Afghanistan's $10 billion is being held by the country that signed its peace deal

सालियां अल्लाहबतिनाज रात welcome back to another episode of Thought Driving Things. जैसा कि आपको पता है कि Afghanistan में there's a lot of a lot of things happening and इसी के साथ हमने multiple podcasts begin थी. आज we have a very very special guest with us for pertaining to the Afghanistan situation. We have the special assistant to the prime minister on information, रोहफ़ ख़सन साहब who's also the chief executive officer of Regional Peace Institute which is a think tank that does जो करते हैं वो I like to ask him as well. रोहफ thank you so much for being part of the show. Pleasure, thank you very much for inviting me here. रोहफ I start the conversation with asking a little bit about what Regional Peace Institute is.

Well, we we conduct, bilateral dialogues at track two and track 1.5, and Afghanistan is a principal country that we've been dealing with for the last seven, eight years now. It's a it's a place very close to my heart, and, particularly grateful that you've invited me here to talk about this country. ज़बरदस्त.

I am gonna sort of jump right into it. You know, Afghanistan में नई government announce हुई है, interim government announce हुई है. What's your take on that, जो अभी you know, the names that have been announced, the government that has been announced? It may not be strictly in accordance with the expectations, you know, which had been generated because of the statements coming out of, the Taliban leadership.

But it comprises the old guard, and, they're all, you know, very devoted members of the Taliban. And they've been, they were part of the government they had in the nineties, and they have been, you know, they were part of this war that दिवेश for twenty years. But this is number one an interim government, and number two, it is an incomplete, cabinet. Right. They have said that more ministers are likely to be inducted. You know, as you can see, there's no, there's no woman in the cabinet. So it is it is expected, you know, that in the second consignment that comes, you know, there will be, there will be some women. And, also, I think the members of the members members of,

members of the other stakeholders in Afghanistan to turn this into what is generally referred to now as an inclusive government, you know. So, we expect that to happen soon. Right, makes sense. अगर मैं इसी को थोड़ा सा expand करूं, you know. Global community इस वक़्त जो है जाहिर है, some of them are looking at it very clearly, very closely. Some of them are, you know, saying कि, you know, we might just sanction them. China के role में और US के role में अगर आप मुझे थोड़ा बता सकें कि how are they seeing the current government in in Kabul? Well, I think there's there's there is enormous

difference between, the manner in which the two countries have responded to the developments in Afghanistan. The Americans, as we were discussing before the, before the recording commenced, you know, they were the ones basically who legalized, legitimized Taliban, know, by signing the deal, you know, back in 2020, February 29 if I remember it correctly. Uh-uh, but now they they want them to earn, as they call it, earn their legitimacy. While on the one hand, it had already legitimized the Taliban back in 2020. Now they want them to earn it all over again. So this is this is the this this enormous contradiction, you know, in the two stances in a while. On the other hand, the Chinese have always been engaged with the Taliban in the last number of years. They are still engaged with the Taliban. And, I I reckon that I think they'll be playing a very positive role, very, productive role with regard to the resurgence of Afghanistan as a viable, credible, and, sustainable country. Right. I believe they have, given some sort of financial aid as well, recently. They have given a tranche of, I think, $300,000,000. You know? I think the first country to do so. And particularly, under the present circumstances, you know, when I think there is a there is an economic, collapse, you know, because the western countries have stopped the flow of, money, to Afghanistan, including, you know, what legally belongs to the state of Afghanistan. So, you know, we can possibly discuss that in greater detail as we progress. Right. Economic, sustainability, I think that's very very important, right? And इसका start मैं इसे करूंगा के, we saw that the $10,000,000,000

जो Afghanistan का, you know, essentially foreign exchange reserve था, that's sitting in New York and that's been blocked. Do you think I mean, I I feel like that doesn't make a lot of sense considering, again, मैं peace deal में जाऊंगा पहले. दो चीज़ों की वजह से it doesn't make sense to me. First of all, the peace deal did not mention as per what's available in the public कि government कैसी होगी या उसके हिसाब से हम, know, financial, वह किस तरह से देखेंगे. और दूसरा यह कि, you know, the idea with with that you mentioned कि you earn your legitimacy, it's like, you know, asking the bird to fly while cutting the wings off. Right? So how do you how do how do they see,

the current government doing anything when they don't even have the money to do so? Well, technically, this money that you're talking about belongs to the state of Afghanistan, and I don't think any country has a right to hold that money back, you know, irrespective of which government is, there to to to take things forward. The western countries, in a long time now, they have been waging this war of change of government, you know. Middle East is in a in a huge crisis space. You know, you look at Syria, look at Iraq, look at Libya. You know, Afghanistan is, is is is one country, you in that chain of, activities that the Americans and the western powers, you know, they initiated. And I think it has destroyed part of the world. This has to come to an end, you know. Now that the Taliban are there, you know, like, going back to 2020, you know, it is the Americans who requested Pakistan to, broker talks with the Taliban. Pakistan did so, and they sat across. They discussed things over a number of months, and then they actually signed a deal. Right. Pakistan present during those No. Pakistan was not. Pakistan just facilitated. You know, then it was left to the Americans and the Taliban to sort things out, and they did. By signing on the daughter line, there were just two clauses to that. In exchange for the Taliban commitment not to allow the use of Afghan sol for any terrorist activity, the Americans gave a timeline for withdrawal of troops. That means they extended recognition to the Taliban, not just as an entity, but also as the potential rulers of Afghanistan. Otherwise, how do you how do you seek this kind of commitment from from a nobody? Right. So, you know, on the one hand, they did that. And now on the other hand, they they they they expect to know that the Taliban will earn their legitimacy all over again. So how how do how how do the Americans expect that the Taliban to earn that legitimacy? And if if if the legitimacy wasn't earned, why was why were peace talks done in the first place? Absolutely. Absolutely. So their legitimacy in their context is that the that that the that the Afghanistan, society is transformed along the lines of the western societies. Right. The Americans did it for twenty years. Go through the SEGAR papers, basically. You know, you must have gone through that. I mean, it's it's they have dreams and dreams, of of how this entire thing was mismanaged. You know, when they wanted to turn Afghanistan into a so called western democracy. Yeah. I mean, you have to have the ground conditions which which are which are which are conducive to, you know, doing what you plan to do in that country. So twenty years of utter, total, shameful failure in Afghanistan. And they still expect that Afghanistan is going to be transformed along those lines. That's not happening. So if that is their concept of inclusivity Yeah. Then, obviously It's made to this. I don't it's it's much too much to expect of Afghanistan and the leadership that is there to rule Afghanistan at this juncture. Right.

