HAVE TO >>> WELL, THEY’VE BEEN HAVING
THESE TALKS FOR HUNDREDS OF
YEARS, EVEN UNDER DIFFERENT
NAMES.
NAMES. BUT THIS IS CASHMERE AND IT’S A
COMPLICATED PLACE.
COMPLICATED PLACE. YOU HAVE THE INDUES AND THE
MUSLIMS.
MUSLIMS. WITH RESPECT TOSS PAKISTAN AND
INDIA, WE TALKED ABOUT KASHMIR
AND WHATEVER HELP I CAN BE, I
SAID I OFFERED WHETHER IT’S
ARBITRATION OR MEDIATION OR
WHATEVER IT HAS TO BE, I’LL DO
WHATEVER I CAN BECAUSE THEY’RE
AT VERY SERIOUS ODDS RIGHT NOW.
AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL GET
BETTER.
BETTER. YOU LOOK AT THE TWO GENTLEMEN
HEADING THOSE TWO COUNTRIES, TWO
GOOD FRENS EVERIENDS OF MINE.
I SAID FELLOWS, WORK IT OUT.
JUST WORK IFT OUT.
>> THE SITUATION TOOK A SERIOUS
DOWNTURN IN EARLY AUGUST WHEN
INDIA REVOKED THE SPECIAL STATUS
FOR THE DISPUTED REGION CAUSING
RELATIONS BETWEEN INDIA AND
PAKISTAN, TWO NUCLEAR COUNTRIES,
TO FALL DEEP NEAR CHAOS AND
UNCERTAINTY.
UNCERTAINTY. TOMORROW, PAKISTANI PRIME
MINISTER WHO MET WITH PRESIDENT
TRUMP IN NEW YORK ON MONDAY WILL
SPEAK BEFORE THE U.N. AND
KASHMIR IS SET TO BE FRONT AND
CENTER.
CENTER. AND PRIME MINISTER KHAN OF
PAKISTAN JOINS US NOW.
MR. PRIME MINISTER, THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US THIS
MORNING.
MORNING. ANDREA MITCHELL HAS THE FIRST
QUESTION.
QUESTION. ANDREA.
ANDREA. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MIKA.
MR. PRIME MINISTER, THE
PRESIDENT’S OFFERED TO MEDIATE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE HIM
MEDIATE BETWEEN YOU AND PRIME
MINISTER MODI AND TRY TO RESOLVE
THIS KASHMIR ISSUE?
>> ANDREA, DEFINITELY.
WE FEEL THAT THE U.S. PRESIDENT,
HEAD OF THE MOST POWERFUL
COUNTRY OF THE WORLD, THE ONLY
PERSON ACTUALLY WHO COULD MAKE A
DIFFERENCE RIGHT NOW IS
PRESIDENT TRUMP IF HE CAN
MEDIATE BETWEEN US.
BECAUSE THERE IS, AS YOU REPORT
MENTIONED, THERE’S A HUGE
HUMANITARIAN CRISIS.
HUMANITARIAN CRISIS. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LOCKED UP IN
KASHMIR NOW FOR ALMOST 53 DAYS.
AND SO WE HOPE THAT THE U.S.
PRESIDENT INTERVENES.
PRESIDENT INTERVENES. >> THERE ARE CONCERNS, OF
COURSE, YOU’RE BOTH NUCLEAR
STATES.
STATES. ARE THE TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS
FORWARD-BASED AT THIS POINT?
CAN YOU REASSURE AMERICANS THAT
WHAT USED TO BE ANYONE TO AS THE
TRIPLE KEY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
U.S. ALSO HAD OVERSIGHT OVER ANY
POTENTIAL USE OF NUCLEAR FORCES
IS STILL IN PLACE?
>> ANDREA, NO SANE MIND CAN
THINK OF NUCLEAR WAR OR NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
WEAPONS. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IS THAT
THIS THING SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY
NIPPED IN THE BUD.
WHERE IT IS HEADING RIGHT NOW,
MY FEAR IS THAT THERE ARE
900,000 TROOPS IN THE VALLEY AND
THERE ARE -- THEY’VE LOCKED IN 8
MILLION PEOPLE.
