:37meeting happens
36:38in South
36:38Korea on
36:39the 30th.
36:41I think
36:42irrespective of
36:43that meeting,
36:44in that meeting
36:45the Americans
36:46are under
36:46pressure there.
36:47I think
36:47there will
36:49be some
36:49kind of
36:49an
36:50understanding
36:50reach.
36:51But irrespective
36:52of that,
36:53I think I
36:54tend to agree
36:55with what
36:56Sushant is
36:56saying.
36:57This is
36:57beyond Donald
36:58Trump.
36:58The Americans
36:59are reverting to
37:00their old
37:01policies towards
37:02Pakistan.
37:03And we've got
37:04to be very
37:05conscious of
37:05this.
37:07That is why
37:08it is important
37:09for us to
37:09develop our
37:10relationship
37:11with Afghanistan
37:13step-by-step
37:14in a prudent
37:15manner,
37:16bearing in
37:17mind that
37:19the Taliban
37:20can put
37:21enormous
37:22pressure
37:22and that
37:24Pakistani
37:26army is
37:28under mental
37:28pressure.
37:29But that
37:30no one
37:31wants,
37:32and that's
37:32my last
37:33word,
37:34we have to
37:35be conscious
37:36no one
37:37wants a
37:38nuclear
37:38Somalia.
37:39That is
37:42the ultimate
37:43truth.
37:43There are
37:44experts who
37:44say that
37:45Americans
37:45already are
37:46in control
37:46of the
37:47Pakistani
37:47nukes.
37:48Mr.
37:48Devashar,
37:49you may
37:49have better
37:50insight into
37:51that and
37:52John
37:52Rosmundo.
37:53But do
37:54you also
37:54agree,
37:55John,
37:55that Indian
37:56American
37:56relations are
37:58not what
37:58they were
37:59maybe five
38:00years ago
38:00or ten
38:01years ago
38:01and they'll
38:02never be
38:02the same
38:02again?
38:03I don't
38:04know if I
38:05go as far
38:06as they
38:06never be
38:07the same
38:07again.
38:08But I
38:08think that
38:08as long
38:09as President
38:09Trump is
38:10in office,
38:11I don't
38:12think that
38:12the slights
38:13that he
38:13has given
38:14against India
38:15will be
38:15forgiven easily.
38:17I think
38:18that the
38:19president needs
38:21to look at
38:22the bigger
38:22picture in
38:24terms of
38:24the subcontinent
38:26and India's
38:29role as
38:30what could
38:32be a
38:32$32 trillion
38:34economy by
38:362040.
38:37and we
38:38afford as
38:39Americans
38:40to let
38:42that go
38:42by the
38:43wayside.
38:44We'll
38:44track that
38:45story very
38:45closely.
38:46I want to
38:46thank all
38:46my guests
38:47for joining
38:47me.
38:48Let's
38:48now focus
38:49on the
38:49other
38:50border,
38:51the
38:51India-Bangladesh
38:52border.
38:52Pakistan's
38:53chairman,
38:54Joint Chiefs
38:55of Staff
38:55Committee,
38:56General
38:56Sahir
38:56Samsad
38:57Mirza is
38:57in
38:58Bangladesh.
38:59So is
38:59Lashkar-e-Taybah's
39:01top terrorist
39:01Hafiz
39:02Mohammed
39:02Saeed's
39:02aid,
39:03Iptisham
39:05Ilahi
39:06Zaheer,
39:06General
39:07Secretary of
39:07Pakistan's
39:08Merkazi
39:09Jamiat
39:09Ahle
39:10Hadith,
39:11and of
39:11course the
39:12preacher of
39:12hate,
39:13Zakir
39:14Nayak.
39:14Once
39:15banned in
39:15Bangladesh,
39:17he is
39:17set to
39:18receive a
39:19red carpet
39:19welcome once
39:20again in
39:21Bangladesh.
39:22So join
39:22the dots.
39:23It's a
39:24very dangerous
39:25picture that
39:26emerges.
39:27A very
39:27dangerous
39:28cocktail of
39:29radical Islamist
39:30terror in our
39:31backyard.
39:33Bangladesh,
39:36once India's
39:37trusted ally,
39:38is fast
39:39slipping into
39:39dangerous company.
