InterNational Churchill society. The result of a collaboration between the society and the George Washington university, the library is the First Research facility in the Nations Capital to go into the study of Winston Churchill. Here students and visitors have access to a vast range of primary and secondary materials, an interactive touch screen exhibit, and starting next month, displays of original manuscripts and artifacts. As i have said many times before, the nclc is more than just a place for study. It is also a venue for discussion and debate. And in the short time since we opened our doors, we have explored not just the legacy of Winston Churchill, but the very nature of leadership itself. I hope youll return on april 26th at 6 00 p. M. , when we welcome former British Foreign secretary david owen, now lord owen, who will discuss his new book cabinets finest hour the hidden agenda of may 1940 and also the current state of brexit. Let me take this opportunity to encourage you to learn more about the International Churchill society by visiting our website, www. Winstonchurchill. Org. Members receive a subscription to our quarterly publication finest hour and many other benefits. I would like to take a moment to recognize raza bukari, adviser to general musharraf and elliot burke, adviser to the International Churchill society for making this event possible. Born in delhi in 1943 to a family that later migrated to pakistan after the 1947 partition, general Pervez Musharraf served as president of pakistan from 2001 to 2008. The general, who was at the time the head of the Pakistani Armed forces, came to power as the result of a military coup against thenPrime Minister sharif. As president , general musharraf supported the u. S. Led war on terror that followed the september 11 attacks. This, combined with his attempts to liberalize pakistani culture, earned the ire of fundamentalists islamic leaders and made him the target of numerous assassination attempts. His autobiography in the line of fire was published in 2007. Under threat of imprisonment in pakistan, he currently lives in dubai and london. Our guest has graciously agreed to take questions from the audience at the end of our conversation. Those with questions should approach the microphone and those with speeches should not. Ladies and gentlemen, its an honor to welcome general Pervez Musharraf. [ applause ] thank you very much, indeed, for inviting me here for this very interesting gathering of especially a q a, but before the questions, suggest i put it on. A modification to the team you decided that is countering terrorism, countering radical islamic terrorism. May i suggest not to associate islam with terrorism . Terrorism has no religion. I know of many, many terrorist organizations, even the United States has declared about 11 in the world, in the christian world and the buddhist world, in japan, in germany, in greece, in italy, in uk. There are bad terrorist organizations which are is it not functioning . Okay. Dont tell me you werent hearing what i was saying. So ill continue. I was just saying that we should not associate religion with terrorism. Terrorism has no religion. We can call it terrorism carried out by some misled muslims, but dont associate the religion islam with terrorism. Islam is as peaceful as any other religion of the world, if not more. So with this beginning, im open to any questions. Well, general, were very honored to have you here. Welcome to the National Churchill library and center. This institution is named for a statesman whose connection to the indian subcontinent was longstanding and very controversial, even by the standards of his own age. Although he was very prophetic about the violent aftermath of partition, and as one historian notes, if jenna is regarded as the father of pakistan, churchill must qualify as its uncle. Id be interested in hearing your thoughts, especially as one who held supreme power during wartime about churchills legacy in that region. Churchill certainly led an Important Role in the transition of pakistan, and that was it was his time and with the lord as the viceroy in india when partition took place. And i believe churchill was the one who endorsed the partition of the subcontinent and creation of pakistan. To that extent, as far as we are concerned, we hold Winston Churchill in high esteem, other than his own performance as the Prime Minister of United Kingdom. By the way, Winston Churchill had also served as a very young officer in pakistan, where a post is named churchill post even now. So, therefore, that is the standing of sir Winston Churchill in pakistan. Thank you. Our focus here at the Churchill Library is not only on the biographical details of churchills life, but also the concept of leadership itself. The circumstances of your coming to power were fraught, certainly, but youre recognized for both fighting terrorism and resisting extremism at home at great risk to yourself. What does this say about the future prospects of democracy and Democratic Institutions in the muslim world . Yes, this is an important question which has been agitating the minds of the world when we see what is happening in the muslim world. What we have to realize is the entire muslim world was really colonized. It was colonized for two to three centuries and became independent after the second world war. All of it. Maybe less turkey and iran. All of us were colonized, so in the late 40s and early 50s we become independent. And when we became independent, we were all backward, most illiterate, having very obscure views, very religious. So this which we became independent and the west required us to become democratic. We were a Tribal Society and a feudal society. Within the Tribal Society and feudal society, autocratic rulers always succeeded in holding the place together. So, therefore, now after independence in the late 40s, early 50s we started imposing democracy, and that was democracy without balancing it, without tuning it. To national requires. It was everywhere. It failed because it was counter to the ground realities within each country. So, therefore, now we are faced with a problem of whether democracy is really applicable to certain societies. I personally believe it requires a certain degree of education level, and it certainly requires a society which is more homogeneous and not divided into small ethnic tribal divisions, because within these tribal divisions, lets take the middle east. By the way, until 1924, there was no country in the middle east. None of those iraq, syria, jordan, lebanon, saudi arabia, none of these existed. These are all creation of after 1924 through i think its called the peace accord with the french and british and drew a line. North of it french control, south of it british control. This is how the country started coming to be. Lebanon got created because they wanted to create a christian country. However, leaving that aside, so in this environment, demanding democracy becomes sometimes counterproductive. You have to tailor it to national requirements. And an autocratic ruler running democracy tailored to their particular government is always more successful than politically elected government, as they say. Politically elected governor or leader who is not really attuned to the grand realities. Thank you. President trump surprised the world and many of his passionate supporters, most of all, by attacking the syrianarab force base with 59 tomahawk missiles in retaliation for a recent chemical weapons attack. Was this a necessary and long overdue punishment for the use of Deadly Weapons against civilians, or a strategic mistake . What would you do in a similar situation . Well, i think it was certainly very serious aggression by the syrian government. Although there is doubts whether they keep claiming and russia keeps claiming that its not Bashar Al Assad whos done that, but the world believes it is the government and the president involved in this chemical attack. That be so, it is certainly a violence of international laws, and violence of humanity, i think. So, therefore, the whole world certainly was against whatever