MILLION PEOPLE. NOW THE FEAR IS THAT ONCE THEY
LIFT THE CURFEW, THERE’S GOING
TO BE BLOOD SHED.
AND THAT’S WHY WE WANT THE
PRESIDENT TO INTERVENE BEFORE
THINGS GO A STEP FURTHER.
AND THAT’S REALLY MY CONCERN
RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT NOW. AND I WANT -- I MAINLY CAME TO
THE U.N. TO RAISE THIS WITH THE
WORLD LEADERS.
WORLD LEADERS. >> MR. PRIME MINISTER, THIS IS
AYMAN AND WAYS CURIOUS TO PICK
UP ON YOUR POINT WANTING THE
UNITED STATES TO MEDIATE.
YOU’VE SAT NEXT TO PRESIDENT
TRUMP AND YOU’VE BEEN DEALING
WITH THIS ADMINISTRATION.
HAS THIS ADMINISTRATION IN ANY
WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM ASKED YOU
FOR ANY TYPE OF QUID PRO QUO IN
EXCHANGE FOR MEDIATING?
AND IF SO, WHAT MIGHT THAT SNB
WHAT DOES THE U.S. WANT FROM
PAKISTAN IN ORDER TO TRY MEDIATE
THIS CONFLICT?
THIS CONFLICT? >> THIS IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE
ISSUE.
ISSUE. IT CONCERNS ONE OR 1 BILLION
PEOPLE OF THE INDIAN
SUBCONTINENT.
SUBCONTINENT. SO THIS -- THE UNITED STATES
NUMBER ONE, BUT UNITED NATIONS
SECURITY COUNCIL IS THE OTHER
OPTION.
OPTION. OR THE U.S. COOPERATE THROUGH
THE U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL
BECAUSE THERE ARE 11 RESOLUTIONS
BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL ON
KASHMIR.
KASHMIR. SO THAT’S ONE AREA.
BUT, QUITE SEPARATELY, THE OTHER
TWO NEIGHBORS OF PAKISTAN, ONE
IS AFGHANISTAN, THE OTHER IS
IRAN, WE ARE TRYING OUR BEST.
WE ARE SPEAKING TO IRAN.
I SPOKE TO PRESIDENT TRUMP AND
HE THOUGHT I SHOULD TRY TO
MEDIATE BETWEEN THE U.S. AND
IRAN A NEW NUCLEAR DEAL.
AND THE OTHER IS IN THE INTEREST
OF PAKISTAN THAT THERE’S PEACE
THERE.
THERE. THERE’S FOUR DECADES OF
CONFLICT.
CONFLICT. PEOPLE OF AFGHANISTAN ARE
SUFFERING.
SUFFERING. THERE’S NO QUID PRO QUO.
I MEAN, IT’S IN OUR INTEREST
THAT THERE’S PEACE THERE.
WE WERE SAD THAT JUST WHEN THE
DEAL WAS ABOUT TO BE SIGNED IT
WAS BROKEN UP BECAUSE DIALOGUE
AND FIGHTING ARE GOING ON
SIMULTANEOUSLY.
SIMULTANEOUSLY. AND THIS WAS ALWAYS GOING TO
HAPPEN.
HAPPEN. BUT THERE IS NO MILITARY
SOLUTION IN AFGHANISTAN, AND
THAT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS AFTER 19
YEARS.
YEARS. SO IT IS IN OUR INTEREST THAT
THERE’S PEACE IN BOTH
AFGHANISTAN AND IRAN.
THE PROBLEM WITH IRAN IS THAT IF
THERE’S A CONFLICT, OUR
COUNTRY’S DEVELOPING WORLD IS
GOING TO TAKE A REAL BEATING
BECAUSE THE OIL PRICES ARE GOING
TO SHOOT UP.
AND WE ARE FRYING TO MANAGE
OUR -- BALANCING OUR BUDGETS.
AND THIS WILL JUST THROW US OFF.
SO IT’S IN THE INTEREST OF
ACTUALLY THE WORLD THAT THIS
IRAN CONFLICT DOES NOT TAKE
PLACE.