Beyond The US, I mean, regional, you know, there are a lot of regional players as well who have a lot of stake in terms of, you know, Afghanistan being stable and peaceful. One country particularly, you know, Qatar has played an important role, not as a as a broker of peace or in terms of as the place where it was being done. But, also, I was reading that the Qatar, government helped sort of repair the Kabul Airport. What do you think is Qatar's role in all of this? And why why are they doing all of this? Qatar's role has been one of the principal,

roles. They are the ones who offered Taliban to open a political office in Joha, and that office has played a major role in in negotiating deals with various countries, you know, and, carrying on the political activity that the Taliban did. That is why we are where we are today. So yesterday, there, Qatar's deputy minister, who also holds the foreign minister portfolio, was here. And interestingly, Pakistan and Qatar have jointly, requested of America to release those funds for, for Afghanistan, to award the prospect of an humanitarian crisis. Now this is what we generally refer to as an humanitarian crisis. You know? The western press was, you know, constantly labeling, you know, the chaos at Kabul Airport as a humanitarian crisis. That's no humanitarian crisis. They are economic migrants. Basically, they would, you know, you you you give that offer to any other country, you know, and you would have other people throng the airports, you know, in their bed to leave the, you know, go to the country where they feel they have better prospects. Right. So this is a humanitarian crisis when people don't have money, food to eat, when they don't have money to spend, when the state does not have money to spend, the government does not have money to spend. So I think it it's it's a huge responsibility that rests on the shoulders of the western countries, the so called democratic, countries, to ensure that funds begin to flow into Afghanistan so that they can run the government and they can, you know, cater to the basic needs of the people. And and very important to put out there, this is not even humanitarian aid. This is the money of the Afghan people that has been blocked by another control. That is what I said. It is legally theirs. It is legally there. Can't be held back. Right.

In terms of, again, you talked about the economy. You talked about, you know, there being a humanitarian crisis in the absence of, let's say, again, if the Americans don't give the the $10,000,000,000 back, where do you see the economy going? Because right now, I mean, the infrastructure has collapsed. There is no system. There's just only been a government, you know, three days, four days ago.

So so how do you see the economy faring in the in the coming few months? I I've written repeatedly in the last three weeks, you know, on this subject, and I think it's very important. It's critical to the future of Afghanistan. I feel that there's a huge responsibility that rests on Afghanistan's neighbors as, at at stage one and Afghanistan and this region at stage two. I think in the absence of the West playing a role, which which unfortunately appears to be the case, at least till this moment in time as we sit and talk. I think Afghanistan's neighbors and then the regional countries, you know, neighbors in they're five. Right. Afghanistan is the sixth. I know. And they have met twice. Even two days ago, met, and they have now decided to invite Afghanistan. On Pakistan's suggestion, they're they have, they're going to invite Afghanistan to participate in the next meeting of the, Foreign minister's At at the foreign minister's level, you of the of Afghanistan and its neighbors. So I think this they they will possibly have to shoulder the front of responsibility, and I think they must. It's important because, basically, all this is about peace, creating peace in Afghanistan, ensuring, you know, that the terrorist stations are now eliminated there, and there is no disturbance along the borders of Afghanistan with other countries. So, you know, to ensure that, you have to banish, impoverishment. Right. And for that, need money. You can't if you have impoverishment, there's bound to be terror. Bound to be terror. And this has been this has been sort of reiterated to so many researchers, you know, which have been conducted the last many years. You know? So that's number one. So these countries possibly will bear the primary responsibility, including Pakistan. But I think these countries are going to be led by China. And we already said, you that they have announced a tranche of about $300,000,000 for Afghanistan, you as, you know, as money going going there so that they can, you know, run the day to day business. Then, of course, you know, will there will be Russia. I think they will possibly, chip in a little. I expect that at some stage, Turkey will also be inducted into this group, you know, so they will they will chip in a little. I think they possibly can do that. But the principal responsibility is this. But then I think at a different level, Muzambel, I think we should we should wager political battle at the international forum like United Nations and all other like SEO we were talking about that, you know, urging the western world, you know, that now is the time to stand with Afghanistan, to encourage it, to give them space so that they're able to take Afghanistan into a future that they envision Right. Is appropriate for it. They have tried for twenty years. They tried to transform Afghanistan into a society that they could not. Right. They were, you know, they were they were utterly clueless. Once again, I would refer to the cigar papers. All you need to do is to access those papers. You know? So now they have a government which is of the people. Right. So they must at least facilitate them. Right. Even if they cannot help them Yeah. By, you know, sending an aid and all that, they should at least return to them what is legally theirs. Right. Borderly theirs. They should not hold it back. So I think a great responsibility rests on, number one, Afghanistan's neighbors, number two, regional countries, and, of course, the international community, you know, to stand with Afghanistan to help them to, you know, wade into the future. Right. I think one of the questions that comes in my mind ever so often is,

it's a chicken and egg. So do you have a sort of a, a social revolution first or an economic revolution first? Right? Like, how do you if if you don't if you have mouths to feed, do you ask them to be different people in terms of their culture and their society, and do you ask them to be more empowered? And so if I look at, you know, the current, Afghan government, and if I go up up, you know, a few decades back and I look at what some of the governments in The Middle East, you know, before the oil money, they were very different. And then once the economic activity started happening and and and people got the money, and so we saw incredible amounts of evolution in terms of their social structure as well, very contextual to their own, obviously, setup. But, still, they were in terms of how the world looks at, you know, the modern world. We saw those countries to be able to enter that. Again, with Afghanistan, when when the West constantly demands them to change their social structure or the way that they sort of deal with, you know, women and the way that they deal with how the society is functioning. Do you think it's possible, and and, again, based on the last twenty years that we've seen, to not have any economic activity and yet expect or demand that socially they'll be able to change? Well, change evolves. It is never imposed. Right. You see, if you go through the pages of history, you know, change has evolved, always evolved. In the western democracies today,

