For those of you who don't know
my name is Adam Goldberg and

I'm the director of the Center for
International status you think knowledge

policy research on the air at Georgia Tech

and we're a very tight isn't in time
because some people will hold hands for

partly due to a very generous gift
that was provided to honor Gen Grange

and for those of you don't know
General Davis Georgia Tech along.

I graduated with a chemical
engineering degree.

I mean was a highly decorated
overtired worst our

general in the U.S. Marine Corps.

I was also a recipient of the medal Medal
of Honor for a salary on the battlefield.

I mean war.

So any of you who knew him or
hear remembered him.

Welcome you.

We appreciate all of
that support provided.

Also I want to know a couple
of events before I talk about

you know we have this is a very
busy semester and large people.

Does it not because of the numbers
of the events but quality that

by one another event I want to
freeze everybody's attention.

I think place on April sixteenth and
it will be the Sam Nunn think of America

policy forum where we will be
looking at the geopolitical and

she'll economic dimensions to
this merging area of natural gas.

What's interesting about this for us
several things one is the keynote speaker

is going to be the U.S.
Secretary of Energy secretary movies and

the second distinguishing feature of this
event will be we're going to look at that

big family of issues from the perspective
of the consumer region like the Southeast.

United States.

Right.
So the focus is not going to be so

much on to frack or not to the crack.

It's going to be a what are some of the
other after sociate it is changing gas.

So I invite you all to pay attention.

If you happen to register
on our e-mail list or

your house or the list on the back.

So I've heard you all to do that is to do
we can send those electronic invitations

to you as soon as the police for
the coming days and

I also want to thank aria for
pulling this all together and

I'm scolding the piece of the way.

So like I said it's a very
it's a state an actual

personal pleasure minefield to
introduce our new day who is Dr T.V.

Paul who is James McGill professor of
international relations are political

science at McGill University for
zero zero.

Professor Paul or

I know the graduate students of my course
as well as most others who are even casual

readers of South Asia know that he's
a well established if not leading scholar.

I don't hold him to very international
security and nonproliferation where he

really has teeth and really made
a mark to regional security issues to

host the regional security issues
tied to south southwest Asia.

He's also going to a lot of work on
the relationship between globalization and

International Security and on some of the
strategic issues related to rising saliva

and all of those different
areas of his work to you.

Needless to say is why people live in
fact this is a distinct first line

of the media because truth be told I don't
know if you want to be credibility or

credit for this but T.V. is really didn't
want to my role models from my early days.

I was already out he was editing and
he always had an air

just calmness around him.

Navigating the rocky shores of
academia and then of course

as early as he is

publication with all of us or
our students here.

He's really an example of
someone who does a good

systematic and rigorous policy you
know of and work on big issues such as

nuclear proliferation liberation and
regional security so

I and all of those were you
especially our students.

You're right brain in that so
without regard to leave my good thing.

Which is the workers are starting
the contemporary world and

I can't think of a better thing
to do with twenty dollars and

a rush out of them some pictures
let's just hold looks like but

of course the devil is in the details and
we'll find out what he has to say and

I am just invite all of you take
a just in a nice conversation I can

thank you Adam and Feria for
organizing this rather a nice event.

I'm on a kind of a book tour and yesterday
it was in Washington D.C. at the Council

on Foreign Relations and I had the chance
to meet could a few in the see members and

and I was quite tired by the time it
came this last evening but then I looked

at your beautiful city in this corner but
still walked around a little bit but

it is like a bit of a homecoming in
the sense that some of the colleagues here

were my contemporaries sought to U.C.L.A.
where I visited last.

You can.
There was it's like a second U.C.L.A.

gathering sort of thing but
in any case it is wonderful to be in your

beautiful campus in the back for
nice T.V. I'm.

OK so I am man this is

a book that I've been working for
about seven years or even longer.

I've been a student of South Asia for
the last twenty five years.

And in between a go back to South Asia and
travel around the in the region and

also do other stuff because I get tired of
doing one project only one region so I'm

trying to combine different theoretical
less or less intellectual traditions.

Let me start out by arguing that Pakistan
is a very important state pivotal

state if you want to call it.

Because of it's not only for

it's a linkages with respect to
regional security and order.

And that's why I got into this
because it has something like

three hundred million people who buy it
will have about two thousand and fifty.

It will be the fourth
largest country in the world.

Right now it's a six a lot of
this one hundred eighty five.

If you believe the number.

Many works in South Asia describe in
fact some fantastic books have come out

of these in the years.

And especially on Pakistan
kind of journalistic or

think tank scholars good writings people
who do interviews there are others but

many social scientists or most social
scientists have ignored this country.

I don't know why but it was a very
difficult one to understand probably.

And that's where I'm trying to
make it at least a little inroad.

I'm trying to understand why Pakistan is
so in secure in security predicament.

And I am drawing ideas from historical
sociology international relations

comparative politics military
history a strategic city six of

them something that I think I have
an advantage because many people who come.

Politics tend not to read the security
studies literature or the deterrence

literature or balance of power literature
and they all out of eleven for

understanding this particular
region in a particular country.

Let me make a disclaimer I
am doing that everywhere.

My effort is not to apportion
blame on Pakistan or

take sides on
the India Pakistan conflict or

try to argue that Pakistan should not
get Kashmir or anything like that.

I'm just a social science scholar I'm
interested in finding puzzles and

problems and explaining.

So I am willing to look
at alternatives but

I'm trying to push the envelope trying
to explain the Pakistani phenomena.

My lot of their contacts those who
are this is the nice map of Pakistan

the European context in fact
I was a do you see a way in

the guy who taught us a European history.

Ronaldo gask you were sitting there in my
seminar and I was very pleased to see him

at the end he said I have been
taught that course in about.

Twenty years or something.

I said yeah you should
teach it against it.

I'm going to do that.

Good to know that.

He was happy with that
he was the referee and

do the little bit of that he taught me.

