'There Is No Terrorist Group In Pakistan'

First words to Bush when he called after 9/11: That I, first of all,certainly condoled all the tragedy that has struck the United States. I condoledthe loss of lives in the United States and expressed our cooperation in fightingterrorism around the world.

On whether he would allow U.S. troops, U.S. military hardware, support,logistics to be based on Pakistani soil? Well, we have -- certainly we'vebeen asked for intelligence and information sharing. We've also been asked forutilization of our airspace and logistics support. And we have said that we willcertainly cooperate in all these three areas. Since we haven't gone into thedetail, I wouldn't like to go into the modalities of our tactical details.

Would he allow U.S. forces to be based in Pakistan? Well, as I said,certainly we need to consider. And we have said that we will cooperate in thesethree areas of logistic support and use of airspace. We need to get into thedetails of the modalities as they come along.

On his bottom line and what he's not prepared to do in any militarycampaign:Well, I would not like Pakistani troops to be crossing the bordersinto Afghanistan because I don't think that is a requirement from our troopsalso.

On whether U.S. has presented an operational plan yet: No, not as yet.We don't know anything about the operation plan.

On reports of special forces from the U.S. and the U.K. already takingpart in reconnaissance in Afghanistan, and that thousands or hundreds of U.S.troops have been based here already: Well, I see these in the news, yes. Sothere's no such information. I don't at all know those who are based inAfghanistan, but I'm certainly very clear that nobody's based in Pakistan asyet.

On whether he's personally convinced that Osama bin Laden and the al Qaedanetwork is, was responsible for what happened in the United States? Well,frankly, we haven't been -- there's no evidence that has been shared with us asyet. So therefore, all that I know is from the television. I don't have anydetails myself.

On whether he's expecting a full sharing of the evidence from the UnitedStates: Well, yes, we have indication that parts of the evidence which canbe -- which do not have any confidentiality, maybe, could be shared with us.

On whether there needs to be a public presentation of the evidence:No. I really don't know what the confidential part of this evidence, so if thereis confidentiality in it, in the interest of justice, we certainly wouldunderstand that. But those parts which would facilitate in better understandingof the people at large should be shared, I would say.

On the huge risk in standing with the United States because of the publicsupport for Taliban and whether that would destabilize Pakistan: No, I don'tthink so. Those who are against whatever my government and myself am doing are avery small minority. These are generally, if not all, religious extremists, andthey do not form the majority of Pakistan certainly. Therefore, certainly I haveno doubt that there is no destabilization within or there's no opposition,there's no mass opposition to me and my government on whatever we are doing.

On whether he and his government would to redress the imbalance caused byhardliners and extremists in Pakistan: Well, I wouldn't say that. We areconcerned about extremism, religious extremism and in the garb of religion,these terrorists acts, sectarian terrorists acts that are being done here inPakistan. So we certainly -- I certainly would like to address this issue. We'realready addressing them as a part of our law and order improvement in Pakistan.And I would like to certainly go along and see what effects these religiousextremists and sectarian extremists have, and I would certainly like to moveagainst them.

On the Madrasas teaching hate:  Well these are -- I would like toelaborate on this issue of madrasas in Pakistan. These are misunderstoodorganizations, may I say. There are about 7,000 or 8,000 madrasas in Pakistan,and they have about 600,000 to 700,000 students in these madrasas. But let mevery clearly say that actually those who know what is going on in madrasas wouldsupport this point that I'm going to tell you, that this is the biggest welfareorganization anywhere in the world is operated today. They get -- about 600,000to 700,000 children of the poor get free board and lodge, and they get freeeducation. Now, the issue is that in many of these madrasas, education is onlyreligious education. But in many of them, they get other forms of educationalso.

So what we need to do actually, and we are doing -- we are following aneducation strategy for madrasas where we have -- we want to teach other subjectsother than religion also in these madrasas so that we won't -- we will thenabsorb these students, these religious students from madrasas into themainstream of life in Pakistan.