they did not become this overnight. There were no dictators, you know, who sort of went around with a rod or a whip or something saying, alright. This is not the way you're going to live your life. This is the way you're going to live the life. And they obediently transformed to to to to to what was being dictated about it, you know. Afghanistan is a very backwards state. It's a very tribalized society. Right. And they live by what they call Pashtun Valley. Pashtun Valley is a code of honor for them basically. And, you see, anybody who violates the Pashtun Valley, you know, becomes an outcast in that society. Change, yes, I am totally totally committed to the fact that change must occur in Afghanistan, but you can't force it to occur, force it to happen. First and foremost is the means to survive and to progress economically. That means money must come in. That means money must be earned in Afghanistan. That means provisions must be created by the government of Afghanistan for people to earn money, to to become more, comfortable with their lives and all that. Then at the same time, they must have money to to, you know, open new schools, you know, health centers and all that. These are basic needs of the अफ़कान people at this time. In the last twenty years, again, I keep referring to सिगा papers. You know, just imagine, I mean, out of out of the two trillions, you know, that were sent by the Americans and, you know, so many other countries also sent money. Virtually nothing was invested in the welfare of the people, you know. Like, we must give this government a chance. And change, yes, it must occur. But let them let them first make, their society and their state sustainable. That's important. And, you know, social change and, you know, other changes, you know, will occur, you know, as a consequence of that, not as a precursor to that. Can't you can't you just force it to know that it will happen, and so economic survival will also come. No. Economic survival will not come. That's just beyond. And that is where the international community and regional community, you know, must play a role. So, you know, I think it is in that order that we must try to proceed further. And I think change will definitely happen. The last twenty years have definitely made a difference, and that is people have become sensitive to to freedoms now. And, you know, you can't if you if people become sensitive to freedoms, you know, you can't just take them back. It's very difficult, you know. A step which is taken, know, it's very difficult to retract that step. Know? So I think the Afghan society today is much more enlightened, much more forward oriented, much more sensitive to freedoms, much more aware of freedoms. So I think gradually, with the passage of time, they will earn those freedoms or they will help those freedoms evolve in the अफगान society within the ambit of their domain, within the ambit of their, cultural constraints and their, religious constraints and all that. It cannot become like the western society. It's a different society. I can't project about the next hundred years or two hundred years, and I'm sure nobody can. But for the foreseeable future, I expect it to remain,

a tribalized society, but a tribalized society which is on the way to improving with the passage of time. Makes sense. It's incremental in its Incremental evolution. Absolutely. Incremental evolution. You know, one of the things that we've heard the the government of Pakistan constantly say is, you know, we need an Afghan led solution. And, you know, looking at the past forty years, with the Soviet, intervention and then, with the US invasion, how important do you think at this point in time is the fact that the Afghan solution needs to be led by the Afghans themselves? Because it seems like nobody else really truly understands what's going on there.

They are leading it. I don't think there's any interference at all from any any other country at this moment, and I think they must lead it because unless it is led by Afghansano, it will not be, acceptable to the Afghansano. Graveyard of empires. Know? It is it's a terminal which is not coined without a reason for it. Basically, the British tried it. The Soviets tried it. You know? The Americans have tried it. They've gone back, and they've gone back, pretty embarrassed. So I think any any country which has the wisdom will not even think of interfering in the Afghanistan affairs. But it does not mean that you cannot extend help and support and encouragement. And this is what I've always been projecting, you know, in my articles and pieces that I've written over the last many weeks. I think we have to stand with Afghanistan. Right. And whatever they are. It may not be. They may not be exactly like us. They may definitely not be like the West. But the fact is, you know, that we have to help them and encourage them to move on and change as they move on. Right. This is important. So it is an Afghan led, an Afghan owned. I think Taliban are very much an indigenized community, and they have come into power today. This war has spread a lot of misery for the Afghan people. I think, as I said, you know, they're based through fire for forty years. Yep. It's a moral responsibility of the world to ensure that it does not happen again. And that will happen only when the West when when the world stands with Afghanistan and helps it move forward. That's it. And this, unfortunately, is what the best is not doing. Right. That that's very unfortunate part. If you talk about, let's say, you know, the regionalcom

regional, countries helping Afghanistan, let's say, you know, the West softens its stance as well. Maybe there's some money coming into Afghanistan. In terms of more, more sustainable economy, Knowing the fact that most of that population has essentially grown up during war, what do you think do they have in terms of, you know, sort of, con like, internal economy? What does Afghanistan have that they can they can sort of rely on for for generating economic activity and something that they can potentially generate quickly? They have enormous mineral wealth, which

has remained untapped for a long time. And then the fact, you know, that they're talking about about the about their inclination to join the r b r I slash c pack, I think that will open up new and productive revenues for Afghanistan. If they become part of the c pack trail, then that'll help Pakistan. That'll help Afghanistan. That will help Central Asian countries, you which will eventually be linked, you know, in the trail and all that. So that'll open up multiple avenues for Afghanistan to progress economically. And making use of the, mineral wealth that they have in abundance in Afghanistan. I think, you know, China can help them. Even Turkey can help them. Even Pakistan can help them, you know, to to to make use of that wealth, you which has which has which is lying underground, you know, and they have not been able to tap into that. So I think two or three different parallel tracks, you know, that they would they they can take. Make use of the existing track, you which is CPEG, you know, then discover their own mineral resources, you know, and make could use of that. And number three is think about the ways it means, basically, you know, which can generate jobs for the people. At this moment in time, it's a struggle for surviving, you know, for most of the people in Afghanistan. And I think, if the regional countries can get together and formulate a mechanism whereby, you know, they can, provision, the basic needs of the people of Afghanistan, either in terms of money, you know, given to the Afghan government, you know, or in terms of immediately initiating certain projects, you know, which are money generating, which are revenue generating. I think that should be good. So these are three parallel tracks which, I think Afghanistan should adopt. So I see you, you know, you're you're repeating