happened and whoever did it. So, therefore, when the United States went against them, it has been accepted by the world. They deserve that punishment. However, since the world is divided now, the world has is transforming from a world where the United States was the sole superpower to a multi power world where china and russia are trying to emerge as a superpower. The United States needs to balance its objectives with those of the other emerging superpowers. So, therefore, what has happened is, the other emerging superpowers who happen to be on the other side has countered that with a threat of tearing the United States not to do it again. Now, that escalates the situation, certainly. Saying United States, dont do it again. Obviously, it would anger anyone whos strong. Ill do it again, let me see what you will do. So it keeps escalating and a warlike situation gets developed. Therefore, while i think the response was correct, but it could lead to escalation, which we need to guard against. Thank you, sir. Recently retired chief of staff of the pakistani army, general sharif, has agreed to become the first commander in chief of the Islamic Military Alliance to fight terrorism, a proposed coalition of 39 countries. What some are calling a muslim nato. That will have its headquarters in riad. What are the challenges and opportunities facing such a coalition and how might it be employed . Well, yes, this is a very important issue. That is agitating the minds of everyone in pakistan also and the muslim world. If we see this, the 39 nations and the center being riad, saudi arabia, and what they are expecting to achieve has sectarian overtones. In the muslim world, theres a big sectarian divide between shia and sunnis. And what is emerging in the syria and iraq and yemen is a sectarian conflict. The shia side is led by iran, and their accomplices are syria and iraq and hezbollah in lebanon. Now, on the sunni side, the leader happens to be saudi arabia. So i would say this, force being created if it is a combination of shia and sunnis both addressing the bigger menace of isis and al qaeda and terrorism within that region within islam, within the islamic world, then it would be positive, but if it is a combination of sunni states going into iraq and syria, which has absolutely sectarian conflict, it can be dangerous. So when an exarmy chief of pakistan goes inside, he has to take into consideration two elements. If i was leader there, i was first of all see what is the force under me, what is my task, am i capable of achieving my task successfully . Will i bring victory to the task that ive assigned . And if i cant do that, i will never accept it. The second thing is whether it has sectarian overtones, like i said, because pakistan happens to be after iran the only country which has the second largest opposition of shias, so we have a sensitivity domestic, internal sensitivity of our own. So, therefore, that can only also be effective. So you need to really balance out these two elements before accepting going into such a situation, so i leave it to the ex army chief and his best judgment. I hope he takes these two elements into consideration. Thank you. Theres been a recent discussion in Indian Nuclear policy circles of the potential need to reexamine the retaliationonly doctrine currently held by the indian government. What factors do you think could be driving this dialogue, and what does it say about the Modi Government and the current status of pakistaniindian relations . Yes, sir, the current status of indiapakistan relations is most terrible. I think confrontation is close, and may i say i dont know how many indian and how many pakistanis are sitting here, but i always believe in talking honestly. It is purely because of the very aggressive stance of Prime Minister modi, unfortunately. Now, on the nuclear issue, clearly it was india which went nuclear in 1974 when they exploded their First Nuclear device and called it a Peaceful Nuclear device. I dont know how a Nuclear Explosion can be peaceful. However, the world swallowed it. But that was the time when pakistan decided that we will match them. Because we believed in our military strategy is based on a strategy of deterrence. Deterrence meaning maintaining a force level which through military weve seen about a defensive force should be at least onethird the force of the aggressor, so we were maintaining that level of a conventional force. When they went to unconventional, that strategy of deterrence stood, so we had to balance it out again. Therefore, we also went nuclear. India has always been saying and proposing a strike because they had a very superior conventional force. We have a smaller conventional force. So we have not been saying that we are in favor of use, although weve been saying we should denuclearize the region. So this has been a conflict between india and pakistan on the nuclear issue, but may i say as far as pakistan is concerned, we are nuclear because we are we have an existential threat, and, therefore, we have a right to protect ourselves. We are threatened. Our existence is threatened. Just like israel. Israel is threatened, therefore, they are nuclear. So we also are nuclear because we have an existential threat. Pakistan is historically maintained an important relationship with the United States but is also a Strategic Partner with china. As the rhetoric contention between the u. S. And prc has elevated as of late, the maralago summit notwithstanding, how can pakistan balance its relationship with both of these great powers . Yes, indeed, an absolute need of balancing this relationship. Pakistan right from the time of its independence decided to in the cold war period when it was a bipolar world and soviet union versus United States, east versus west, we decided to get into the camp, we have parts of central defense pacts with the United States. And then we have been having ups and downs throughout. Our relationship has been going up and down. It has been a roller coaster. It was up until 1965 when we went to war with india and used the weapons given by the United States. Sanctions, then went down. 79 soviet invasion, we were needed, so, therefore, it went up again. But the whole decade was a very good relationship. Soviets were devoted, so, therefore, amendment came in and we were put on sanctions again, we went down again. Then comes 9 11, we are needed again, come up again, so now it is down again. So this situation is terrible. Now, we have to learn that as far as pakistan is concerned, United States is very important to pakistan. We have very broad ranging relationship with the United States, military and social economic, and we have been getting a lot of assistance from the United States, which we must be grateful about. Theres no doubt about that. But then there are certain strategic compulsions that are the emerging realities of china and the United States interest visavis china with india very well. Therefore, United States relations with india, visavis china, has become important, but we have an enmity with india, we have an existential threat with india, so how do we balance out this whole confusion of relationships and National Interest . I would say bilateralism. We should maintain relations on a bilateral basis. Pakistan should not be concerned or should not be overly bothered about u. S. Relations with india as long as it does not go against our national security. So also, United States should not bother about our relations with china as long as we dont impinge on United Statespakistan relations, so let us try to maintain bilateral relationship and balance it out with our relation with other countries wherever sensitivities are involved on both sides. Its a type, but diplomats must learn to do it. Thank you very much, general. I wanted to leave as much time for questions as possible, so now i would like to invite the audience, those in the audience with questions, to approach our two microphones and to ask, as i say, very brief questions of the general. Please, come up to the microphone and ask your question here. Over here, yes. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you for coming. I wanted to ask you, you sort of touched on it, but how do you see the pakistaniiranian relations going, especially since the former chief of Pakistan Army i know this directly pakistan and iran have had friendly relations, but how do you see that going after this incident . Thank you. Yes. Iran and pakistan are neighbors, so we cant undo neighborhood. Geography demands that we coexist, and we have been coexisting very well. Now we have to balance our relation here. Pakistans special position, may i say, not that im boasting because im a pakistani, but in the muslim world, there are three different views. One is turkey having all the historic power behind the o Ottoman Empire and all that, iran has been a power also, and saudi arabia, which is the center of the muslim world. These three have never had good relations between each other. Pakistan is the only country which has good relations with all three. So i think pakistan can play an ideal role of balancing, harmonizing relations within the muslim world. And bringing peace and harmony. But that can only happen if we have strength in our own country that is pakistan. If pakistan is running well, if pakistan is on an ascended course, recognized as such in the world as a progressive dynamic nation, then yes, indeed, we can play a great role in the muslim world. And we can play a great role also in bringing peace in the world, because most of the conflicts today in the world involve muslim countries. So these are the issues that i think pakistan ought to be conscious of. Set its own domestic environment right, and then play a very immediate role between saudi arabia and iran. For peace in the region and peace in the muslim world. General musharraf, in your introduction you briefly mentioned the issue of countries in post colonial middle east and south asia having populations that were ill equipped for democracy as you mentioned, and you mentioned in some situations authoritarian governments may be able to do the job more efficiently, perhaps. Do you think rhetoric like this is constructive to the political growth of pakistan in the future, given the fact the instability of the civilian Government Faces and the risk of another military coup in pakistan . Do you think this is constructive dialogue for the growth of the country . Thanks. Well, i believe if you see pakistani environment, pakistan has always progressed and risen under military rule. In the yukon era, in my era, im very proud to say that, and even in the era, socioeconomically. May be other eras we havent liked, but in all there has not even been a single civilian government in pakistan since 1947 which can claim to have given socioeconomic prosperity to pakistan and looking after the interests of the people of pakistan. Unfortunately. So, therefore, one has to see what is the issue of how to balance our democracy, totalitarian government is not the answer, why military coup, martial law is not the answer, but the answer lies in addressing the flaws in the democracy that we are running, in adjusting that democracy within the environment of pakistan, which is very different from the democracy in the United Kingdom from which we have borrowed our democracy, and also ensuring that there are checks and balances on the power brokers of pakistan, which are not there at the moment. So, therefore, if you can tailor our democracy to our requirements and then introduce checks and balances, yes, democracy is possible then, but this has not happened in most of the muslim countries, unfortunately. And as i said, there are tribal societies divided, so, therefore, totalitarian leaders, autocratic leaders, have always succeeded better than the democratically elected governments. General musharraf, i wanted to get your views on the anti laws, who target for us saying reading the koran, which is like the only law of its kind in any country in the muslim world, which basically criminalizes any islamic act, even though they are criticized for them. How do you view those laws . Well, this is a very sensitive question that you are asking, really. Personally, i believe in tolerance. I believe in moderation. I believe in allowing anyone and everyone that religion should be between him and his god, and i dont believe in interfering in that domain, but unfortunately, the muslim world is many are divided on this issue. If you take pakistan, well, lets not go into that. It will be a long answer, but they have to take a certain decision on the amnenty issue and this was done in the regime which really was most they were most nonreligious, i would say, he, himself. But it has been taken and i think it is very difficult to undo it now. That is all that i can say, and i would not like to comment further, whether it is right or wrong. Its a very serious religious issue, although i personally, as i said, believe in tolerance and accepting whatever religious views anyone holds. Hi, general musharraf, during your tenure as president , significant progress was made on establishing a framework for resolution to the longstanding issue between india and pakistan through the negotiations, so i wanted to get your perspective looking forward, what conditions must be satisfied both in pakistan and in india for the two governments to at least engage in meaningful dialogue again . Thank you. Yes, i have been telling about the Prime Ministers with whom i was successfully moving forward towards peace. I have been telling both of them, i told both of them, that there are three qualities required between the leaders, between you and me, i said. Number one is sincerity. Sincerity to resolve the disputes. Sincerity towards bringing about peace. That in your head and heart you believe that we have to resolve our disputes and bring peace into the region. That is in the socioeconomic interest of both the countries, and also the region, the southeastern region. The other is, and i believe that both of us had the sincerity. We really wanted peace. Therefore, we were moving forward. The other is flexibility. I believe that we have to be flexible enough to accept each others points of views in case they impact our own. Then only can we move forward. So that also, i think, was positive on both sides. The third area which is the most difficult is courage and boldness. Why courage and boldness is required is because any resolution of a dispute on a country requires if its to be solved requires meeting midway. It requires give and take. So when it requires a give and take, you have to give up to take off. You cannot take all. No leader will give all to the opponent. So when you have to give up, then only you take off, you are scared that in your backyard there will be agitation. There will be agitation and politically maybe you lose political ground. Now, these are this feeling of what would happen at the peoples response then scares leaders away from reaching a resolution. I know of the palestinian dispute. I believe arafat was reaching an accord in the days of simone perez or barack, but he didnt sign it because i believe there was a threat to his life and he came back. So now that is where the leader stands. If a leader is threatened that he signed the accord, when you get back well kill you. That is where leadership comes in. Do we have the guts to face this threat . For the sake of bigger gods than yourself. And that is where leaders get scared. So, therefore, may i say in the case of pakistan and india, first element of sincerity now when you come to the present times, i dont think that sincerity is available from the indian side. Prime minister modi has different designs about pakistan and they are strategic thinkers. They are saying that very openly, that they want to do the economic strangulation of pakistan, they want to weaken our army, destabilize us internally, isolate us internationally. This is what they have been saying and writing. Now, if this be the environment, theres no way of peace, how will we get peace . So im afraid the intention of the leaders at this moment have to change if you want to move forward in the direction of peace in the subcontinent. Thank you. Next . My question is