PLACE. >> MR. PRIME MINISTER, JEFF
GOLDBERG FROM THE ATLANTIC.
JUST TO FOLLOW ON YOUR STATEMENT
THAT DONALD TRUMP WOULD BE THE
BEST MEDIATOR FOR YOU.
TWO RELATED QUESTIONS.
ONE IS WHAT SPECIFIC SKILLS DO
YOU THINK HE BRINGS TO MEDIATING
THE KASHMIR DISPUTE?
THE SECOND RELATED QUESTION IS
HOW DO YOU ASSESS HIS HANDLING
OF THE IRAN FILES SO FAR IF HIS
PRESIDENCY?
PRESIDENCY? >> WELL, U.S. IS, AGAIN, I
REPEAT, THE MOST POWERFUL
COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.
AND THE U.S. CAN MEDIATE.
THE U.S. HAS THE CLOUT.
PROBLEM I’M FACING RIGHT NOW IS
UNFORTUNATELY, AND IT’S
UNFORTUNATE AND IT’S BEING
REALISTIC, COUNTRIES LOOK UPON
INDIA AS A MARKET OF 1.2 BILLION
PEOPLE.
PEOPLE. AND THAT’S WHAT I’M SAD TO SAY
THAT’S WHAT THE INDIAN PRIME
MINISTER -- THAT’S HIS LEVERAGE.
AND THAT’S WHY HE’S DONE
SOMETHING SO INCREDIBLE,
REVOKING THE CONSTITUTION, GOING
AGAINST U.N. RESOLUTIONS, AND
HE’S ACTUALLY BOXED IN THESE
PEOPLE.
PEOPLE. AND SO U.N. -- U.S. BEING THE
STRONGEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
WOULD LEVERAGE THE U.N. SECURITY
COUNCIL AND JUST AS THE BIGGEST
TRADING PARTNER OF INDIA, U.S.
HAS THE BEST LEVERAGE AND THAT’S
WHAT MR. TRUMP HAS AT HIS HANDS.
ABOUT IRAN, I JUST -- THIS IS A
VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION.
IT’S BREWING UP FOR A WHILE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I AM AN ANTIWAR
PERSON.
PERSON. I DO NOT BELIEVE WAR SOLVES
PROBLEMS.
PROBLEMS. I MEAN, YOU GO AFTER ONE PROBLEM
AND IT GIVES BIRTH TO FIVE OTHER
DIFFERENT PROBLEMS.
DIFFERENT PROBLEMS. AND THEREFORE, I DON’T BELIEVE
THAT THESE -- BECAUSE, YOU SEE,
IT HAS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
YOU KNOW, EVERY WAR WHICH I KNOW
OF, PAKISTAN JOINING THE U.S.
WAR IN AFGHANISTAN, EACH TIME WE
WERE TOLD THIS IS A MATTER OF
WEEKS AND, YOU KNOW, PAKISTAN WE
LOST 70,000 PEOPLE DIED IN THIS
WAR ON TERROR WHEN WE
PARTICIPATED.
PARTICIPATED. AND OUR GENERAL, SAID IT’S ONLY
A MATTER OF WEEKS.
WAR WITH IRAN IS VERY COMPLEX.
ONCE IT STARTS, YOU KNOW, NO ONE
KNOWS WHERE IT’S GOING TO GO.
AND SO THEREFORE, ALWAYS, ALWAYS
CONFLICTS SHOULD BE AVOIDED.
ALWAYS.
ALWAYS. >> MR. PRIME MINISTER, JOE
SCARBOROUGH BORROW HEREHERE.
THE UNITED STATES AND PAKISTAN
OF COURSE AS YOU KNOW BETTER
THAN EVERYBODY, WE’VE HAD AT
TIMES A TUR MULEROUGH RELATIONSH
WE HAVE NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH ON
WEAPONS STILLS AT TIMES THE
PAKISTANIS BELIEVE WE HAVE PUSH
THEM IN DIRECTIONS THAT ARE NOT
IN THEIR NATIONAL INTERESTS.
AND, OF COURSE, AMERICANS HAVE
HAD CONCERNS WITH THE PAKISTANIS
NOW.