this idea of regional countries having a stake in Afghanistan's peace. And I think that's that's very important and a fascinating concept for me because, you know, अगर Pakistan की बात की जाए तो constantly, particularly हमारे कुछ certain neighbors हैं और कुछ western media है जो क्या कि बारे में कहते कि Pakistan doesn't want peace, Pakistan is a spoiler. What do you think is Pakistan's role and what what is Pakistan and the region, particularly, you know, Central Asian states? You you mentioned Russia to be involved. You mentioned China to be involved. What is their stake in, you know, a peaceful and potentially stable Afghanistan?

See, the common stake is peace. That means there is no terror in this part of the world. That is Pakistan's stake. You know you know, through years, in fact, decades, you know, Pakistan has been destabilized from across its western border, particularly in the province of Butistan, you know. And this was an India slash NDS, funded and, aided and abetted projects, you know, all of them, basically. So we have suffered destabilization. And I think, you know, one of the principal reasons, you know, why we why we have played a role, a constructive role, is that we do not want our borders to be destabilized, you know, across our sort of, you know, western neighbor and all that. This this is this is also the ambition of every other regional country, you know, be it China. China is very sensitive to ISK, you know, which has created problems there in Schengen Province, you know. So they're very sensitive to to to to any terrorist activity emanating from Afghanistan. So are Central Asian countries and of course Russia and Iran are also very sensitive to this. So this is a common objective. There should be peace in Afghanistan because peace in the region is dependent on peace in Afghanistan. This, unfortunately, over time, had become the hotbed of terror, you know, starting with Al Qaeda and even before that. So that is the common point. So I think there is a there's a legitimate reason for all these countries to play a role, to bring peace to Afghanistan so that there could be peace in all these countries. And they could also rightfully invest their, resources, in helping their people, you know, walk out of impoverishment and all that. I mean, this is, again, the other common factor is impoverishment in these countries. Know, be it Afghanistan, Pakistan or the Central Asian countries and even Iran, there is impoverishment. So, which is directly linked to terror, as you know that. You know, you have to eliminate impoverishment, you know, to to eliminate terror. Right. And so There's a link in So in terms of the economic, opportunity

here as well, right? Because we do see there's a certain language of regional connectivity that has certain, you know, that has risen in the past few years. And then particularly, was looking at the Pakistani government and how they sort of shifted their focus from geo... Geo... Security to geoeconomics. And that's basically centered in the context of the region altogether. So so a peaceful Afghanistan. What does that mean? Because, you know, I've I've been seeing the Pakistani government constantly engaging a lot with the Central Asian states, not just in terms of security or Afghanistan, but also in terms of business deals and trade deals and a lot of these things. I I remember there was a a a real sort of memorandum of understanding that was signed with Uzbekistan, I think, $5,200,000,000 a few months ago. And for a lot of people, that's just very, very confusing. You know, we never Uzbekistan is not a country that we, saw in in our media a lot. That's and and to see a $5,200,000,000 worth of of a deal with them, you know, people do definitely do have questions. What do we stand to gain from it? Peace in Afghanistan means peace in the region.

Peace in the region means, economic activity in the region. Economic activity in the region means, generation of resources to eliminate poverty. Right. Wealth, you know, wealth creation Wealth creation and all that. So elimination of poverty. That will ultimately lead to these countries joining the ranks of the developed world. Right. So peace is the fundamental requirement to move along the trail to, becoming, developed countries, you know, so to say. So this is a common this is a common, common, factor between all regional countries. Know? And this is why they're working closely together. Right. You know, they're they're meeting regularly, and they are, constantly thinking of ways and means. You know? Now Pakistan, I think, has has, proposed that, Afghanistan should be invited to attend the next meeting. And I think they will, and I think Afghanistan will also come. So, you know, these countries will sit together. When you sit together and we talk about problems, you know, you definitely come up, and you have a positive approach, and you have a common objective, then there are I think I'm sure that they will come up with ways and means and mechanisms, know, to move forward. And this, is the only way. You know, like I said, you know, Afghanistan is waged through fire, you know, and in a way, other countries of the region do have. And I think, we would not want a repetition of that kind of thing happening in the future. So there's a common there's a common objective, and I think that brings the countries together, closer together. And that I see happening. And I think it's a very positive thing. This region emerging, you know, as, as leaders of the world. The West is a declining, civilization as you I'm sure you must be aware of that. So we are the ones basically who can replace that, that decline. China's there. China has played a very major role, and I think, other countries of the region are also, developing economies. And, this is an opportunity which has come their way. And I think, you know, by working together with common objectives in mind, they can they can, you know, lead the way to helping Asia emerge as the leaders of the world. Right. And And I call this actually you know, in one of my articles, I call this the, the strategic power corridor. Interesting. I refer to it as the strategic power corridor. There is China, there is Russia. There is Pakistan. These are elite, sort of countries. Know? So there's the strategic component. Power emanates from there. But, basically, the strategic power will, you know, will emerge out of economic development, you that the that the region goes to. China is virtually, there already, but all the rest of the countries, they still have to go a long way. You know? So I think China is helping out through CPAC, through BRI. And, you know, bilateral agreements, you know, like they've signed one with with Iran also. They have helped Pakistan a lot, and they're willing to help other countries, including Afghanistan. So I think it's a it's a, it's a stimulating prospect, you know, and I think I look at it that way. And I think, you know, the West is very of it, if you would like would like to discuss that. They're very very of it, and this possibly is the reason why they're behaving the way they're behaving, you know. Right. Holding things back and not helping Afghanistan because they're afraid of it. But, you know, if you look at the geostrategic sort of composition, you know, I think we're finally, after seventy three years, we're finally playing our cards right. Yeah. We are playing our cards in the region. Yeah. Well, way back nineteen hundred and forty eight, forty nine, you know, we opted to shake hands across 15,000 kilometers of turbulent waters. Right. And that, you know, you you know, what we have suffered all along because of that relationship. So here we are coming back to the region. Right. And signing deals, you know, with the regional countries, you know, working together with the regional countries, you know, and, you know, in in, you know, to in in a bid to, attain, common objectives. Right. So this is where she should have been actually seven decades ago, but I'm I'm one of the since I've been sort of, you know, constantly talking and reviewing this, it makes me a very happy person, you know, that, you know, my country is finally