Now the context is important here.

There is an important segment
of the comparative literature.

That argues that water and
water making and

being the key source of state formation
and state strength in Europe.

None other than the big name charts

Tilly made the statement war made
the state and state made war and

it was a multi-state process elimination
of external rival suppression of

pacification of internal enemies
extraction of resources through taxation.

And strengthening States made pacts with

powerful social groups to
confront the legitimacy.

Now this doesn't mean that all
European states that engage in war

making became strong in
fact many did not survive.

And some perished or
became much weaker examples of many

by sending them Burgundy Austria-Hungary
Soviet Union but clearly Tilly has a point

of that particular school that war was
very pivotal for European state formation.

Now the question is is this very unique or

a bit that we can apply it
to the developing world.

There are at least talky books that I can
refer to that is applying this Logic Gem

pretty her work on Africa African States
did not become strong because they

never experienced war so
conquest lower population densities and

abandoned reckon land made them less
interested in that sort of thing.

Centeno argues that Latin American
countries have been weak

because that invades big wars.

And so they ended up with civil wars.

Now I find two problems one
is the circularity problem.

Essentially that the origin of
the beacon is did not allow states to be

big wars which in turn caused
these countries to remain weak.

So it's very hard to make
that connection proper.

The second problem is this human
inevitability of a positive

correlation between
warring states strength

without giving allowance to the ruinous
consequences that war can have on states.

We need not become stronger
them France was a winner victor

of World War One Britain was
the victor of World War two But

Britain probably declined
considerably as a result of that war

Soviet Union drove its economy to
the ground for its military preparations.

So I argued that in the post
World War two period.

War has become preparation have
become counterproductive for

state capacity State Building is no longer

naturally focused on core issue capacity
but the integrity power of the.

And the ability of the state
to invest in its people.

In national security states not
all of them have become weaker.

Those will became stronger adopted what
we call a developmental state approach

a trading state approach and
this is where Pakistan comes across

as one that did not make it because of its
lack of focus on developmental aspects

of Pakistan's development sixty six years
intense focus on military preparedness for

wars they said I'm not blaming Pakistan
and all the reasons to be focusing on it.

Forty seven forty eight sixty five
minutes seventy one ninety ninety nine or

one half of the time military rule.

They're not going to continue in the
hybrid systems because the military has

what he called the top power
on key national security and

foreign policy issues.

No Pakistan has been
attempting to achieve a kind

of strategic parity with India it
will talk about that in a few minutes

here is a material capability
differentiation between its chief rival

Pakistan India and
Pakistan one to seven one to eat and

more spread of meters before
the bifurcation bungler this one before.

Obviously talk a little bit about the grim
statistics that is coming out of Pakistan

or in Pakistan the failed state
index talks about it almost

on top of the ten weakest days for

the last six seven years a home and
says on various areas in various areas.

Sectarian killings is definitely worse and
two thousand and thirteen.

That's the number but
last January of this year alone.

You have something like
six hundred deaths and

that's just increasing
it's going to get worse.

I think unfortunately.

Most of four hundred twenty fourth among
hundred forty four countries in global

competition index.

Is one of the least globalized
a country in economic terms

is obviously globalized in
the bad aspects of globalization.

Pakistan has some hundred
ten nuclear weapons and

then plans to deploy sixty kilometer
range tactical nuclear weapons

on the border with India some silver
linings limited progress in democracy

transition first time the military did not
intervene when a democratically elected

government gave power handed over power to
another democratically elected government

military's remaining in the barracks
some efforts especially in the washer

the government is planning or
talking about peace.

More afoot said economic integration
the European Union gave a deal.

Dialogue with the United States
a strategic dialogue for

the first time includes three.

This is something the day yesterday
mentioned in the only country that

this would have been from day one.

Yet the prognosis is not good Taliban but

they've been in Afghanistan
now stepped up their attack.

Afghanistan could unravel into
today's New York Times is a really

really depressing story about what's
going on with the Taliban and

the killings of those Taliban that want
to negotiate with the Afghan government.

Now my effort here is to explain.

Pakistan's weak state syndrome.

Why Pakistan is finding it so

hard to become a strong statement and
I'm not

trying to understand everything relating
to Pakistan but I'm trying to understand.

What I try to offer to explanations
that it will come in in a second.

My paper wrote a little disconnect.

Now I want to talk questions.

Why this Pakistan remain a vehicle state.

Despite intense focus
on national security.

For such a long period of time and
secondly why hasn't it.

Why has the why is that the elite of
Pakistan pursues policies that have

not been broad long term security or
prosperity to Pakistan.

You know when countries realize that
they're not becoming stronger or secure or

prosperous.

Sometimes they're weird up
their strategies in this case

adapt action is very very slow or
it's not happening and my argument is

that social scientists have not offered
a good answer to these two puzzles.

So I'm trying to come up with
an explanation developing

based on both structural and
agency driven factors.

Look at the geography of
the circumstance of Pakistan.

And the ideas and I'm not a constructivist
of people sitting here to know but

I like the notion of ideas and strategies
which by the way has a lot of appeal to

mean for me as other social logical and
other disciplines.

Now the question is how do we
how do these two are linked.

I argue that Pakistan has
substantial importance for

the great power system
great power conflicts.

It's situated in the kind of right place.

If you want to call it.

And this has generated
considerable wealth to Pakistan

through a for you know interactions but
that is not enough.

You need to look at the ideas that
proper they lead to Pakistan.

I'm not arguing again I want to emphasize
because then I'm sure the Pakistani people

of Pakistani origin will find it
difficult to take my argument but

I would argue that I am not arguing
Pakistan has not faced that conflict.

Not arguing Kashmir conflict
did not matter not arguing

Indian behavior did not matter but
country is the.

Face big rivalries and territorial
disputes have faced their conflict

differently here the elites ideas and
strategies matter.

They come up with a concept
called geo strategic could use.