NOW. JUST PULLING BACK FROM THE
EVENTS OF THIS WEEK, EVEN THIS
MONTH, GIVE US, IF YOU WILL,
YOUR BEST READ ON U.S./PAKISTANI
RELATIONS RIGHT NOW.
ARE WE IN A BETTER PLACE TODAY
THAN WE WERE, SAY, FIVE, TEN
YEARS AGO?
YEARS AGO? >> DEFINITELY.
>> DEFINITELY. THIS IS THE BEST RELATIONSHIP
PAKISTAN HAD WITH THE U.S. IN
ALMOST TWO DECADES.
BUT LET ME JUST GIVE YOU BRIEF
HISTORY.
HISTORY. PAKISTAN JOINED -- U.S. AND
PAKISTAN GOT TOGETHER AGAINST
THE SOF YENTS JETSE HAD THEY
INVADED AFGHANISTAN.
INVADED AFGHANISTAN. AND SO PAKISTAN TRAINED
MILITANTS TO FIGHT JIHAD.
THEY FOUGHT AGAINST THE SOVIETS.
AND SO THESE GROUPS CAME AND
THEY OPERATESED FROM
THEY OPERATED FROM PAKISTAN IN
THE ’80s.
THE ’80s. THE U.S. BACKS UP AND LEAVES AND
IN ’91, WE WERE SLAPPED WITH
SANCTIONS.
SANCTIONS. SO THAT WAS A SHOCK BECAUSE
PAKISTAN HAD BY THIS TIME 4
MILLION REFUGEES.
MILLION REFUGEES. WE WERE LEFT WITH THESE MILITANT
GROUPS, AND SECTARIAN TERRORISM
STARTED IN PAKISTAN.
COME 9/11, WE AGAIN JOINED THE
U.S.
U.S. AND I REMEMBER GEORGE BUSH
SAYING, LOOK, THIS TIME IT WILL
BE DIFFERENT.
BE DIFFERENT. WE ARE NOT GOING TO ABANDON YOU.
BECAUSE PAKISTAN WAS SKEPTICAL,
WE HAD BEEN ABANDONED.
THIS TIME WE JOINED AGAIN AND I
OPPOSED IT.
OPPOSED IT. I’LL TELL YOU WHY I OPPOSE
PAKISTAN JOINING THE U.S.
BECAUSE WHEN HE TRAINED THESE
GROUPS TO DO JIHAD AGAINST
FOREIGN OCCUPATION.
FOREIGN OCCUPATION. NOW WHEN THE AMERICANS TURNED UP
THERE, HOW WE ARE GOING TO
EXPLAIN TO THEM THAT NOW IT’S NO
LONGER JIHAD, IT’S TERRORISM?
SO WHEN PAKISTAN JOINED THE
U.S., THE SAME GROUPS TURNED
AGAINST PAKISTAN.
AGAINST PAKISTAN. AND THE FUNDAMENTAL MISTAKE
PAKISTAN’S LEADERSHIP MADE AT
THE TIME IS THAT IT TRIED TO
TELL THE U.S., DON’T WORRY,
WE’LL BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH IT.
THEY COULDN’T DEAL WITH IT.
I MEAN, THERE WAS SUICIDE
BOMBINGS GOING ON IN PAKISTAN,
GHQ WAS ATTACKED, ARMY,
COMMANDOS.
COMMANDOS. AT ONE POINT WE ACTUALLY THOUGHT
WE WERE GOING DOWN.
AND SO U.S. KEPT PUTTING
PRESSURE ON PAKISTAN TO HELP
THEM MORE.
THEM MORE. PAKISTAN COULD NOT DELIVER MORE.
THERE WERE 150,000 NATO TROOPS
AND IF THEY COULDN’T WIN IN
AFGHANISTAN, HOW WAS PAKISTAN
GOING TO HELP THEM?
AND SO WE WERE THEN ACCUSED OF
PLAYING A DOUBLE GAME BECAUSE WE
COULDN’T DELIVER.