Finally the right track. On the right track. Makes a lot of sense. Right, you know, आपने multiple times बताया, regional countries का भी बताया. आपने बताया कि, you know, particularly बड़ी exciting बात है आप लेकिन कि it's the, it's the time of Asia, it's the century of Asia and potentially, you know, Asia could rise. It seems from the indicators now that, it it it's only a matter of time. But अगर मैं these general countries की बात करूंगी, थोड़ी देर पहले Iran convention किया था and it's when I'm looking at what what Iran is doing with Afghanistan, I'm very confused because they have been trying to sort of engage as well. Historically, एक वह, you know, Sunni and Shia fault line थी. But in terms of ever since, you know, August 15, we did see कि Iranian side थोड़ी सी उनसे engagement कर रही थी. But recently मैं you know, पाकिस्तानी context में देख रहा था कि you know, the foreign ministry putting out, you know, odd statements and then there are protests, जो कि it seems like, you know, they're they're very well curated protests. So what's the angling there? It's very confusing.

You've used the right word, angling. We have, consistently pursued a policy of engagement with Iran, There have been such instances in the past also. This is not the first time that it's happened, you know, that they've come up with statements which are not congruous with the course of development, you know. But we have remained engaged with them. Our ambassador, I think, three days ago had, in Kabul, had a meeting with the Iranian ambassador there, and I think they were tied over this in due course of time. I I don't attach, much too much importance to it. The Iranians are a little concerned about the fact that they are not playing the lead role, which, has, fallen into, Pakistan's kitty. I think we we have we have handled it brilliantly. So they're a little sort of, you know, upset, and that that sort of finds expression in words, you once in a while. So I don't really attach much importance to it because I think, I think we're there, and we will we would like to take Iran along. I don't think we will And you think Iran will eventually sort of, be part of that as well? Yes. We will. Definitely. I think, see, Iran is already linked with China. Right. And if if CPAC moves forward, Iran will move forward, and it'll become part of the regional approach and regional initiative, you that I'm talking about and, in fact, I'm very eager about. And I understand that Pakistan wants to do the same. This is the broad based thinking, you know, at the highest level that we have to proceed further as a region rather than individually.

That helps. That helps. Right. And then, obviously, the other player, that that'd be being India. Right? You know, even when it came to belt and road initiative, you know, it seems like they are sort of doing what Pakistan was doing a few decades ago, but they're again going 15,000 miles away and partnering with someone who's been pretty confused in terms of how they've been managing the global affairs. Where do you think they're coming from at this point in time? And particularly, I'm gonna go deeper into it with with with a lot of fake news that we've seen. But before that, just to sort of understand what's India's angle with Afghanistan?

India has been making use of the Afghan soil, you over a number of years, particularly in the last twenty years, you know, to destabilize Pakistan. We have talked about it. You know? Right. That opportunity is lost. I just to be very honest. I feel like people just tend to,

get confused about that a lot just to sort of understand in the past twenty years what has India been doing. Because, you know, we we've I know that I have a huge Indian audience as well, and they keep on mentioning this $3,000,000,000 that they invested in in Afghanistan. You know, how do you or or if you could run me through a little bit about what Indian presence in Afghanistan has done, you know, for

this space. India has followed a two pronged strategy in Afghanistan. One is that they've invested this money to build hospitals, to build schools, you know, to build their parliament building and so much else, basically, to earn good wealth. So this has been one part of the strategy. The other part of the strategy has been to make use of the NDS, which is the Afghan, intelligence agency, and, make use of their consulates spread right across Afghanistan to, send terrorists into Pakistan across our western border, bordering, Pakistan. Pakistan. Yeah. So this is a two pronged strategy. You know, while, on the one hand, they have been winning goodwill of Afghanistan, particularly under Kazai and, Ghani governments. On the other hand, they have been creating problems, you know, for Pakistan. And using also that as a cover. Right? So, essentially, like, this humanitarian aid and all of that engagement is is great cover. It's only a cover. Yep. Absolutely right. You know? So I think, you know, we we have been protesting to Afghanistan in a long time. We have given them dossiers, you know, containing proofs of what we always suspected was happening from across the border. We had specific, reservations about the use of the Afghans oil, you know, for launch of terrorist activity against Pakistan. But unfortunately, क़ज़ाई and गानी governments, you know, they did not pay any attention to it because unfortunately, again, they had become conduits to to this this activity, which was basically spearheaded, you know, by the अफ़क़ानs. Then in their NDS also, there were people like the Umbralis Salsis of Afghanistan. There were so many other people basically of having, you know, nurturing similar venom and hatred for Pakistan. So, you know, this this did not have any effect. You know? Now there has been a transformation. India is virtually out of Afghanistan. Came planities for the time being. You know, Taliban are in charge, and Taliban have committed to Pakistan and to the world that they will not allow the use of their soil, again, for any terrorist activity. India, if you go back to the nineties, you know, when the first, war was being fought there before the Taliban took over, there is, the northern alliance, the former northern alliance. They're trying to resuscitate that northern alliance now. Amrullah Saleh, you you know, know, there's understandably, he's fled to he's fled to Tajik. Ahmed Ahmed Masud and him. Understandably, both of them have fled to Tajikistan. So they're trying to resuscitate that. But the the regional dynamics have completely undergone a shift, you know? Then they had the support of India. They had the support of the former Soviet Union. They had the support of Iran and some other countries also, you know, from Central Asian countries. Now the regional support is totally missing, know. Even Iran that we talked about, Iran will not extend support to India to destabilize Afghanistan because it doesn't serve Iran. As I said, the common objective is peace in Afghanistan. And if they destabilize Afghanistan, by helping India, there will be no peace in Afghanistan. That will definitely impact. It will impact other countries, but it will also impact Iran. So, obviously, they are not going to go that far. So India is virtually out of Afghanistan. In the in the in the current dynamics, I don't see them playing a role. Right. And definitely not a negative role, you know, that they have been playing in the last twenty years particularly. I mean, even before that, you know, they were playing that role, but, you know, it was, much less as compared to what has happened in the last two decades, of the so called westernized democracy in Afghanistan. So this, I think, they will definitely, try to, provoke a rebellion, you know, in the Pansheer Valley, which is understandably, they were they they supplied some armaments there also, and they are also extending material support, to those few people who are still there. They've not been completely eliminated because they have, walked over into Tajikistan. So there were rumors, you know, and there were, think, some reports also, you know, that about 1,800 people Tajiks, you know, have, vowed support to those people who are part of the resistance movement, the so called resistance movement. So, you know, for India, it's a paradigm change, you know, from being the most important country in Afghanistan to becoming virtually So I think this is, you know, this may provoke some kind of anger and some kind of, Desperate. Desperate