39:42Thaka is
39:42rolling out the
39:43red carpet for
39:44Zakir
39:44Nayak,
39:45the controversial
39:45preacher wanted
39:46in India for
39:48hate speech and
39:49inciting
39:49extremism.
39:51The move
39:51under the interim
39:52government of
39:53Mohammed Yunus
39:54marks a sharp
39:55policy reversal and
39:56a worrying signal
39:57for India's
39:58security agencies.
40:00Zakir
40:00Nayak is not
40:01the only name
40:02raising eyebrows.
40:03A close
40:06aide of UN
40:07designated
40:07terrorist,
40:08Hafiz
40:09Saeed,
40:09Ibtizam
40:10Ilahi
40:10Zaheer has
40:11also arrived
40:12in Bangladesh.
40:13He has been
40:14touring districts
40:15right along the
40:16India-Bangradesh
40:17border.
40:18Zaheer has been
40:18delivering provocative
40:20speeches and
40:21meeting local
40:21clerics.
40:23If that wasn't
40:23enough, diplomatic
40:24moves are also
40:26adding to the
40:26concern.
40:27On Saturday,
40:31Pakistan's Joint
40:32Chiefs of Staff
40:32Committee,
40:33General Sahir
40:34Shamshed Mirza
40:35met Mohammed
40:36Yunus at the
40:37state guest house
40:38Jamuna during
40:39his official
40:39visit to
40:40Dhaka.
40:41The high-profile
40:43military visit
40:44first in years
40:44signals deepening
40:45ties between
40:46Dhaka and
40:47Islamabad.
40:48Under the new
40:49interim set-up
40:50led by Mohammed
40:51Yunus,
40:52Bangladesh is seen
40:53reaching out to
40:53countries once
40:54kept at arm's
40:55length, including
40:56China and
40:57Pakistan, for
40:58economic and
40:58defence cooperation.
41:00From Zakir
41:01Nayak's visit to
41:02Hafiz Saeed's
41:03eighth-brother
41:04tours to talks
41:06with Pakistani
41:06general, the
41:07writing on the
41:08wall seems
41:09ominous.
41:10Bangladesh terror
41:11tango could soon
41:12become India's
41:13next big security
41:14challenge.
41:15Bureau Report,
41:17India Today.
41:20So let's try and
41:21make sense of
41:22these developments.
41:23Sushant Sarin
41:23and Telak Devashar
41:24stay with me on
41:25this big story.
41:26Mr. Devashar,
41:27your assessment,
41:29because it's not
41:29just General Mirza,
41:30there are many
41:31Pakistani generals
41:32including those of
41:33Pakistan's ISI who
41:35visited Bangladesh,
41:36some very close to
41:37the Indian border and
41:38especially the
41:39Siliguri corridor and
41:41they're building
41:41military strength
41:42around that area.
41:43Your assessment of
41:44what's happening in
41:45Bangladesh right now,
41:46sir?
41:47You know,
41:49according to the
41:49reports, media
41:50reports, I don't have
41:51confirmation that
41:53Mirza actually did
41:54A, go to
41:55Siliguri, and flew to
41:57areas around the
41:59chicken's neck.
41:59So obviously, you
42:01know, some sort of
42:04a mischief is a
42:05fool.
42:05But the interesting
42:06thing again, these are
42:07media reports, I stand
42:08corrected if you have
42:10to, he didn't meet the
42:12army chief.
42:13Yes.
42:13He met the naval
42:14chief, he met the
42:15air chief.
42:16There is no report
42:17about him making the
42:18Bangladesh army chief.
42:20That I think is
42:21significant because if,
42:23you know, there is to
42:24be any kind of anti-India
42:27moves, the army will
42:28definitely be involved.
42:29So that is one thing we
42:31should just keep at the
42:32back of the mind.
42:33But yes, there has
42:34been a series of
42:35visits in army
42:36officers' exchanges
42:37right from January
42:38onwards, when people
42:41from Bangladesh have
42:42gone, they have
42:43started training
42:44courses, ships, air
42:47flights are going to
42:48start again.
42:48So there are a whole
42:49lot of things on the
42:51agenda which shows a
42:52deepening relationship
42:53or Pakistan trying very
42:55hard to deepen the
42:57relationship with
42:57Bangladesh.