I'm adapting from the literature on
resource currents and foreign aid coders

and or in course basically Pakistan
has been simultaneously blessed and

cursed with us because you can
portray us for great powers.

You have to look.

And the villainess of the elite to
participate in great power competition.

Through the Cold War Pakistan was
the choice an ally of the United States.

It was seed considerable
support in the turn for

base facilities there in
the eighty's it was the conduit for

supply of weapons and
funds to the Afghan resistance.

Since two thousand and one.

It has been a key ally of the United
States in the war in Afghanistan and

Pakistan has been that
of China in many sense.

And so the area lot of other countries
this participation geopolitical

competition brought billions of dollars
and modern weaponry to Pakistan.

The European internal extraction and

South-East Asian examples
of internal innovation and

the external trade have been absent in
the Pakistani case other than of course

a short period of you can use the military
elite became key players in economic and

political systems major efforts of
domestic gets traction on economic reforms

were not undertaken this is somewhat
similar to this is somewhat

similar to foreign aid which is actually
a big topic discussed in the literature.

And it has a lot of problems.

What it does is these are some of
the problems of the literature and defies

hinders them or the class undermines
to ability to severe pressure to read.

And create a patron client relationship.

No long term investments or

productive sectors because our
allies will be there to be out.

In the world there is
a crisis as it's happening

just happened recently the I.M.F.
coming up with the big rescue package

a great example of internal
capacity of a state is

how much tax it can collect Pakistan is
one of the least tax collecting states

in the world New York Times
in July two thousand and ten.

Made this.

Important.

Revelation or

one hundred seventy million Pakistanis
only two percent been income tax.

Making Pakistan's revenue from taxes.

Among the lowest in the world
not spill last year early on

in terms of ratio of tax to
gross domestic product and

this report said some ten million
Pakistanis to be paying income tax

would really even early two point
five million are even registered.

Pakistan are obviously gets
a lot of money that will

limit Tensas Pakistanis working abroad.

Now there's also how can be a curse
has in many other situations

because it also disincentive buys
the lead to do anything else.

Pakistan got in two thousand and
thirteen some fourteen billion dollars So

between two sic nine hundred sixty in two
thousand and twelve it was zero seventy

three point one billion dollars from buy
a lot of them are developing sources U.S.

provided some thirty percent
Japan France U.K. Germany.

I'm a full Boeing etc
I'm offering the rest.

Between two thousand and
two and two thousand and ten.

Pakistan has gotten more than two billion
dollars per year from the United States.

The military it Pakistan is becoming
a part of the land it is circusy in

some sense this is actually looking at
the European History also the worst

cocktail you can get in the military
elite is given land in return.

So is retiring from the Pakistani
army is one of the most lucrative

things you can get hyped
up to get a lot of it.

Case of Lenten and also become members
of the various corporations and ditties.

Now there's a fascinating
book on the subject by kind

of a critical Pakistani journalist called.

Military Inc You must read that show
the extent of militarist penetration in

the industrial sector of Pakistan and
the various etc

We can we can talk about the need for
that too in some extent because I

met the guy who ran one of the foundations
of solid foundations their own and

he said that actually sympathized with
him said that you might invade on for

some profit of this sort of his like for
taking care of the millions

of soldiers who will take care of them and
so we have a necessity.

So that's the kind of us are perpetrating
process but there is no private

industry or private sector to do
this sort of sort of research.

Well first of all they're not allowing
this part of the problem but I want to go

beyond that this only explains
part of the problem at hand ideas.

I very important.

I'm using the Goldstein call Hain
definition a discussion about ideas and

foreign policy and you see that ideas
affect embedded them in institutions.

And blinders on people.

Reducing number of alternatives.

But clearly strategies that
determined by the ideas

lead towards the dominant
ideas of the Pakistani elite.

This is actually I'm drawing quite
a bit from Stephen coins work which

if you haven't read this
called The idea of focused on.

It actually the ideas come from
kind of a realist Topsy in world

is somewhat similar to Vilhelm
mind Germany who are pressured to.

Some extent.

That you need a strong
national security state.

Your enemies are pretty three and
that they will anytime pounce upon you.

If if opportunity comes and
they will destroy you and

it's a realist World System
eleven games matter.

National security territory and security
all most important goals of a state trade

and economic welfare are secondary Worley
if it helps the National Security State.

Extreme conflict is the nature
of interstate politics and

the perseveration of the state from
per day to really of adversities

is the primary function of state.

Obviously we're all in the Vendean
classification although he's borrowing

from other people the idea of loci
in ideas of the exist but unlimited

violence or fear of denying solvent is
not the or Kantian ideas of kind of

absent in this discourse armed forces
that are model for Pakistani society.

Again colons words.

Selfless disciplined obedient and
competent.

Deep rooted social or economic
reforms including Lambert forms and

universal literacy are tourists key for
a state that was already unstable and

pressed from the outside
by dangerous enemies.

Some of the ideas are drawn from
British colonial of us especially

the idea of strategic depth and
conflict of India it's natural.

In order to award your a strategic
parity and the balance of power and

deterrence in all the things
that we worry about.

Such parity is up tenable and desirable.

Even though it may impose
high costs on society.

The size differential is big but

we can all work at the all to come
that by pursuing crap described it is.

In a relationship with great
powers acquisition of weapons

systems including nuclear weapons.

Religious ideological strength adds
to Pakistan's balancing effort.

I think I go deeper into
the national security parity

bringing in the civilisational aspect of
it something that is actually missing in

the literature.

Not hunting Tony and
what I'm interested in that they mention.

The desire for parity has deep
roots in South Asia's history.

It can be traced to the demand for
a Muslim homeland to regain the lost power

of the Muslim minority and the conceptual
inheritance of the Mughal empire.

Now this is also a competition for status.

And I will discuss that
concept in the larger

context is not a typical Hindu Muslim
conflict as people talk about.