activity. And so do you think that that that desperation essentially can be seen through, because, I mean, I've been watching the media past few few days. First, I was watching this, this live transmission from Anab Goswami. I believe that's his name. And Anab Goswami. Anab Goswami. And and so he had a a bunch of these American analysts in, and a lot of the questions that he were answering, even the Americans were like, listen. You're you're wrong about this. And so he was just losing his mind. He was like, you know, if the Americans are our allies, why are they also negating what you were saying? But then, you know, we saw, like, the sort of, like, the the ultimate, the the the grand finale with the with the clips from a video game saying these are Pakistani jets in the Panjab Valley, with the, you know, with the fighter jet, like, an American fighter jet in Wales using clips of that and saying, you know, this is, shot down. Shut down. What's going on? I mean, this is it it honestly seems like a fairy tale that we're going to pander any news whatsoever, and and and seemingly, you know, that news gets picked up as well because, okay. Sure. The maybe the clips weren't picked up. But that all a lot of that noise now is being used by the western media as well and to ask questions when there is absolutely no factor on the ground that that would support it. For example, you know, the idea that Pakistan has been using drones when, in actuality, Pakistan does not have the technology that could fly that that far and and do what they claim, you know, we could do, and the world community knows that. So how are we continuously pandering these narratives? Or rather, do you think all of this is just for that purpose, narrative building?

This, is part of what we generally refer to as the fifth generation war. You know, fake news is a major component of that. Know? And I think on the September 6, I think at a ceremony in GHQ, the chief the army staff also talked about the the need to handle, fake news and so many other things, you know, which are directly related, to this phenomenon. What is what is some for me is that even the Western world, you know, which is world's relatively far more enlightened and far more sort of fact and figure based, you you know, know, people. They have given into this kind of, pandering to, unsubstantiated and all that. You know? That's very, even BBC is CNN, and so many other channels that I've watched. I mean, for example, we were talking about it. You know? Christine Fair, for you know, we're talking about that. And so many others that that the former Canadian ambassador, Chris Alexander or something. I mean, just just just go through his tweets and you will understand that it's it's it's a level of lunacy that they've already achieved, you know. So I think, I think it's important for Pakistan to to to to to take care of this. And I think if you have an organized, you know, the, we have constituted a special national security committee, you know, to look into that. And I think, you know, in the next months and week, months and years, we will be taking special care of this, fifth generation war and try to help Pakistan sort of avert any anteward impact of that. But this is you know, in Pakistan also there is talk of, controlling the social media. You know, that basic platform for spreading fake news is social media. So, yes, I totally agree with that. I am not in favor of controlling media, but I definitely am one to to make sure that the social media operates within, given parameters, you know, within legal and, moral parameters, which unfortunately is not the case at this moment in time. But, you know, if you watch Indian channels, you know, you actually start laughing. Yeah. The the the, I mean, the way those people are conducting themselves behaving, you know, even their generals, former generals, you know, and their anchors, you know, the one that you talked about at Napa Svami. Mean, this is they've they've attained a a different level of lunacy basically. So, you know, but I'm happy that we are not indulging in that kind of, you know, direct and all that. You know, we virtually don't even talk about India. So that's great. Yeah.

I'm gonna expand the conversation a little bit, particularly in terms of, know, you mentioned that there's a new power rising, you know, with China taking the lead there. You know, post COVID, we also saw that China could potentially be the biggest economy in the world. Previously, it was projected to be, believe, 29, 30. Now they've brought it back to '25, '25, '26. And, obviously, that does make The US uncomfortable. We've been seeing the trade war. We've been seeing a lot of these, sort of decoupling of the economy happening, over the past few years. What, in your opinion... I will I've so the first question being very, very simple. Do you think we're going towards a new Cold War? And the second one being, new do you think that particular Cold War would be more economic or more, sort of like how Russia, you know, Soviet Union and The US were, with, arms and with bases and expansion on that on that level.