42:58and most significant
42:59if you recall, when
43:01Munir, Asim Munir was
43:02speaking to the
43:03diaspora in Tampa,
43:04Florida, he said
43:06this time we will
43:06attack India from the
43:07east.
43:08That's where they have
43:09the most resources.
43:12And they don't share
43:13a border.
43:16They don't share a
43:17border.
43:18So obviously they have
43:19some sort of intention
43:20of using what you
43:21mentioned, strategic
43:22depth or trying to use
43:24the land border of
43:26Bangladesh and the
43:28most vulnerable area
43:29is the Seliguri
43:30corridor of Chicken's
43:31Neck.
43:32So if you put all
43:33these things together
43:33and now with this
43:35Dashkar fellow arriving
43:36there along with
43:37Zakir Nayak, you
43:38know, it shows that
43:40there is a creeping
43:42sort of coordination
43:44between Pakistan and
43:45Bangladesh.
43:46I wouldn't say all of
43:47Bangladesh.
43:49In any case, this
43:49man, Muhammad Yunus
43:51is only there for a
43:52temporary time and
43:55hopefully when elections
43:56are held in February
43:57there will be greater
43:58clarity on which way
43:59Bangladesh is going.
44:00But this is something we
44:01should certainly be
44:02concerned about.
44:04Because Sushant Sarin,
44:05when you look at the
44:06picture, one is being
44:07done very openly.
44:08The visit of Pakistani
44:09generals, the visit of
44:12Zakir Nayak, the visit of
44:13those very close to
44:15Lashkar-e-Taiba, the
44:16radicalization of a major
44:18part of the population
44:19there.
44:20What does this all show?
44:23Asim Munir said next time
44:24the attack will take place
44:25from the east.
44:26So, elections in Bengal,
44:28target India's east,
44:29target India's northeast,
44:31target the chicken's neck
44:32or are they trying to
44:33send across a message,
44:34don't mess with us in
44:35Afghanistan, we'll mess with
44:37you through Bangladesh.
44:38I think it could be all of
44:40the above.
44:41Gaurav, I think they are
44:43going to try and send that
44:44message.
44:45There is some talk of a
44:47trilateral between China,
44:48Pakistan and Bangladesh.
44:49Bangladesh, the Bangladeshis
44:51have said no, no for now
44:53but who knows how things
44:55will pan out.
44:56We've seen a lot of
44:57movement of the Islamists
44:58as you yourself have
44:59documented it and we have
45:01seen a regime in
45:03Bangladesh under this
45:04third grade fellow, the
45:06Nobel Peace Laureate, you
45:07know, even I don't know
45:08what the kind of people who
45:09get the Nobel Peace
45:10Prize.
45:11This fellow, he has
45:13actively been encouraging
45:14this activity and has been
45:17denying it whenever he has
45:18been confronted with it.
45:19So, I think it's upon us
45:21now to wake up and again
45:23smell the coffee unless we
45:25again want to stay in a
45:26slumber and think that no
45:28Bangladesh will be
45:29perfectly fine, it will all
45:31work out in the end, let's
45:32wait for the elections.
45:33Look, the elections are not
45:34going to throw up any
45:35results.
45:37I would love to be
45:39surprised and be proven
45:40wrong but from whatever we
45:42can make out right now, the
45:43elections are not going to
45:45throw up any results which
45:46are going to be good for
45:48India, okay?
45:49And let us imagine a
45:51situation where a terrorist
45:52party like the Jamaat-e-Islami
45:54wins the election.
45:55Then what?
45:56Then what do you do?
45:57And we still have a
45:58portion of a border that
46:00is not fenced even today.
46:01Allow me a sentence.
46:04I think it's very clear what
46:05India needs to do.
46:06Number one, beef up your
46:07intelligence assets in
46:10Bangladesh to get a fix on
46:12where all these activities
46:13are taking place.
46:14And secondly, the Prime
46:16Minister assured this
46:17country, Mr. Modi, that
46:19henceforth, we will not
46:21allow this kind of
46:22terrorism to take place
46:23into India without an
46:25appropriate response.
46:27So please be ready for an
46:28appropriate response.