It is a believe that Muslims
ought to be co-equal

with Hindus in terms of if you
look at that civilization lasted.

Because Muslims controlled South Asia for
a thousand years.

It was an eight hundred fifty seven
the first so-called war of independence of

all Indians or of the mutiny for
the British that the Muslim

swear given a lower rank in
the society because the revolt was led

by many Muslim rulers of northern India.

And so when you know was
conceptualizing the state.

He was hoping for a core you quality
of really getting more than what he got

entire Punjab entire
Bengal obviously Kashmir.

But he didn't get all he wanted.

So he called it a market in Pakistan.

And that really heard them say
colossally because they were hoping for

equality and the Indians obviously
didn't treat them nicely.

Initially the the distribution
of resources they were not given

you know to call down the you
had to go near fast and or

death to get Pakistan
the locator resources and then.

In the U.S. assassinated probably because
of that now Pakistan needs to depth.

I discussed a lot of the the ideas
coming up British colonial.

So if you think of the fear
of the Russian Empire etc and

that the impact of that on
the strategic thinking.

So my argument is that a country of
this nature it is an intense national

security state and it is engaging in
not just curative competition but

a status competition with its neighbor.

And it is losing that status competition
partly because after the end of

the Cold War until the end of the Cold War
the Western world traded a desk or

you call with India India Pakistan hyphen
it after the Cold War ended India started

liberalizing economy started picking and
America started embracing India.

Now you don't hear that Ifa nation for
that generates a lot of frustration for

the Pakistani elite and
I can understand that and

that is part of the big challenge.

They are facing.

Now how do you get change
in a such a mill you.

Interestingly those who study
revolutions and social change will find

that too often it is to mechanisms need
to be either it is internally driven or

externally properly to some extent or
people limited other countries.

You need a middle class.

You know the Paddington more kind of
statement normal sure nor democracy

kind of thing Pakistan and person doesn't
have a big middle class which is a big

challenge in a civil society or
do you need labor class really to fight.

As you just witnessed in
the Ukrainian capital or

in Egypt or what Egypt is
an example of similar to Pakistan.

And the civil society sort of ideas for
transforming the country.

And the passion for tending the country
Pakistan definitely has a civil society

but up times they fight like the lawyers
waiting for getting them were shot and

then they end up supporting
the killer of a governor who was

defending the question may not.

These are rights.

You know things like there is so
as there is not a consistent struggle for

transformation the pressures of
change can come from outside and here

in the United States is unfortunately has
had a very short term view of Pakistan.

It's been kind of patron
client relationship.

Unlike U.S.
relationship with Korea or Taiwan.

And they didn't they only the U.S.

but any conditionalities because the fear
is that Pakistan will collapse and

that will affect American security or more
than that the ability of Pakistani lead

to negotiate is an interesting
book by terrorist attack.

Schafer and it has been homewards I would
say for cornhole Pakistan negotiates

extremely successful in tactical victory
negotiations with the United States.

Using this is in a similar negotiation
actually is a fascinating topic by itself

how the weaker party uses ideas
to gain more than it was.

But this has not made the US popular

toll in Pakistan factors more hated us
is more more hated than India today.

If you may recall the US aid to Korea and
Taiwan and then

in the sixty's the nineteenth seventy's
U.S. aid demanded structural change in

economic integration with the world market
and World Bank and I.M.F. were also

in world to some extent but obviously the
big source of change of domestic change

the bureaucratic elite developmental
elite passionate about change.

And other countries like China
obviously are not going to pressure of

Pakistan to change
Saudi Arabia did a lot of harm

by starting with the ISIS
rather than other schools.

So my effort in one of my chapters is to
here is your model Empire by the way.

I just met a guy from his
than who is a diplomat

in residence in I was called Barbara
who was who invaded India and

stablished the Mughal
empire was from Star.

And I was you know you realize that this
was you talk about a regional orders and

you see the region going up all
the way to the Soviet Republics.

And obviously they didn't reach there
in India which was quite interesting.

The pre-partition India.

You had five hundred odd
states half independent

protectorates a British Empire the area.

Lately grey area is or
directly controlled by Great Britain and

they had also control over to Singapore.

Again the north and
of says regions can change.

So this sort of

out of the major issues I'm talking about
but I think those comparative is sitting

here will find my chapter on comparing
Pakistan with top national security states

that face intense conflict
that is Taiwan and Korea and

three Muslim majority states that also put
a lot of emphasis on military security

and their trajectories have been somewhat
different except for probably Egypt.

I know it's not a perfect comparison but.

I think not to countries
are perfectly comparable anywhere.

South Korea and Taiwan prove that
a national security state can also

become strong through
developmental approach.

What became democracies up to playing
with intense military rule here

of course some structural condition
Japanese colonialism aspires brutality.

You know a lot of good to this
place in terms of industrialisation

in terms of getting rid of the power
of the land it is circusy.

Education a lot of things that
the PAN did brutal one has to say

British Colonial is we're not very good
in any of that and obviously India.

Suffering as a result to some extent.

But here I think the biggest
thing is the bureaucracy.

I told Callie has interesting
book on the bureaucracy.

They adopted what we call
a developmental state approach.

Pakistan has been pure national security
approach pursuing a pure national security

approach the South Korean entirely is a
lead realise that if they do not modernize

popular discontent will affect their
defense the relationship between security

and defense is so clear that they
are also putting emphasis on defense but

they knew that people would not
support the difference efforts.

They also had up in several strong ruler
Lillete but at the bureaucracy definitely

played a big role in these countries and
they made use of the war.

So the United States fought in Asia
especially Japan's experience with Korea

but in this case Vietnam War intensely
traded with the United States as

a result of the U.S.
involvement in Vietnam Pakistan.

Unfortunately has not
benefited from Afghanistan

the two wars only a short
period a mention.

You can speed it was just actually
quite good for Pakistan but

the sixty five War onward spark is there
and has been downward spiral spiral.