It's a very important question, mister Ameland. I think let's give it some time, basically. I mean, I have no doubt in my mind about the western, approach to imposing this cold war on Asia. Right. Particularly, keeping in mind the progress that China has made and continues to make. Like you said, previously, it was projected that there will be the economy in the world by 2040. It was advanced to 2029. Now you're right. It is being it has been advanced to 2024, twenty twenty twenty five. So, Americans are going to lose, their ascendancy, economic ascendancy in the next two, three years' time. So they will do everything to destabilize this part of the world. You know? And it was a imposing cold war. But things are not that simple any longer. Right. I mean, although we still refer to America as the sole superpower, but, technically, it is no longer the sole superpower because China has emerged has a major contender. And in in in due course of time, which is not going to be very long, I think they will actually become one of the superpowers. So let's look at it that way. Now their intention, I have no doubts about. They want this to happen in this part of the world so as to stall our progress, you know, led by China. But I think the countries of the region are very sensitive to it. They understand what is happening. So, I think I think this regional approach that I'm talking about, you know, maybe this is the way to move forward, you know, that they they work together. They work jointly, you know, in pursuit of common objectives. You know? And the way things are taking shape, post Afghanistan, post American withdrawal from Afghanistan, I'm I'm very I'm very, heartened actually, you know, that, you know, the regional countries, you know, are sitting together trying to devise a joint strategy, joint mechanism, you know, to to be able to move forward. I don't think, you know, who is going to help America in this, intent to impose a cold war on this. They only can bank on India. But India will suffer a lot on account of that also. Right. India has to survive in the region. India has a population of 1.2, afflicted with gross impoverishment Right. Poverty. So they have similar issues that Pakistan and other COVID, they've they've had it really, really bad. So they can't afford a cold war. They can't afford their economic progress to be stalled. And already they have come down a number of notches. You know? It's no longer like it used to be two years ago, three years ago. You know? They have been consistently coming down in their in the in the pace of their economic progress, you know. So India has much too much to be afraid of, from this from this so called, World War. So I feel that, yes, I, India's the inherent wisdom in the Indian leadership, I think. Although मोदी is an exception to that rule. Do not include him among the wise Indian leadership leaders, you know, that it has consistently had which have taken the country forward. I feel that in spite of him, they will not fall a victim to this, this this American and Western strategy, you know, to impose a cold war on this region. And I think Pakistan and other countries have already become very sensitive to this, and they are fighting through, and I think they will succeed. So we won't have an economic cold war. I think we we we can't we we can't afford

it. Right. No country in this part of the world can afford it. And and, you know, recently, on the June 15, I believe, there was an article regarding the g seven's commitment of the build back better world. Do you think they could potentially... So, obviously, it's it seems abundant to declare all the people that I've talked to, all the most of the policymakers, think tankers in Pakistan, they don't seem too eager, to participate in any plan to sort of, you know, counter China or or any of that sort. But then suddenly, you know, when you think of when they come up with a plan, okay, here's an alternative. There is an alternative, but that alternative is also talking about growth and connectivity, but it's just the American style of it. What happens when and how serious do you think they were? And what happens when they come and, you know, sort of unveil that and, maybe it's three times, four times as much as what China could offer?

Do you think that could... There there is a certain reality to that? Let me for example, this is, something which is very stimulating for me. Let me give you a bit of by world view of this. You know? Asia is moving forward. Right. Let me tell you. But there is one continent which has not really played a role that it should have a long time ago. That is the European continent. It has lived under the shadow of the Americans. Right. And I think I I have been in touch with many people, many friends there, many think tanks there, you know, and I've I've been talking to people here in Pakistan also coming from the European, community. Trump gave them a shakeup. Right. A huge shakeup. And there is now a thought process, you know, which is which is taking shape in Europe to begin playing an independent role. I don't think that will happen immediately. Right. But that will ultimately happen. It takes five years or ten years. It's very difficult to project. But if that happens, the world is going to become a much more balanced place. It is going to be no longer divided between the Americans and others. Right. It will have Europe emerging as a power by itself. And I think it's absolutely vital for two things, peace in the world and economic So it's not two superbbers essentially. It's three superbbers then, you know Yeah. There you are. There you are. I think that that that could play a really balancing act between the citizens. Act. Know? And I I hope I'm I'm a great proponent of Europe emerging as a as a major player on its own, not under the shadows of the Americans. Americans, like, they've exported everybody else. They've exported my country or country Pakistan. They've exported other countries also. They have also exported Europe, but I think Trump has given them a wake up call. Also, I see a lot of sensitivity to the fact, you know, that, we deserve to be playing a role on our own. If that happens, I think we will have a different kind of world altogether. Let we'll forget about the cold war, and we'll forget about everything else. I think we need to move towards a realm of, healthy competition. Right. And I think, if at all, it will emerge. Look. The European civilization is a much older and much more entrenched civilization. It's a much more sustainable civilization. Americans are new, basically, and I think they they achieved stardom, as I would call it, much too soon, know, in their lifetime. Right. And, unfortunately, they've not been able to make good use of it. Know? They have sort of flounded it away. There's not a war that they have won. Somebody asked them, why is it that China is where it is, and why is it that America is where it is now? It's a declining civilization, and China is an emerging civilization. And that person put a counter question. He said, how many wars have China fought? None. And he said, how many for how many years America has been without fighting a war? None. Right. This is the difference between the two two countries. You can't continue progressing if you are constantly engaged in warfare in the world. China has been focused. China has not undertaken, not even it has not even thought of attacking, let's say, you know, what it considers to be its own part.

Yeah. One. So

Hong Kong, it waited, waited. And, you know, that that reminds me of the of the of the Afghans. The Americans and the Western world has not been able to understand the most formidable weapon that the the Afghans have. Time. Time slash patience. Yeah. They wait. Yeah. The most formidable weapon they have is patience. They wait generations to get it. 20 is a long time. Yeah. Forty years of fire, unremitting fire, and they live on. It's it's it's an unbelievable nation. Yeah. So I think this is the new world that I feel is going to take shape, and I at least want it to take shape. I don't know whether it will or not. That's a different just a projection. But I think Europeans are far more sensitive today to their to their existence and a role that they can potentially play than they were in the past. Makes sense. And I'm gonna move to move towards sort of ending this, but I do have one particular direction

set of questions. When I look at, the Afghan war and particularly what's happened in the last one month, it seems like most of the Washington think tankers had absolutely no idea what they were doing, in the past twenty years. What went wrong there? And, again, did they actually have no intelligence on ground? Because, I mean, The US was the only one with boots on the ground, with assets on the ground, and it seems like they were the most clueless about what's gonna happen. It it seemed like everybody else had some, at least some clue of where where this might go. And particularly in terms of Pakistan, we, you know, it seems like we've been telling them a lot of these, you know, news clippings are coming out, statements are coming out of what Moshev said, of what general Kiani said. What do you think has been going on in the minds of think tankers in sitting in Washington?