But what I certainly would like to say is that there are influences withinthese madrasas by political extremists or religious extremists just like theyhave in any other university or college or educational institution of Pakistan.So therefore, one shouldn't think that all madrasas in Pakistan really are underthe influence of religious extremists and they are teaching some kind ofterrorism. No, that is not the fact.

On whether he would stamp out those madrasas which promoteAnti-Americanism and terrorism: Yes, certainly. Any madrasa which ispreaching terrorism or militancy will certainly we would like to move againstit.

On the support in the Pakistani army and intelligence services for theTaliban and the security of strategic assets, protection for nuclearfacilities? And would and could he self-destruct them, destroy them rather thanrisking their reaching the fantatics: No, I'm very, very sure that thecommand and control set-up that we have evolved for ourselves is very, verysecure, is extremely secure, and there is no chance of these assets falling inthe hands of extremists.  The army is certainly is the most disciplinedarmy in the world, and there is no chance of any extremism coming into the army.We have an excellent command system, we have excellent traditions. And I don'tsee this doomsday scenario ever appearing.

On Northern Alliance: Not concerned, really, to the extent that wemust understand what Afghanistan requires. We must understand we are interestedin Afghanistan's peace and stability and unity of Afghanistan. We are interestedin having a friendly Afghanistan. And we certainly are interested in havinggovernment which takes into consideration the ethnic layout, demographic layoutof Afghanistan. To that extent, I really don't know what is the extent ofsupport that is going to be given to the Northern Alliance. Our concerns are inhaving whatever I've told you.

On Taliban: Well, may I say that this term "Taliban" isbeing used rather loosely, I would say, in that "Taliban" really meansa religious student. Now, there are millions of Taliban. I would say all thesechildren in the madrasas are Taliban really.

The ruling militia then, the Taliban militia as we know them inAfghanistan: Well, as it appears because of all the coalition-formingagainst them, certainly there's a danger of damage coming to them.

On whether the Taliban is a liability to Pakistan now: Well, they aregoverning their own country. We have had diplomatic relation with them. We arethe only country left having diplomatic relation with them. To the extent of adegree of views in the world, we, Pakistan, acting against world views onAfghanistan, we have suffered for their sake, but that was because of ournational interests. Certainly Afghanistan is a country which concerns us themost, so whatever our diplomatic relation with them were based on our nationalinterests. So I can say that diplomatically certainly we sufferedinternationally because of our support to them.

On Taliban's very close alliance with Osama bin Laden backfiring onPakistan: Well, as I said, we were interacting with the Taliban inAfghanistan because of our national interests, and we are directly concernedwith whatever is happening in Afghanistan. So to that extent, our policy towardsthe Taliban and Afghanistan was absolutely correct. It's a different matterwhether we suffer diplomatically or not. Now the situation is very different,and we are still interacting with the Taliban to moderate their views, to changetheir views in accordance with the dictates of the world opinion. We are stillcarrying on doing that.

On the failed missions and likelihood of success: Yes, I would sayyes. We haven't been able to succeed in moderating their views on surrenderingOsama bin Laden or even -- we would very much have liked that the eightforeigners against whom they are holding trials, maybe they need to be released.We haven't succeeded as yet, but we have our doors open. And some progress hasbeen made, and we hope a little more progress could be made.

On whether Taliban will do what's expected of them: Expected of themin what form?

Hand over Osama bin Laden, close down the terrorists camps: I thinkthe passage of time as the situation is, the hope is very dim, I would say.

Dim? Yes.

No hope? One can carry on engaging with them. And there is a littlebit of flexibility being shown after the edict by the Ulamah, by the Shura inAfghanistan. But the signals that come out certainly are not very encouraging.