Export or die was the month.

That East Asian states adopted of course
they had something there called to look up

to in Japan so that approach has been
missing in the Pakistani elites thinking.

Partly because it's the land it is circusy
land reforms have not taken place in

Pakistan and we talk a little
turkey turkey also has been

very focused on national security state
of course a different approach secular.

Ism was the big approach there
top down transformation but

a highly intense real politik approach for
those of us that turkey realize

the military at least until recently
had such a dominant position.

This for a military cause they also
had separate discord if separatists

conflict with Greece or typeless.

Cyprus because of the NATO membership.

But Turkey balance security
concerns with the need for

economic development center
a semi developmental state.

Under the name and the new sixty's it
was growing at least I'm really OK.

WHAT A point six percent for
a decade after nine in ninety's Turkey

has been growing quite well became a G.
twenty state.

But now it's probably all did turn the
other affected had land reforms early on.

Now Turkey has made
partial transformation.

It has become more democratic.

If you want to call it although I
don't know how you want to define it.

Turkey at least control its
military some of them are in jail.

The A K P party has done initially some
good progress but the fear is that

you may become more authoritarian
with the continuing certain policies.

I think my next case Indonesia is
definitely the most interesting one.

And something Pakistan could emulate.

This is the largest Muslim country in
the world it received considerable

assistance from the United States
there are several internal conflicts.

Yes It need not have a big
external conflict of able its

armed forces was in control but it didn't

get in a successful transformation over
time it got rid of the military rule.

Despite the military wanted to be
a big player in it and it got it

off its internal conflicts and external
interventions in East Timor and internal

conflict in that chamber it pursued a mild
secular strategy the points approach.

And by two thousand and seven so

little elected governments managed to
stay on to a democratic transition

control of the military Pakistan
could definitely hope to get there.

By two thousand and seven Freedom House
has declared Indonesia free a fully free.

Obviously there are some things going on
there but after the two thousand toolbar

early bomb beings Indonesia put
a real control over the terrorists or

the non-state actors like Pakistan
International pursued a program of policy

despite widespread corruption and
it has been a pro developmental state.

Obviously it has its
weaknesses poverty etc.

But it is quite an impressive
piece of growth and

Pete is a you know happening the cycles.

To many of these countries Egypt is
probably following Pakistan's part

of the military is now back in power and
similarities are many

of differences of the intense
focus on national security state.

Pakistan.

Egypt has been getting this two billion
dollars a year from the United States but

the difference here is that the U.S.
put a condition that peace with Israel.

Otherwise the money will be cut off and

it has definitely moderated
its foreign policy goals.

You know the story of two thousand and
seven out of spring.

The transformation taking place.

Very difficult trajectory
going through the next two or

three minutes let me conclude
my kind of conclusions here.

One argument people make criticize one of

this sort of logic is time
will make a difference.

Pakistan has been in existence for
sixty six years various European

states took some four hundred to
six hundred years to become strong.

My argument is that in the modern times or
in contemporary world.

You don't need a whole lot of time.

To early two decades for
China to achieve whatever it is Korea and

Taiwan probably less than that
time is compressed to this world.

Many Latin American countries
have been in existence for

over one hundred fifty years but
none has become stronger as this and

in a linear progression
Taiwan China Korea.

Even India and R.C.N.
countries have changed and

transformed in terms of economic goals and
this is short period of time.

And time but a national security state
is needed to adopt a trading and

development emphasizing that that is my
biggest argument to the Pakistani elite.

To become stronger.

If they are going to ignore that they will
remain considerably weaker over the years

and so without Deng Xiaoping China
would be a basket case

without India's reforms in ninety one
India would have been a basket case.

Securities no longer the border security.

You can have military disputes.

But you would need to focus
on trade investment and

engagement with the rest of the world.

Vascular water making as the European
states engaged is no longer available

to become strong.

You play with dark skin water making
you become Ethiopia Somalia Eritrea or

North Korea.

Pakistan has not benefited from
water preparation because it has

not been a development of steep
Pakistan has not encouraged its

younger generation to globalize and
benefit from economic liberalization

as it has been the case with China and
to some extent India.

They're not given the necessary education
to sleep in science and technology.

Pakistan has very few
technical institutions.

Haikus than has therefore a misdoubt
the post-war post cold war economic boom.

Especially the benefits of globalization
associated with greater international

trade investment and
mobility of work force globally.

None but
of a crisis is a proper link thing for

countries to transform
was ninety ninety one.

There was a big crisis in India.

Cases that forced them to change.

None of the cases that Pakistan faced
big enough but every time it face

a crisis there is that extra little aid
coming to patch it up to keep it going.

Because the fear that it
collapses a bit of content.

You know difficulty.

MADE IT transformation is necessary in
the way Pakistani elite civil society and

ex-pat community think of security and
development.

You cannot wait for all your territorial
dispute to settle with India and

Pakistan Afghanistan.

Until then you are giving
the veto power to your enemies.

You can do both simultaneously.

Pakistan's key allies the U.S. and China.

Need to rethink their strategy.

U.S. really needs a long term economic
engagement with this country cannot

continue this client state patron client
relationship based on military aid or

Band-Aid for services and you cannot

modernize without big making a fairy tale
in Pakistan and Central Asia and India.

A part of a lot of trade networks.

China is focusing on infrastructure but

it has been miserable in terms of
the economic development of Pakistan.

It really could offer a lot
more by way of trade in sort of

emphasizing balance of power competition
deterrence nuclear material sex at all.

You need regional economic
integration connectivity.

If you have any chance of Afghanistan
coming out of this tragic situation it

seems India definitely has a big role to
play it should not securitize is what

a this is sort of War era Percy policies
in Kashmir and open up its economy and

gave civil society with Pakistan as
much as possible without seeking

Pulis a prosody Obviously it's hard on
them but India needs creative strategies.

It has to be modern JENNER.