concerning the passport, so, being a muslim myself and due to our religious status being on the passport we have suffered discrimination. I would like to ask why did you not decide to remove the religion section from the passport . When you were president , you said you would. This is, again, the same sensitive question really. And i would like to pass this question. I do understand your concerns, and i have my great sympathy, and im not saying that because you are one, im saying that because many, many of my friends and very Close Friends have been and are. And i think you are a community which is very educated and very progressive and very dynamic. I mean every word of it, so, therefore, one should favor you, yes, but one has to see the bigger issue of pakistan and turmoil within pakistan. One has to balance sympathies towards your community with realities on the ground. So you have to live with it. One hopes that better times will come. Thank you. If you were able to advise President Trump on how to best engage pakistan in the future i didnt get you . If you were able to advise President Trump on how to best engage with pakistan in the future, what would you advise him as being the best steps that the United States could take . The United States should take on the pakistanUnited States relations . Yes. Yeah, one the United States must understand pakistans significance and pakistan must, obviously, understand the United States being a superpower. Must enter and understand its interest in the United States and United States sensitivities towards pakistan. That is the main issue, understanding each others sensitivities and trying to deal with them honestly and sincerely. I mean, let me very proudly say, my success, if i call it a success in my time of relation with the United States, was basically because of my and president bushs absolutely clear openness and frank talk. Mine and secretary of state Colin Powells absolutely Straight Talk with each other. So this was the basis of our relations. We knew that the other side is talking very frankly, meaning every word of what they are saying, and then i mean every word of what im saying. No no mincing of words. That was the basis of our good relationship. I think that must continue. At the moment, when we hide our feelings and we become what we call diplomacy, i dont believe diplomacy doesnt mean you should be lying. Diplomacy means that you must speak the truth in a decent way. Some people interpret diplomacy as bluffing your way through. That should not be the case. I think its an attitude. Its an issue of attitude. We have our sensitivities in afghanistan, and United States has certain about pakistan in afghanistan. These must be resolved sitting frankly and talking straight to each other. That is what i would like to advise them. General, thank you so much for coming to our campus. There is a rising intolerance. How do you think that situation can be dealt with and what can pakistan and india play role in that . Thank you. You are talking of the region whether you talk of the region, the institution that joins us togeth together, asean. Where are you from . Sri lanka . India. India. Okay. The main reason why asean is important relation. Why is it important . Because of indiapakistan relations. Let me educate if you am allowed to quote a joke. I went to one of the conferences. One of the Prime Ministers, very small country there are small countries, actually. The biggest is india, then pakistan. Sri lanka is not small. Sorry. So this person said, mr. President , assad is important because of indiapakistan relations. He said when two indians quarrels, at that time between myself. Mr. Prime minister, be it the two elephants start making love, the grass may get more trampled. So i feel that we must resolve our disputes. We have to resolve our disputes and we have to have sincerity as we resolve our disputes. That is all. We must do it for the sake of india, and pakistan and the region. Everyone has been calling me in india a man of war. But im saying im a man of war but a man for peace because i know the hazards of war. Maybe everyone does not. I fought two wars. I have seen conflicts. So therefore i know what war is. I have my best friend who was killed in action and my son is named on him. So therefore i know what war is. Therefore we must stop wars. We must go for peace. But our intention must be noble for the whole region, for socialeconomic development. Of both. If you want to take all the advantages and give disadvantages to the other, cannot happen. You being from india, india is a big country. Certainly. Many think india showing accommodation will be seen all pos till. Magnanimo magnanimous. Good heartedness. P till. Magnanimous. Good heartednes po till. Magnanimous. Good heartedness till. Magnanimous. Good heartednes till. Magnanimous. Good heartednest till. Magnanimous. Good heartednes till. Magnanimous. Good heartednesv till. Magnanimous. Good heartednese till. Magnanimous. Good heartednestill. Magnanimous. Good heartednesill. Magnanimous. Good heartednesl. Magnanimous. Good heartednes ive been telling indian leaders, you have to be m magnanimous. Not me. This is what we need to bring peace to the world, peace to the region. Thank you so much for coming. Recently the Indian Army Chief of staff acknowledged the existence of the cold start doctrine which calls for indian offensive Holding Patterns to prevent a pakistani retaliatory response. This has been seen as destabilizing. What do you as a former chief of army staff and a strategic thinker in pakistan see as the alternatives or option policy options that pakistan has, and how does this doctrine change the dynamic in any future potential conflict between the two countries . Thank you. Did you say cold start strategy reduces Nuclear Response . Just the existence of the cold start strategy is aimed at sort of preventing or trying to prevent some sort of nuclear retaliation. No, i think it encourages that. It encourages a tactical Nuclear Response. If india wants to have a cold start strategy, although its did not succeed, as a military man i can say that, then you cannot assemble a force in our environment because we are watching each other closely and are activities, our intelligence activities in each others countries are so much that we know exactly what you are doing, you know exactly what we are doing. Now in that context, cold start strategy will not work, and we have assembled our forces in a way to conquer that. But the least is that if at all it could have some success, the way to such topic is having a Tactical Nuclear weapon and responding to this with a Tactical Nuclear weapon. So you are actually encouraging Nuclear Response, not reducing it. So i think it is negative. Thank you so much. Good evening, general. You i wanted to discuss the recent dkrencent degradation of russian military. How do you view the stealth toward russia thats been recently viewed . Is it significant and long lasting or it is just like not it is temporary . Thank you. No, i think it is a manifestation, as i said, of a changing world. A world which is changing from uni polarity to multipolarity. China, russia. Therefore, it gives other countries choices, diplomatic choices. Of balancing relations, it is not a single super power only. So, therefore russian dealing with russia or having a relations with russia has significance. So as far as pakistan is concerned, we are in a geographic situation which is of interest, interestingly, to all the three super powers of the future. United states sees that pakistan is in the center of iran, afghanistan, china, india. All of these four countries are of significant importance to United States. We are the center. So that is how important we are. For russia, they are seeing that they have an ambition of going on to the indian ocean, through central asia, then pakistan through afghanistan, then they came into afghanistan to balkanizing pakistan, afghanistan. They are seeing their reemergence and reassertion in the Central Region republics and afghanistan. Then associating themself with pakistan for their old dream of reaching out to the whole world