On President Bush demanding Osama bin Laden is wanted dead or alive: Well,I think certainly Afghanistan is suffering, the people of Afghanistan aresuffering. And as I said, because of this, even Pakistan diplomatically has beensuffering. So I think in the interest of the people of Afghanistan, a resolutionto this impasse on Osama bin Laden must be resolved certainly. I would urge theTaliban to do that, and that is why we keep interacting with them.

On terrorism in Pakistan, Pakistan harboring terrorists or having its ownterrorists groups, one of them on the list of the United States terroristsgroups: Well, when you talk of terrorists groups here in Pakistan, there isno terrorist group in Pakistan. You are talking of probablyHarakat-ul-Mujahedeen, which has been banned.

Which has been just closed down: Yes.

The offices of HuM: No, Harakat-ul-Mujahedeen is not here at all. Theyare operating in -- they were operating in Kashmir, in Held Kashmir. And we haveno contacts at all with them whatsoever. So they don't have offices here. Theother office which was -- what was the name of this office? That has nothing todo with Kashmir. The trust that has been -- the accounts which had been frozen,that has nothing to do with Kashmir. And if at all they are involved interrorist acts, we certainly will take all actions against them.

On  relief from sanctions, debt rescheduling -- significant, orsymbolic: Well, this is not a deal that is going on, so I wouldn't like tosay that there's some exchange or we have made a deal for whatever we areproviding and you give us this much. I haven't gone into this. And I only expectcertainly that we have been faced with a difficulty, and, as you yourself said,that we are again a frontline state. We were a frontline state for 10 years whenwe fought the Soviets with the allies, and now again we are a frontline state. This has its fallout on Pakistan. I'm sure United States understands ourdifficulties and certainly whatever is happened does not address all ourdifficulties at all. But there's no deal as such. I would leave it at this.

Does he expect more? Well, again, I wouldn't say that there's a deal.One certainly expects the United States to understand our difficulties and helpus in removing those difficulties, overcoming those difficulties.

On openly joining the military coalition: Well, I had told everyone, Ieven have conveyed to President Bush, that certainly a United Nation umbrellawould be extremely helpful in removing certain doubts or putting certain doubtsat peace. And also we are trying to have an OIC foreign ministers conference,which is being held, I think, in a few days time on the 9th of October, I think.These will go a long way toward removing this anxiety in the minds of somepeople that maybe we are the only Muslim states. But all of the Muslim stateshave also voted in favor of the U.N. resolutions which do call on cooperatingfor the fight against terrorism around the world and also the perpetrators ofterrorism and those who abet terrorism. So therefore, Muslim countries areonboard on this issue of fighting terrorism. So to that extent, all Muslimcountries are onboard.

On the delicate balance in Pakistan that could topple one way or anotherif a military action starts: Delicate balance within...

Within Pakistan, the vocal minority: No, I don't think so. I think Ihave the support of the entire people of Pakistan. It's only the religiousextremists, as I said, who have this extreme views. Other than that, I place --I divide Pakistan into three groups actually: the religious extremists, who arein a very small minority. Then the other is the middle class, the upper-middleclass, and the upper class of Pakistanis, who certainly have moderate Islamicvalues. They are moderate Muslims. They don't believe in extremism and they arefully, always have been in support of whatever we are doing. The other left, thethird party is the lower-middle class and the working class of people ofPakistan, whom I tried -- who maybe did not have the full comprehension of thesituation. And I tried to address to the nation, to this third group of people,and I think I managed to explain to them what the reality is. And I'm very surethat I've converted opinion in my favor. And therefore, the only people left arethe religious extremists who are in a small minority. I'm sure they don't holdsway on whatever will happen in Pakistan.

On his commitment to returning Pakistan to full democracy next year: Yes,I still remain committed because that is in our national interest. It's not forany other country of the world or any world opinion that I'm doing it. I'm doingit because it's in our national interest. And I will do it. The time scheduleand the road map that I've given, I will still go forward on it.

(Courtesy CNN; televised on September 30, 2001)