Of us with Pakistan on trade.

It probably needs a new doctor and
it needs to strengthen the Sonic and

supped of it is that
real Trade Organization.

So let me conclude by arguing
that Pakistani media and

leading come in to do so.

Writing more on the need for economic
approach in fact it's fascinating to read

the English language
newspapers of Pakistan.

Except that every day starts
with thirty killed or

forty kilometers to spoil your day but did
the same time I'm forced to read no for

this purpose and so official discourse
is reflecting somebody's thinking

but I don't know it's the never
said comes from foreign

nations even they don't know the people
who deal with Pakistan even daily basis.

Do they are the powerful group
decision makers surrounding

Shareef to make that push forward
transformation but one thing is clear.

Pakistan's for exactly will be
a key determinant yesterday

that if we get peace and stability for
almost two billion South Asians and

also global security for that our children
will be fighting wars in Afghanistan or

going to school their children
to the house and on and on.

So here we are.

Thank you.

T.V. said

well first off there's pizza
there's like courage you guys to

sort of go back and forth.

But while you're doing that T.V. It's
very graciously said that he'd be happy

to entertain questions not only on the
book and on the particular argument here

about the work your state but
also about broader South Asian security.

So please.

Question What you just state your name.

Yes I just.

Your life

is a very it was important for

your argument you have historical
succession and we are very

very good that you know

about the more serious problem and

you know my mind I have actually
that's why when you read the book.

Which actually goes into the sectarian
differences and the Islam

as a bridging course that hasn't
worked out because who is Islam.

Pakistan is a very powerful minorities you
know the home of the minority there is

an oddity.

But unfortunately over the years.

Pakistan has become a Sunni dominated
country with especially see old executed

and that it has done very poorly in these
in the integration especially Belinda

standing just mentioned I
have a sincere discussion

on their inability to develop
that part of the Pakistan.

Despite that it is a big provider of
natural gas and other minerals and

that is one thing that the so-called
Punjabi elite the Pakistan

has not done are told is to
bring up the different segments

of that country losing
by you know Pakistan.

Now one can say and
intervention was there but

it happened as a result of
internal processes taking place

there are a lot of new books coming as
a new book called The blood telegram.

You may want to look at that.

Fascinating study on Mr Bloodgood
was the Pakistan American consul

general in Dakar and
he was reporting on a daily basis.

The cruelties going on and

the Nixon team simply ignoring
their own balance of power.

But it that apart.

Losing that it was quite the next
in the nobility of the lead and

here I blame Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

I mean we hold those as great
champions of whatever but

in this case he made two major critical
errors actually three the first

I think was he was one of the big small
group that started the sixty five war

decision making group and
impressing upon how you can do initiate

that while that really destroyed us
relationship US put sanctions as a result.

And then the Pakistanis started
because you're unhappy with them and

obviously relations with India.

So and they didn't get whatever
they were fighting for.

So that losing that
territory because after

the election zero nine hundred seventy.

The Bengali is won the election
of the majority and

would hold refused to give him shake
would you put him on Marcus and

lead to a chance to form a government and
their service.

That was a Socialist Movement.

Obviously supporter heavily by India in
the recent to see that this is this could

have been probably avoided if she was
given a chance to run the country and

we're not blue that and
that was part of the challenge.

So I think this is the problem
Legion is a strong binding force but

then I mentioned Islamization
you know declaring

the home of the minority is tiny
minority to be million as an Islamic and

then she has now facing
challenges even if merely.

We're a rather peaceful part of
Pakistan and they're facing challenges.

So it's tough to interpret it based
on religion because of the sectarian

differences and what else can integrate
them economics could be a very fair state

is one that indicates I mean what about
integration India is going through

is probably because it has some semblance
of secularism some semblance of you

know federalism some semblance of
democracy participation not a perfect one.

I'm always critical of that but let him as
he cannot come through a top down cohesive

approach or even bringing in this
narrow conception of religion

into it so that story is discussed
in a big detail in my book and but

I don't want to say everything.

It's a huge country with a lot of
history a lot of interesting issues.

That's all I'm saying and

I like it when

I feel like it.

And

I don't like it but I think.

Now let me bring I could cover this is a
kind of a general Pakistani understanding

or people or I gave it quite a bit of what
he said but the only point I disagree

is that it assumes the major blame
is an outsider's Unitas especially

since a Pakistani leader is somewhat
innocent victims of the situation.

That's not the case Pakistani elite played
a big role in making use of this so

called geo strategic when that was
coming out of this relationship.

Now I don't want to say
US did nothing wrong.

Obviously we're going to read the book
Ghost Wars you know see how much they have

been reading but that is not enough for an
elite to claim that we are just victims.

We you made certain choices during this
period you mean as the elite during

this period see our hook in particular and
those choices are not simply.

Forced by the United States
alone obviously the U.S.

is giving them Incendies but
it is clearly certain

ideas they have about certain
strategies and that I heard them.

That's what I'm saying that it's
it instead of using the U.S.

relationship for trade investment
there the blame goes to the U.S.

to where it became more like aid as the
number one source of economic activity.

So I'm saying that none of what I want
to say you said is very correct but

those conditions a different set of
elite could have used that condition for

a major economic benefits to
Pakistan trade relationship.

They ignore trade.

That's what all I'm trying to
say how much of a great sign.

Yes.
When I when I had

that place I was in this house.

Why don't we rephrase this a little bit
when how has the changing nature of

the conflict military conflict.

The fact that we're making state
especially the national security state.

Given the modernization that's going on
in Pakistan both on the nuclear front and

where they now face.

You know interesting paradox you write
in on ability involvement paradox on

the nuclear front but the other
types of conventional information

types of issues how is that changing
the nature of work very effectively.

I am rather depressed
to be honest with you.

The impact of nuclear weapons.

I'm not arguing that South Asia doesn't
need nuclear weapons percentage you need

nuclear weapons for
a limited deterrent but

they're putting a lot of
emphasis on nuclear weapons.