through this route on the indian ocean. China is seeing United States as maybe encircling china. If they see the presence or the shift of United StatesStrategic Power from the atlantic to the pacific, from the Strategic Focus shifting from being euro centric to south asia and gulf and middle east. And then seeing their relationship with japan, south korea, vail, taiwan, philippines, singapore, india, they are seeing an encirclement of themselves. So they see pakistan has a route to the middle east and access to the warm water of the indian ocean, access to africa, access to europe. That is the significance of the geography of pakistan. Now, we must make sure that we utilize this and balance our relations in our own interest with all three. We must not do something which annoys another one. So that is the art of diplomacy. And if you can play it well, we can use these three elements that i said to our advantage. And if we dont do it well, it will go to disadvantage. I am a full bright scholar here from lahar, pakistan. Very good. I have this question that you always talk about a theater made diplomacy, democracy for pakistan. So what are those changes, adjustments needed in case of pakistan, and why didnt you make them when you were in power . I was. I was in the process of making them definitely. But you need time. What i was doing, i certainly transferred power to the Grassroots Level through the local governances, which i did. Yes, you did. But they finished it off. That was real democracy, isnt it. Real democracy is empowerment of the people. That is what i did. They have never done it. And they have stopped it again. And i empowered the women of pakistan. I empowered the minorities of pakistan. This is what really democracy is. Now but weve seen that this parliamentary system of democracy is not suiting pakistan that well. We need to have a president ial system introduced in pakistan. Then the important thing, without getting into details of what the pluses and minuses of each, but we need to have checks and balances in each. If a president ial system is introduced without checks and balances, it will fail again in pakistan. So we have to look into whether we should introduce a president ial system whether we should have proportional representation in elections, how do we ensure that there is no corruption, how do we ensure that it is always a Fair Election held in pakistan, how do we ensure checks and balances over the misperforming Prime Minister, over maybe an impulsive army chief . Who can impose martial law . So therefore, these are the checks and balances or modification that are required within our constitution. And the Supreme Court had given me three years and not allowed me major modifications to the constitution. Therefore, i couldnt do this. So these are inhibitions to what i could do and what i could not do. But one has to do one has to have a think tank to really go in to minute details of what how to get this democracy to our requirements. A lot can be done, and that is what we have to do. So can i ask another followup question . Do you see those changes coming with the power play between two Political Parties ever . Yeah, that is difficult because obviously changes to the constitution can be brought about by what means . A government, which has twothirds majority in the assembly. I dont see that happening. So therefore, that change will not come. Secondly, it can be through an interim government which has been maybe authorized by the Supreme Court to be able to amend the constitution, which they have given me to an extent. They have to do that. That could be another possibility, a shortcut to achieving what im saying. I expect i hope the shortcut comes about. Thank you so much. General musharraf, thank you for taking my question. Just want to ask you reflecting on your time as leader of pakistan, reflecting on all your experiences and everything that happened during that period, theres one thing you could have done differently or one regret you had, what would it be that you would have done differently . Very honestly speaking, i mean i dont believe in boasting, but whatever i did, i made a definition for myself back in early 2000. What are my responsibilities as a leader, and what are the responsibilities of my government . And he defined them. I thought that my responsibilities are to state and the people. And this applies to any leader in the world. Responsibilities to the state, and to the people. Development of the state, development of the people. These are the two basic responsibilities of any leader and any Good Governance. But then in case of pakistan, i thought we had an existential threat. There is no pakistan, there is no people, there is no state, there is nothing. So therefore security. I ensure the security from Less Development of the state, welfare well being of its people. And then i started working on each one of them, what is security, what is welfare Progress Development of the state, economy, agriculture, industry, communication, infrastructure, i. T. , telecom, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And then welfare of the people, poverty generation, private education, health. On each one of these, on each one of these, if you take the facts and figures, there is progress in some major progress, in some less progress. But not in a single one of them. Anyone can quote figures that we were not doing well. However, having said that, so therefore, i would like to repeat whatever i did, because we were rising. We were a defaulted state in 1999. Technically defaulted state in 2005 we became one of the n11 countries of the world. The next 11 economically vibrant countries of the world in five years because the nation has its potential and the resources. Now there are some things that i did which were correct but maybe because of the followup work should not have been done. So i have learned that sometimes even doing right is not appropriate to be done at that time. I needed to learn that and i have learned this. Thank you. Hello, thank you for coming. So you mentioned that the lack of account for tribal differences contributed to the efficacy of autocracy and improving the Economic Standing of middle eastern countries. Do you think that these lines should be redrawn or need to be amended in order to allow democracy to improve the Economic Standing in middle eastern countries. First of all, in all these countries you have to improve the standard, the social economic condition of the country and the people. Then only can you start thinking of introducing meaningful democracy in the countries. So therefore, education is one. And social economic can development is other. We must have an educated population. Today in the muslim world, we are the most uneducated in the world, the muslim countries. 22 of our 57 countries which are muslim are the poorest of the poor in the world. They are the most backward and they are the most illiterate. So in this condition when you go forward and you expect equal rights and all that, it doesnt function that well. And the people who dont even understand how to put their calm impression on a column let me tell you in pakistan when they vote for war, you vote a symbol and you are just expected to put your tongue impression against that symbol. People dont even know what is those columns, the two lines in between they put on the lines, they. You the it under the line. So this is the kind of literacy that there is. So i would say that we have to improve the condition of the people before we can introduce meaningful democracy. And then, yes, gradually we shift. For that we need benevolent autocratic benevolent governor. Ruler. We hope that did you have any in mind . Anyone in particular . I would say even if you see Southeast Asian countries take korea. Take singapore. Take taiwan. These are very progressive countries. Take malaysia. All have been governed by very autocratic rulers. All of them. That is how they rose. So therefore, im not talking of anything unique to the muslim world at all. Good evening, general musharraf. Given that india and pakistan started off sort of at the same time, and