European Institute for Asia Studies -Regional Security

Speaker: Mian Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan. Co-Chairs: Dr Apurba Kundu, EIAS, and Fraser Cameron, European Policy Centre.

Briefing Summary

Foreign Minister Kasuri began by observing that, despite the end of the Cold War, we are not seeing the end of conflict. Throughout the world, there is both growing terrorism and the continuing "brutal suppression of freedom movements". The international system is giving way to new doctrine of intervention. In response, Pakistan is both fighting terrorism at home, and seeking a "stronger and more credible United Nations" abroad.

In the second part of his briefing, Kasuri observed that, in terms of regional security, "peace in South Asia is as elusive today as it ever was". He added that it was "high time India ceases to talk to Pakistan via the media" and, instead, finds the "strong political will" to negotiate. Kasuri also made the point that the international community must become more engaged with helping the Karzai regime in Afghanistan.

Full text of Briefing (pdf)

Questions and Answers

Following his briefing, Foreign Minister Kasuri engaged in a question and answer session. These included (in an abbreviated and paraphrased form):

Q: Should we deal differently with terrorism and occupation?
A: We need the support of the international community if the rights of Kashmir and Palestine are to be restored. Pakistan itself suffers from sectarianism. This is a significant problem because the primary objective of the country is to attract FDI [foreign direct investment]. This only goes to countries where there is stability.

Q: In this trip to Brussels, has the foreign minister raised the possibility of European Union engagement in trying to resolve outstanding issues of potential conflict in South Asia?
A: I have raised this possibility with everyone I have met, including [Javier] Solano and [Chris] Patten. Pakistan is "ready for even a bi-lateral dialogue [with India]".

Q: What is his reaction to recent inflammatory statements made by Indian defence Minister George Fernandes?
A: "Fernandes doesn't have to go the extra mile to prove he is more loyal than the King".

Q: How will Pakistan react to the "new wave of Talibans [sic]"?
A: Everything that goes on in Afghanistan has consequences for Pakistan. There needs to be more international support for Afghanistan. There are "140,000 American soldiers in Iraq, but only 10,000 in Afghanistan". The warlords in Afghanistan currently command huge forces. Indeed, "I would prefer not to name them [and their numbers] for fear of further demoralisation".

Q: Pakistan President Musharraf's recent trip to China is being portrayed in much of the Western press as a failure, especially since he did not get the Chinese to agree to assist Pakistan in building a second nuclear power plant. Your reaction?
A: Every trip by a Pakistan prime minister to China is a success, or he would not go. Pakistan has an "ideal relationship with China".

Q: What is the current state of Pakistan's relationship with the Taliban?
A: Remember that it was not only Pakistan that supported the Taliban; many other countries, including the United States, did as well. We supported them because they were bringing order to Afghanistan. However, quickly many of their policies, including toward women, were not to Pakistan's liking. We especially pleaded with them not to go through with the destruction of the Buddhist statues in Bamiyan.

Q: How do you reconcile Musharraf's repeated pleas for Muslim countries to seek socio-economic development with Pakistan's own lack of democracy?
A: The single most important feature of a democracy is a free press. The press is more free and more critical of the government in Pakistan than it is in India. The second most important feature is the judiciary. Pakistan has a "fairly well-established judiciary". The third most important feature is elections. Governments in Pakistan need to take care to appoint independent electoral commissioners. Pakistan "is not a perfect democracy... At least we have elections that are relatively free". The recent Presidential election was not seen as free and fair by EU observers. "I do admit that a lot needs to be done and we need to have a dialogue".

Q: What are the implications of the development of theatre nuclear weapons?
A: When India went nuclear in 1974, Pakistan said let's keep South Asia a nuclear and missile free zone. India was not interested. In 1998, India went overtly nuclear; "and when it went nuclear, it went ballistic [in its rhetoric]". Pakistan had to treat this seriously as it has fought three wars with India. However, "we are not in an arms race with India... We have decided to have a minimum nuclear deterrent [only]". Israel's decision to sell Hawks [sic; the Phalcon early-warning radar system] to India is an "unfortunate development", and this introduction of a new generation of weapons will "destabilise the whole region". India says its defence expansion is for other enemies, but all its arms and training and the situating of its bases are geared toward fighting a land war. The international community should apply pressure on India and Israel not to introduce a new generation of weapons to the region.

Q: Do you see a situation where international community could intervene to resolve conflicts in the region?
A: "I don't accept the theory of pre-emptive doctrine". Instead, the UN should be made much more representative. Pakistan is against idea of extending the veto to any more countries. Any armed intervention must be sanctioned by the General Assembly rather than the Security Council, unless the latter is extended radically.



Search eias.org: Home > Activities > Special Briefings > Regional Security - Pakistan