Asif that's going to bring a lot of
transformation this we you know nuclear

deterrents and balance of power
status quo maintaining systems

they don't promote change change
because countries don't have

to change here I think that because I
could answer part of your a question.

ADAM That is I think South Asia
is becoming the next theater or

probably emerging as a theatre
of nuclear arms race.

Pakistan has started over
planning to deploy some sixty or

sixty kilometer range short training
missiles on the border of interest palms

to India as a potential reaction in
a crisis like the two thousand and

one parliament attack in the moment by
attacks and the so called Look start

doctrine of myself and see if they're
attacked again in the in the interior.

But.

The point is that it is the most
destabilizing aspect of military

planning going on there.

Because those who know the impact of
short range missiles is that you've given

command authority to
the commander on the ground

because you can cut off
once the war started.

And if the command if one nuclear weapon
is used the Indian reaction is they

will retaliate massively and
the Pakistanis will tell you to.

This is a recipe for
fundamental dishonesty for

a region so prone to crises.

So I am a rather a happy as a scholar in

the people who are engaged with this that
they are going into the road near to and

worst of Paquin through and
got it off short range especially and

you don't need that kind of
nuclear escalatory behavior there.

Why not talk of confidence
building measures why not develop

use technology for verification and
confidence building.

It is very feasible and
not totally impossible to think about

developing a hotline of a terrorist
attack in Mumbai or someplace.

Maybe Pakistan has
nothing to do with it but

how do you communicate that to
the Indians and try to make sure and

respond in a way that will
create a nuclear crisis.

So technology has been used
very selectively in this case

instead of an advantage on some of these
things idea especially is a good deal

the remote sensing is good but
I don't know whether this is really

all militaries are modernizing I
think the Pakistani military or

some drones if I not call it incorrect.

And that Indians are buying drones and.

So there is a lot of that
competition going on but

India is modernizing with China in mutual.

So it's kind of this trilateral
context that we need to look into and

then the involvement of now in Japan and
India a little bit from Chip.

US Obviously this big player there.

The balance of power is reemerging
in this region competition and it.

Unpredictable outcomes.

Because the region has great potential for
economic integration

that may not happen if competition
competent interaction submerged.

So I'm not very much up on the take
a glass because I can say the nuclear arms

is not going well as the part initially.

Yeah

yeah yeah yeah.

We are all very you know mine.

I am all in support of gas
pipeline not only from Iran but

also from Central Asia
through Afghanistan to India.

Unfortunately the argument is
that it's a big investment

security is not guaranteed anyone
can destroy the pipeline any minute.

Therefore it's probably not worth
the money but you're right the U.S.

does that put pressure on India
especially in Pakistan not to proceed.

Although Iran and Pakistan have made
some progress recently I think the U.S.

has to think big.

But it's part of the sanctions regime
that the U.S. put on it when it can't be

just isolated because they don't want any
dealings with Iran no so I think if you

want to talk about regional connectivity
you little piece we need to think of not

only these one gas pipeline but
they're quite a few other potential and

hydropower I've been talking pushing for
this idea of India is building some seven

or eight dams on the Indus River to be
a radius in this and to be treated worse.

In Kashmir.

Why not make energy as
a source of cooperation

in Pakistan a part of the energy
that comes out of it and

develop the Kashmir region with the money
that they could gain out of that so

that acquired a kind of fair and
better thinking among the elite

they all have desire but
nobody want to take that first step.

This is a sign of an intense
national security mind

Hope seen world basically that
is dominating this region.

So your brand in Pakistan have I think
done some the some really good work in

this area but
they are part of the global you know

screen power conflicts system except worse
so some of them beyond their control.

Yes

I.

My

gosh you know

what it

was you know

which by the way is a dumb
idea in the nuclear context

but not the people I blame
the people are pretty good

people.

OK.
I mean

there are a lot of you're
actually you gave a very good

Pakistani We point I agree
with most of it actually but

I disagree with this blaming the rest
of the world for our problems sort of

South Asians do that are all over not
really Pakistanis Indians do that.

Three languages do that you
know you're very good at that.

Let me tell you that.

You have some point about this
is a chicken or egg problem.

In fact if you read my book.

This is what I'm arguing again is
that security wall of security and

economic development can go together.

Pakistan proves that in the nineteen
fifties and under one hundred sixty five.

OK are you can prove that you can do both.

He was part of the Cold War alliance in
fact are you kind maybe the only little

ruler of Pakistan come out of this carcass
than was a model economy by the way for

many countries Karachi is the place
where South Koreans visited to

find out the planning South Korea
was weaker than Pakistan but

they had an economic plan
obviously they have a lot of us

us in the deterrence etc but here.

This is where people like you
will have to start focusing

on Pakistan has to take responsibility.

That means leaders have to
take responsibility for

the choices they have made unfortunately
even internal integration.

I mentioned that or
using this extra Not relationship for

the greater international
trade investment etc.

If we wait for

all the conflicts to solve then they will
come they're never going to come Pakistan

need to develop a grand strategy that
included trade the United States.

I was in a track to meeting with
Pakistani ex officials and U.S.

ex officials and
the big discussion was security and

I was asked to comment on
a paper on balance of power.

And I made it dumb statement that.

Why is that not a single trade
representative sitting here

in this meeting and the response of the
Pakistani emerged sort of a rather harsh

as if you don't understand our
problem of problem he saw security.

Once we saw security we would love trade.

It is never going to happen like that.

You really need a strategy that
uses your security economic

Nish completely abandoning I have no
understanding why Pakistan would not start

at least ten technical schools
wife Pakistan has initiated.

Educational reforms or
some limited obviously

why Pakistan is relying on this
transactional you're right.

Absolutely.
Aid and relationship.

So this blame goes both ways.

Yes Americans had to be blamed.

But America is not you know international

it is I has a grand strategy it is also
a national security state somewhat broad.