given that you mentioned earlier this evening that you see diversity as a potential problem to instituting meaningful democracy on population, et cetera, which has civilian government succeeded so much better in india as compared that pakistan, and why has pakistan had so much military intervention in its politics. Yes, bear in mind they are different. I think our democracy and politics in india had matured through the times since the early 20th century. And when we wrote our petition, in our case, in india, feudalism was finished. It was a good thing that all were done away with. In pakistan, our feudals were sitting in the 70s themselves. So therefore, they couldnt pass any law to undo themselves. So therefore, the feudal environment and tribal environment of pakistan gets perpetuated by the presence of the feudals and the tribal leaders in it thethe asem xwlia. I think there in the real sense democracy became dysfunctional. Is dysfunctional. That is the main reason, i think. Could i follow up . Just short one. So do you think it is failure of the Founding Fathers of pakistan to eliminate feudalism initially . No, no, i dont think so. Because one man cant do anything. It is the government which has to do something. It is all of them together. But if his support in making pakistan in the emergence of pakistan is from the feudal and the tribal what do they do . They are his backbone. They are his supporters. They are the one who have created pakistan. They are the ones who get elected and who are sitting in the assembly. So i dont think that is the reason at all. And then, pakistan i think over the time i would say to the discredit of the civilian government that they havent been able to handle the diversities in our population, the linguistic diversities, the ethnic diversities, the sectarian diversities. We havent been able to handle them well. I mean that is all that i can say. Therefore, they have been centrifugal forces which have prevented the government from functioning well, and therefore the emergence. And the peoples faith in the ara army. In pakistan people have tremendous faith in the army. They think that the army is the solution to everything, and they want for the army to come in to intervene whenever pakistan suffers. So they have issues which are applicable to pakistan and not that applicable to india itself. What do you suggest the current government of pakistan can do differently to remedy the issue of sectarian violence and intolerance throughout pakistan . What do you suggest the current government of pakistan can do differently to remedy the issue of sectarian violence and intolerance domestically within pakistan . Accepting indoll ratolerance. Intolerance and sectarian violence within pakistan domestically. Yes. Let me let me tell you what pakistan and let us understand pakistans religious environment. I divide pakistanis pakistan into four categories. Number one, moderates. Moderates are in a minority. They are the enlightened progressive educated kind. They build influence, but they are only restricted to cities of pakistan. Islamabad, et cetera. They are the minority. The second category is conservatives. Now conservative is the vast majority of pakistan. The vast majority living in the rural areas of pakistan, 60 , 70 . They are the ones who work at shrines. They believe in saints. But they are against extremism or terrorism. They are religious, highly religious. So this is the second category, vast majority. Third category is fundamentalists. Again, a minority. But they are the ones who believe in ritualistic islam, imposing like youre not wearing ahhah job, they would demand you must wear ahhah j h. I dont have a birdie, i have to have a birdie. They try to impose the ritualistic elements of islam and they can be violent, also. They are the minority. The fourth category, extremist and terrorist also get involved in terrorism, militancy. They believe in imposing their islamic views on others and they are militant. Now the key area is this vast majority which is conservative. If they are educated, if they handle this conservatives well and educate them, and bring social economic welfare there, they will tend towards moderation. And if you dont look after them and they remain in miserable condition, then they will tend toward fundamentalism and extremism. So this is the demand from the governments in pakistan. So therefore, in this environment, it is tonly some wo flourish and they misuse their authority towards bringing militancy, teaching militancy, in to the people who are illiterate, that conservative class in the villages. They are affected by the cleric. They are the ones who bring infuse this extremism in their mind, militancy in their mind, intolerance against other sects in their mind. So we have to address there issue of these intolerant clerics, misuse of the mosques, the misuse of the madrassa. There is another element. So therefore we have to take an overall strategic view of where extremism and fundamentalism lies, where does it come from . Where does it grow from . And address those issues. So it is a long, drawn battle, but we must be clear on a strategy and go towards it. Thank you. Hello be with general musharraf. My question also follows to that question. It is about the National Action plan that the government made in courts with the military not too long ago and how thats acting out. Because there are bbanned outfi pakistan that have been said to be protected by either the state or military and why has nothing been done to take enough action against these militant organizations in pakistan . I think weve done a lot. I think yes, indeed, the National Action plan wasnt being implemented and the army, frankly, had to push its way through to implement even against the authorization of the provincial and Central Government sometimes. Which is unfortunate. But however, the operations are there which was carried out as part of the National Action plan in north waziristan, has succeeded in a major way. This place, not waziristan, was the center where the taliban and al qaeda were being it was their communication center, their link with the with all the terrorist organization. It was from here. It was their Indoctrination Center where suicide bombers were trained. Their training center. Their center to teach how suicide where jackets are prepared and ieds, explosive devices, are prepared. So therefore, their goal, their center, has been shattered. It is a very big achievement. Very big achievement. So the linkages of these are other terrorist organizations has been shattered. So therefore, in the tribal agencies, reasonable amount of peace has been brought about. But then we are talking of karachi when there is a different kind of terrorism. There is political terrorism. Ethnic terrorism. There are different nuances of terrorism which have to be all dealt with. I think pakistan has the military, i would say, has done well and all the latest part of the operation that has been launched now is addressing the issue of sectarian terrorism in i thi i hear it has been going well. I think gender equality in pakistan i feel is a big issue. How would you propose that pakistan could empower its women politically other than the reserve seats that are there on the parliament . I think what i did for the women of pakistan has not been done by the woman of pakistan who was the Prime Minister. It was i who empowered the women. First of all, we did think of what to do for the women. So the first element of that i thought was political empowerment. Let them sit in their Decision Making organizations of pakistan, National Assembly and the senate, the provincial assembly and the district government, and let them decide and let them take their destiny into their own hands. That is why that is where i gave reserve seats for them, and also allowed them to contest against men. Many women defeat men and have come in. I know there were 13 with imwho defeated men and came into the National Assembly. So therefore, this was the empowerment of the women. The other element was certain laws which are discriminatory against women. Like the honor killing. We adjust