46:30Don't take three weeks
46:31before you now start taking
46:33an appropriate response.
46:34If it means having to bomb
46:36some kind of camps or take
46:39out some kind of people
46:40inside Bangladesh, this is
46:42something that the
46:43Bangladeshis would have
46:43called upon themselves, not
46:45something that we desire
46:46doing, but this is
46:48something that the
46:48Bangladeshis are forcing
46:49us to do.
46:50I think that message needs
46:51to go out loud and clear.
46:54Mr. Devashir, how would
46:55you see Zakir Naik's
46:56presence and especially
46:57after the terror attack,
46:59he's a fugitive there,
47:00he's a fugitive from law
47:01in India and now he gets
47:02a red carpet treatment
47:04from the radical Islamists
47:05in Bangladesh.
47:06Is this not just to
47:08radicalize people in
47:09Bangladesh, but also along
47:10India's border belt?
47:12True.
47:13But you know, Rakir Naik
47:14was last year, he was
47:16in Pakistan.
47:17He got even a redder
47:18carpet treatment in
47:20Pakistan, if you recall.
47:21Now he's come to
47:22Bangladesh, you know,
47:23working on both sides.
47:24So this man is danger,
47:26he's poison.
47:27You know, and the fact
47:29that he's in Bangladesh,
47:31Bangladesh, unfortunately,
47:34after the departure of
47:35Sheikh Hasina, the
47:36radicalism in the
47:37Bangladesh polity has
47:38come very much in
47:40evidence because of the
47:41Jamaat-e-Islami.
47:42And on top of it, if you
47:43insert Zakir Naik, you
47:46know, then you can, it's a
47:47very, it's a witch's brew.
47:49So I think it's again a
47:50very dangerous thing.
47:51One thing about elections,
47:52what I meant to convey was
47:54that this chap, Yunus, is
47:56acting.
47:57Right?
47:58So you can't take what he's
47:59doing as Bangladesh policy.
48:02Whatever, once you have a
48:03government, a regular
48:04government elected for five
48:05years, then Bangladesh will
48:07be in its true colors and
48:09you will know.
48:10I agree with Shusha, you
48:11know which way the trend is
48:13going if a VAMI league
48:14continues to be banned and
48:16can't participate.
48:17Then it might be a toss-up in
48:18the Jamaat and the BNP.
48:20Neither of the two prospects
48:21are at the moment or going by
48:23past history very much to
48:25speak home about.
48:26But there will be a regular
48:27government and then you
48:29can have, determine what
48:30the policy is.
48:31But Zakir Naik is bad news.
48:34Indeed, Zakir Naik,
48:35Lashkar-e-Taiba, Pakistan's
48:37ISI, it's a very dangerous
48:39cocktail in Bangladesh and
48:40we'll be tracking that story
48:41very closely.
48:42I want to thank my guests.
48:43But before I take a break,
48:45I want to talk about an
48:46Indian moolana from
48:47Devuband who's very worried
48:49and he's very worried because
48:51of a Pakistani serial.
48:53He thinks this Pakistani
48:54serial will cause trouble in
48:57India, not because it
48:59preaches terror, because it
49:01preaches women's rights.
49:03It's a Pakistani serial.
49:04So this Indian moolana from
49:06Devuband has spoken out
49:07against a Pakistani
49:08television serial, asking
49:10women to stay away and not
49:12watch this Pakistani serial
49:13because family ties in India
49:16will get impacted.
49:17So moolana Kari Ishak Gora
49:19from Devuband has blamed this
49:21Pakistani television serial,
49:22which is quite popular in
49:24Pakistan that it's spreading
49:27poison in Muslim households
49:29in India and is leading to
49:32rising cases and divorces
49:33because it talks about
49:35women's rights.
49:37Listen in and listen in to the
49:38I can see I can see you.
49:41I feel like that.
49:42I can see your
49:43Aliens.
49:43if I
49:44have the
49:44What
49:45A
49:45A
49:46B
49:48A
49:48A
49:58A
49:59And we have our lives in media, or screenings, which we see in the screen,
50:10we can see here at home, we can see how we can see it.
50:17Today our children are in Pakistan, which are in the serial world.
50:22He can see that they can see the
Be the first to comment