COULDN’T DELIVER. THERE WERE 50 DIFFERENT GROUPS
OPERATING IN PAKISTAN, MILITANT
FRIPS GROUPS.
FRIPS GROUPS. GROUPS.
GROUPS. AND SO THIS MISTRUST BEGAN.
NOW OUR PRECIP ISRELATIONSHIP IS
TRUTH AND TRUST.
WE ARE PART OF PEACE AND SO
THERE’S TRUST.
THERE’S TRUST. THAT’S HOW THE RELATIONSHIP
SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
IF I WAS THE PRIME MINISTER I
WOULD HAVE SAID, LOOK, MR. BUSH,
WE CANNOT DELIVER.
WE HAVE THESE GROUPS TRAINED AND
HOW ARE WE -- THE MOMENT WE JOIN
THEM WE LOSE LEVERAGE ON THEM
AND THEN TURN AGAINST US.
SO I THINK THAT’S THE MISTAKE
WHERE OUR LEADERSHIP MADE.
>> AND WHAT ADVICE HAVE YOU
GIVEN PRESIDENT TRUMP ABOUT
AFGHANISTAN, A TWHARWAR THAT MAN
AMERICANS HAVE GROWN TIRED OF 18
YEARS LATER?
YEARS LATER? >> YOU KNOW, I KEPT OPPOSING.
I KEPT SAYING THERE IS NO
MILITARY SOLUTION, ONLY BECAUSE
YOU ONLY HAVE TO KNOW THE
HISTORY OF AFGHANISTAN.
I MEAN, THE BRITISH HAS A SUPER
POWER WENT IN THREE TIMES,
FAILED.
FAILED. SOVIETS KILLED 1 MILLION IN THE
’80s, FAILED.
’80s, FAILED. AND HOW -- YOU KNEW THAT THIS
WAS GOING TO BE A WAR THAT IS
JUST WOULD NOT HAVE ACHIEVED ANY
RESULTS.
RESULTS. SOMEONE SHOULD ASK, I MEAN, IF I
WAS AN AMERICAN I WOULD ASK THAT
WE -- $1.5 TRILLION AT LEAST
HAVE BEEN SPENT IN AFGHANISTAN.
WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED IN THIS?
AND THEN I HEAR SOME PEOPLE
SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY,
NO, WE SHOULD KEEP THE MILITARY
OR KEEP THIS GOING.
THIS WILL GO ON FOR ANOTHER 19
YEARS, THE TAXPAYER IN U.S. IS
GOING TO KEEP POURING IN MONEY
IN THERE.
IN THERE. WHILE THE U.S. WAS POURING MONEY
IN AFGHANISTAN IN THIS FUTILE
WAR, THE CHINESE WERE DEVELOPING
FIRST WORLD INFRASTRUCTURE AND
YOU JUST HAVE TO GO TO CHINA TO
SEE THE WAY THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE
IS.
IS. I’M IN NEW YORK AND I’M WATCHING
THE CAR BUMPING AROUND HERE
[ LAUGHTER ]
>> THAT MONEY WAS WASTED.
>> YOU DO NOT SOUND --
>> THAT MONEY WAS WASTED.
>> YOU DO NOT SOUND RIGHT NOW
LIKE A PRIME MINISTER FROM
PAKISTAN, YOU SOUND LIKE A VOTER
FROM THE BRONX WHO WOULD
COMPLAIN ABOUT THE
INFRASTRUCTURE OR MONEY BEING
SPENT ON WARS IN AFGHANISTAN
INSTEAD OF ON FIXING LaGUARDIA
AND THE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE
THERE.
THERE. MR. PRIME MINISTER, THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR BEING WITH US.
WE GREET GREATLYATLY APPRECIATE
>> WE ARE ABOUT AN HOUR AND A
HALF AWAY FROM JOSEPH MAGUIRE
TESTIFYING ON CAPITOL HILL.
PRESIDENT TRUMP TWEETED THE
GREATEST SCAM IN THE HISTORY OF
AMERICAN POLITICS.
AMERICAN POLITICS. >> BOY, THAT’S CONFESSIONAL,
ISN’T IT.
ISN’T IT. >> FORMER SENATOR CLAIRE