It is not going to be doing everything to
police Pakistan or anybody for charity.

So unfortunately American thinking
the the elite in America.

Also you know three you know some of them
already sitting in various councils they

come and go they don't have a long term
understanding of this region for instance.

So we can blame up to a point but

the notion of double games you know
it's rather difficult for Pakistanis to

accept that that is rather what has
been going on and so you know a sense.

We need to look at what is
the next phase the cases

that Pakistan face if it
wants to get out of it.

You'd really have to put
money into education.

That's a hundred technical
institutions liberalize improve your

a social science a liberal education or

you have a lot of points unknown please
I'll tell you the whole liberalism.

New hold on capital the capital
investment will come and

go to the Saudis to bring money
to start technical education

not not the kind of a hobby education they
are giving it a lot of things can be done.

China this so-called friends of
Pakistan can help Pakistan and so

I think this is its economic problem but
I think if you're waiting for India

to soul crushing the problem America soft
understand then we will go into trade.

That's what's going to happen but

I think trade has to come simultaneously
right now they have to appoint a team

of people to look at where can Pakistan
gain in this emerging international

economic order we have a we're running out
of time we have a couple more questions.

So I'd ask everybody short concise.

I know you don't like

me

but

let

me tell

you

that

right.

I mean like

you.

I understand that you
didn't get all the things

that you will

let me that you learned on your life

a little bit like everybody.

Why do we need to believe it will be OK
why don't we take what we got a couple

of intimate questions maybe take up
another question is I'm all the questions

that come out of here

you hear me.

Hindustan and
Pakistan out of the room it was

one line like

I'm going to be by the by

is what I know

it's on that difference of
forty percent of the things

you need

me to do is to think you're just.

You know and

there's just this little
you just don't want to.

Yes Yes Well it's all in the book.

So here you are here Larry.

Yes.

Here I want

to not want to know what the impact
of what I've been in this war.

You know if you have a question.

OK.

I mean more than once like

OK OK OK OK Well

yes thank you

very much

and you know you want to look here.

Yeah yeah yeah

you know you know

there have been military security they're
doing a little bit of that by the way.

No but much limited thirty percent go for
development sort of thing.

The rest are for the military
because they're fighting a war.

It's not like they have a choice.

Sometimes but the point is that they
could have opened up a trade lot more now

even Pakistani textiles can
come American because of you

know Southern states I believe
don't like these text.

You know then you need to be about a
dentist or whatever little niche they have

open up those trade facility in a bungalow
that is the leading textile exporter in

South Asia about this than he used
to be that would last Pakistan

doesn't have a whole lot to export I
mean what I want it has it's trying but

it's Hamburg by you know this other quest.

Let's take some sanity.

Bungler this impact a bundle of theirs
was tremendous in terms of initial loss

of India to some extent and they
consolidated the power off the west west

Pakistani leave that versus to
the question the gentleman asking and

giving them more of a desire to achieve
parity through acquiring nuclear weapons

in the book or make a face
statement famous statement that.

We can we will lead grass for
a thousand years and

will still get the nuclear
weapons are you gaining the last.

Status.

And then of course security too so
it had a perverse effect.

It was not a decisive defeat as Germany or

Japan consolidated the power of the so
called Punjabi a leader.

I'm referring to you
all seem to think that.

Pakistan is solid you know is not what
I'm trying to talk about is the leader

the leading It's a five hundred odd elite
according to Stephen Cohen that comes and

goes that has upper hand in
making decisions the ordinary

soldier every country in know
their fight for their country.

I don't want to question their loyalty or

their need to be finding
their profession honorable.

It is not that class.

I'm talking about it is the interaction
between the land that is Circassian

the top military elite that generates the
kind of dynamics that you get a fall of

the developmental part of
the country has taken.

It's not clear that Pakistan has land
reforms that is absolutely needed for

any country to make use of its a situation
or put investment in education

all South Asian countries by less than
two percent on education Korea and

Taiwan put more than six per cent on
their G.D.P. and education without that

investment how do you ever become
a strong state and so I don't think that.

These ideas are you know it's hard to
listen to some of these things but

we really need diagnosis and sometimes
people have to realize that a certain

part has been followed for
the last sixty six years perhaps.

We need to think of different
crafting different strategies and so

people like you here have a lot of ideas
technically Dia's help these countries

back home by not to be nationalistic about
it by trying to defend everything they do.

At the same time giving
them some creative ideas.

I do know that a lot of smart people
out there who can offer that.

It in the youngsters etc So I don't
think that we have an opportunity now.

With nobody there is a fatigue of warfare
in South Asia and I talk to many of

the people there including
Pakistanis Indians in the Afghanis but

somehow that fatigue that crisis
opportunity is not used for

transforming the region economies.

I do think that this is
a grand opportunity.

This transition that's going on and
the U.S.

definitely should take the lead but
then the U.S.

is waiting for Karzai to come back which
is looking rather bleak right now.

So I don't have answers for all those
big issues that you're racing but

quite a bit of it is a cause discussed
in the book the parity issue etc and

the failure of the Congress party to
understand what dinner was trying to argue

he wanted a kind of representation in
the government that was formed by no.

Not based on you know one or
two but giving religious

minority in more already equality and
that was denied rejected straight away by

the Congress party so there's a lot
of thing goes back to history.

You can relate history.

You know I discuss that but my effort here
is to encourage Pakistan and I'm trying

to be a friend of Pakistan by the way that
they need to rethink their grand strategy.

I'm not saying give up Kashmir I'm not
saying there is security challenge but

then need to become a dad.

Some of the ideas coming out of Korea's
entire once and Chile and other case in

which I was rather brutal but he did
extremely good for three or Indonesia.

You know so there are a lot of other
examples in the world rather than just

justifying the current trajectory which
will not bring Pakistani unity security or

what it is seeking prosperity.

I'll stop there.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.