them. I did modify them to remove the elements which really affected the women in a bad way. The other is to improve the lot of the women in education and jobs. So we established quota in the government and increased the women universities in pakistan. Another thing that we did was to the Women Protection bill which was passed which had all the elements of protecting them from unnecessary laws which were discriminatory, again. So we did a lot. But lot, there is no end. I mean still women are discriminated. Still they are the underprivileged. There is no doubt about it. Because more than laws, you have to bring about social change in the thinking of people. I mean if there is honor killing is banned, much more honor killing is being done because that is the mind of the men, the mind of the people. You can bring laws, they dont care. That is how they have been brought out. So therefore, education, gradual you make laws, then you keep implementing them. Even though there is a law in honor killing but the judge inside believes in honor killing so what more do you do about that when hes sitting in judgment of that . It is not a simple issue. It needs a change of law but a change of mindset. Therefore it is a long drawn process. Thank you so much. Good evening, sir. My question is you are seen as the person responsible for could you shed some light on the whole incident . Im very much responsible for having taken action and crushed them. I mean i claimed that. And i have been proud of that. Because we were trying to destabilize the government in the center of the country with the diplomatic play was only one kilometer. Is that how a progressive country which was one of the n11 countries of the world exists . So therefore they have to be cracked. These people were trying to challenge the will of the government. That is what we did. Now are you talking of the cleric whos running around free without being yes. It is an irony of fate that i am being accused of terrorism when this man who is a terrorist is running around. Hes initiated the case against me, calling me a terrorist. I didnt. That is why i keep saying that the cases against me are all politicized. That is how environment in pakistan is. We need to face such things. Thank you. Good evening, general. Thank you for being here. My question is about after the kidnapping and beheading ever daniel pearl in pakistan in 2002, you said that mr. Pearl might have been a little too inquisitive and overstepped his boundaries when he was investigating al qaeda in pakistan. I was wondering if you still stand by those remarks, and maybe connect it to the american journalists who were beheaded by isis a couple years ago and if they, too, you think overstepped their boundaries and what the role is of Investigative Journalism in todays era. I didnt get the what was stepping on boundaries in . Well, mr. Pearl specifically was overstepping the limits in his Investigative Journalism and when he was in pakistan investigating the links between al qaeda and pakistan and richard reid i think he was investigating. You are quoted as saying he might have overstepped his boundaries. Did i say that . I dont remember. Well, sometimes, yes, indeed, sometimes some of the journalists have been although i have been always believing the freedom of the media. In fact, you may be knowing that i am the one who introduced thr Free Television in pakistan. People have been saying that im the victim of my own creation. But, however, sometimes the journalists do not understand the extent of their freedom. I us a believe that this freedom has certain responsibilities attached to it. They must understand their responsibilities. So if there are certain sensitive areas and sensitivities of a country, they must adhere to those sensitivities and do not cross boundaries. Now i dont exactly know what particular case you are referring to, so it is only when that is crossed, then they put themselves into trouble. But, however, if there is any government, or any Government Organization or any law enforcer who is unnecessarily trying to create other than free media, i am totally against that. Any time i am against it. Thank you. Good afternoon, general. Do you think that pakistan can reach internal stability if it doesnt adjust the issue of solely funded wahhabi funded influenced madrassas in the country. Yes, think so. Pakistan is very stable. There are ups and downs in pakistan. There is good government, bad government. This happens in every country. We have a difference certainly that we have a threat. We have an existential threat. So if the armed military is capable of meeting this external existential threat internally, there are ups and downs, as you said. And we can handle ourselves. The plus point that i would like to say, if we see the ingredients of power potential within a country, pakistan has all the elements of power potential. We have all the resources. We have abundant water for human consumption, for livestock, for crops. We have for power generation. Dhe cheapest power generation. We have a bunch of land for the best crops for exports. We have all the resources for the Cheapest Energy generation. Water, hydroelectricity, wind, solar, coal, nuclear. So we have all the power potential resources. And then our geography, as i said. Then we have abundant natural resources. So we have all the resources that go to make a country strong. Our only negative is our big population, if that population has good quality and it is killed, it will become a positive, a big positive. And if it is unskilled and uneducated, it is a negative. That is what we need to handle 200 Million People only to improve their education level and skill development. Skill. If that be the case, we are very powerful nation. We have all the ingredients for power that is theoretically the case for judging a countrys power. So we shouldnt be at all responding that there is a problem in pakistans power potential. We can be very stable, we can be a very strong government and strong country. May i proudly say that in my time we were. We were recognized internationally as a rising country from all points of view. We had a statehood. We pakistan was respected everywhere. So therefore, it is merely good leadership and Good Governance which transforms and optimizes the power potential that is inherent in a country and uses it in a positive way to good of the country. And if the leadership and governance is bad, the same resources, same power potential does not it takes you down. So these are ups and downs of a country when it shouldnt be at all thinking that pakistan cannot be stable and rise. We can very much rise always. Good evening. Im from peshawar, im a fullbright visiting scholar. Youve mentioned a couple of times about the excess steniste threat from across the border. What do you think is the domination of penjab, and at the same time exploitation of the smaller provinces and also what have you considered in order to do about streaming of fatah. Because that makes it one element of kind of makes one element of the two centrifugal supportses th forces that you have spoken. It is the biggest province and more than half of pakistan. Therefore, Resource Wise and power wise, they are bigger than all the other three provinces together. That is what it, to extent, causing destability in pakistan. Yes, indeed. So i have always believed we should divide pakistan in a in thumb b number of provinces. Smaller of the provinces, the federation will become stronger and the provinces will be better administered because they are small. They would be better administered because the administration will be close to the people. But, however, i wasnt able to do this because i would have too much happening, too much happening, what i was thinking after 2007 i thought that the party was supporting me would win again and we would bring about restructuring of the again, the political system, and also government restructuring, Civil Services restructuring, et cetera, and we were thinking of doing that at that time. The other point that you made is of fatah. Yes . I think we need to need to eliminate fatah in to a number of