What the world sees as, as having happened over a period of two to four weeks' time, actually, did not just happen over two to four weeks' time. It took much longer. We were taught strategy and tactics, you back, a number of years ago. And they said, you know, when you want to charge to the front, you don't just charge to the front. You hold back. You clear your back. Right. Then you look at your flanks, then you move forward. And what is it that the Taliban were doing for the last couple of years? Were forging partnerships with their traditional enemies. And where were they concentrating? On all the great routes. So these one and a half to two years, they were engaged in a different kind of war. Right. They revolved themselves. They were nullifying their opposite form. So that is the real and they did it. They signed deals for them. They negotiated deals for them. They neutralized them. So when they moved forward, there was no enemy, except the enemy sitting in Kabul, and they they were raised to ground within no time. There was no war in Afghanistan. There was no humanitarian crisis. There's no prospect of civil war. Yeah. Because they This is because this is the way. Now, I mean, for the Western world and for the particularly, more specifically for the DC think tankers, they cannot understand. I deal with many of them. They cannot understand these realities. They don't understand. They they they they are unwilling to believe that there are intelligent people living in this part of the world. I've I've sat across the table with them, and they honestly, They feel that intelligence only belongs to them. It is only a commodity that they can harbor, and the others are dull. The the chapter of Afghanistan has proven it the other way around. They have no clue, as you said, to the ground rallies. They had no clue to what was happening over the last couple of years. They had no clue that Taliban could actually act so intelligently. Yep. So but they forgot the fact, you know, that, you know, they have, they have generations, you know, which were born and bred in the battlefield. Forty years is not a short period in in in in a nation's history. You know? They've gone through, as I repeatedly say, gone too far. And and these think tankers, you sitting in their air conditioned rooms and all that, you know, and and and and and stuck or infatuated with promoting themselves and not giving due consideration, you know, to what others may or may not be able to do. They I have just been promoting a single-minded, narrative that, again and again, I mean, America has lost all the wars. You know, starting from Korea to Vietnam to wherever you go, basically. There's not a war that they won, and yet they rate America as invincible.

Mhmm.

So, I think they need to I keep I keep engaging with them on social media once in a while. Know? And it's interesting, you know, but I keep telling them. I say, you know, just, you know, put your feet on the ground and start looking at a country as it really is, not as what you want it to turn into. Just like, you know, for twenty years, they turn they'll they they they made an effort to turn, Afghanistan into a western democracy. The ground conditions were not right. They're not the kind of people who would accept western democracy. Yes. Maybe a hundred years down the lane, two hundred years down the lane. If it evolves, that's okay. But you can't do both things on them. So, you know, they're detached from reality. There was, you know, the the DC think tankers, they get very angry, you know, when when I use the terminal that you're totally detached from reality, but, they are totally detached from reality. They don't have a clue to what they talk about. You know? And at this moment in time, most of them are totally embarrassed. You know? So they're talking more than ever before to cover up above what their embarrassment. So but I'm I'm you know, it's an interesting period, you for you and I basically to go through to see that this can happen. I mean Yeah. I mean The very active, Iraq Tag Military Yeah. 30,000 people defeating the the sole superpower of the world and, you know, along with 57 other countries, know, the NATO countries and all that. I mean, it's a remarkable feat. Yeah. And then they blame Pakistan as having done it. You know?

That I mean, we must sit and talk about that someday. You know? It's another very interesting feature. You know? Absolutely, sir. We're we're almost at the one hour, limit, and we have to, you know, wrap up the conversation. But there's one question that I ask every time I have a guest in, and I'd like to, ask you as well, particularly in the context of the region, as well. Where do you think Pakistan in the next thirty years? 2050 is generally the time when I when I try to see, you know, how how we're gonna evolve. Where do you think Pakistan would be in 2050, and where do you think the region will be in 2050,

thirty years from now? See, if there is peace in Afghanistan, which hopefully there will be, the connectivity will improve further. We will we will be exposed to the world, in a more formidable way, than we have ever been before. We are on the right track. We have China. We have the regional connectivity here. We're trying to forge further, closer connectivity with with countries of the region. Russia is on board, more or less. Iran is Iran remains a question mark. Know? But I think, you know, since, as I said, you know, we we we remain engaged with Iran. If all this happens, then it falls in place, and this region acts as one, closely connected teacher, you know, working for common objectives and all that. I think I I see this reach, know, as the leader in the world by 2050. Definitely. Iran I mean, of course, China will play a very major role in that, very major role in that. But I see the emergence of these countries, you know, as welfare oriented countries, you know, in another twenty years or so. That could be a great achievement. I think, some good comes out of, wars also. And I think if this comes out, I think this would be a direct derivative of, the war in Afghanistan, the long war in Afghanistan. And I think all countries of the region stand to benefit from it, but they have to work together. That is very important to know. There should be no conflict in this part of the world. And that reminds me of India. If we can somehow if India can somehow understand that its future too belongs to this region, which it believed till about five, six, seven years ago, till, when they opted for shaking hands with the Americans, you know, and they, detached themselves from this region. Like, Pakistan had committed the plunder back in nineteen forty eight, forty nine. It we plucked ourselves out of the region and shook hands with the Americans, which is it did not help us. Unfortunately, instead of learning from us, India has committed this plan. So if India falls back into the region and becomes one of the countries rather than their country trying to dominate the region, I think we have I mean, there is absolutely no doubt. We we have we have a great future, beckoning our next generation, and I'm very optimistic.

100, sir. Thank you so much for the optimism, for the insight, and, you know, for taking the time out for My pleasure. Absolute pleasure. Thank you. And for all of you guys, you so much for watching. If you like the episode, please do share it with your friends. For YouTube, if you click on the like button, it'll intrigues our engagement, and we'll get more viewership. If you do agree or disagree with anything, that sir, रोहुप has said, please do let us know in the comment section about what your thoughts are. And इसी के साथ साथ, this was, मज़हब्बिना संसेदी. You were watching Third Band Things. Thank you so much for watching, and I'll see you in the next one.