maybe easily identified three or four provinces are. But one has to see that. These are very far reaching reforms which the government needs to see but i know that fatah has been integrated with the frontier province now, and that is a good step, i think. Thank you. We have time for just two more questions. I came to listen to your lecture. I did not take my lunch to listen to your lecture, but im glad im making this conference. I need to treat you to lunch, i think. That will be good. I have a question. You refined from the presidency but we have not accepted your resignation. You are still my president. You will be my president. You are my president. And i want you to be next president , but not the dummy president. Thank you. And you just answering someones question about indian behavio behavior, specifically doing a lot of bad things against pakistan, but you forgot to mention one thing. You cannot live thirsty and hungry in pakistan. Why didnt you visit that point . Yes. That is an issue. We have three disputes with india, as you know. Kashmir and two others. We were trying to resolve all three. I was trying to resolve all three. Now this water dispute is very, very serious obviously. There is a water agreement, water treaty between india and pakistan, International Water treaty where there are six of us, three came to pakistan, as you know, and three went to india. They all come from kashmir. Indian part of kashmir. One comes from himalayas. One comes from a range in india. They are all in india and they come into pakistan. So they now Prime Minister modi saying that we stop the powers is an extremely serious threat. I dont think he should do that at all. And if i was in charge, i would have told him that well go to war if you do that. It is that serious. Yes, it is serious. So dont do that. If he is prepared to accept war with pakistan, then do it. Thank you for answering my question. Just one more person and we going to go for lunch dinner. [ laughter ] thank you. Good evening, general. As you mentioned earlier, we have like a roller coaster relationship with u. S. And since 9 11 in fact, when 9 11 happened, u. S. Needed us and we responded. We not only provided them more bases, but also we were like a front line ally in the war on terror. And since then we have sustained almost 118 billion of loss to our infrastructure and the taliban are retaliating by conducting suicide attacks and other terrorist activity across pakistan. But they see us as a terrorist sponsoring state. How would you clarify pakistans position . Well, i think some people do think that we are terrorist sponsoring. But majority of the countries and leaders do understand that we are fighting terrorism, that we are the victims of terrorism. We are not the perpetuators of terrorism. Those who blame us of that do not understand where this religious militancy started. Religious militancy started in 1979 when afghanistan was occupied by soviet union. And when that happened, American Interest was to contain communism, and therefore expel soviet union from afghanistan, and pakistan interest was also that because they were their intention was to go through pakistan to the warm waters of indian ocean. So therefore we joined hands and we waged jihad we called it a jihad to draw mujahadin from entire muslim world. About 25 mow mujahadin came from the entire muslim world into afghanistan. Then we claimed and armed taliban. Then i say we, the United States and pakistan. We trained taliban and sent them into afghanistan to fight the russians, the soviets. And we defeated them. In ten years. So militancy really just militancy was introduced then. And then it continued in the whole decade of 90s because United States lost interest there, went into iraq, and in this period there was a vacuum in afghanistan and al qaeda came into being and then the taliban unified under mullah omar in 1996. And in this era, in this ten years a vacuum ideal for terrorist planning. And that is where 9 11 was planned by al qaeda, because it was a total vacuum in afghanistan. And 9 11 was executed in 9 11, in 2011, right . So this religious militancy is not pakistans doing. We are a victim of circumstances in the region. So therefore, we cannot be blamed at all. Its only those who dont understand the history. Now we have to fight against terrorism or whatever has happened there. And we are doing that to the best of our ability, and i think those who are blaming pakistan are absolutely wrong. They must understand pakistans sacrifices, the role that we played and the sacrifices weve given fighting terrorism, and we still continue to sacrifice fighting terrorism. Thank you so much, general. Because it hurts when you are victim of terrorism, but then your leader is a terrorist. So thanks for clarifying. Yeah. Ive been through these attacks already. Two known ones and i think six unknown ones. Thank you all for your very, very good questions tonight. General musharraf, thank you very much for your time and your insight. Goodnight. [ applause ] thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Congress is back this week following a twoweek spring break. The house resumes bill debate tomorrow. Among issues awaiting action, federal spending for the remainder of this budget year and in 2018. Current Spending Authority runs out on friday. Also, raising the debt ceiling which limits government borrowing. The senate meets today at 3 00 p. M. Eastern. Senate lawmakers will vote this afternoon on the nomination of former georgia governor sonny perdue to be the next agriculture secretary. Lawmakers will also vote on advancing a Deputy Attorney general nomination. You can watch that debate on cspan2. The house is live on cspan. Attorney general Jeff Sessions will speak today about workplace integrity and ethical standards. The event at the annual ethics and Compliance Initiative conference here in washington, d. C. Will also include a discussion with former Justice Department officials from the clinton, george w. Bush and obama administrations. That will get under way live at 3 15 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Former president barack obama talked about political activism and Civic Engagement today while at the university of chicago. This was his first public event since leaving office. He moderated a Panel Discussion on voting participation and how to get young people involved. You can see the conversation tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspan. Check out our cspan classroom website at cspan. Org classroom. Its full of free Teaching Resources for cspan classroom members. The improved layout gives teachers easy access to readytogo resources for the classroom, including short Current Events videos that highlight important events in washington, d. C. Constitution clips that bring the constitution to life. Social studies lesson plans. As well as on this day in history resources. Our search function allows cspan Classroom Teachers to search and filter by date, person, keyword, topic, and grade level. Our bell ringers video clips of teacher favorites are short videos paired with vocabulary and discussion questions that make the federal government and political discussions more accessible. Ill use bell ringers in conjunction with an activity that were doing that day as more of like a wrapup. The new website is something thats just fabulous. My students use it regularly. It is so easy in fact that they are right now working on clipping videos and making questions that they can design and turn into their own bell ringers. Finally my favorite aspect is the deliberations page. It is a perfectly set up readytogo classroom deliberation, classroom discussion on just a variety of topics that are current and relevant today. If you are a middle school or high schoolteacher, join thousands of your fellow teachers across the nation as a member of cspan classroom. It is free and easy to register at cspan. Org classroom. If you register now you can request our free classroom size american president s timeline poster. A graphic display of the biographies of all 45 president s. Find out more about it at cspan. Org classroom