Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clinton Outlines Five Steps Needed To Address Pakistan in Wake of Bhutto Assassination

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:23 PM
Original message
Clinton Outlines Five Steps Needed To Address Pakistan in Wake of Bhutto Assassination
PRESS RELEASE.

In an interview today with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Hillary Clinton outlined five steps she believes must be taken to address Pakistan in the wake of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Clinton called for an independent, international investigation, reiterated the need for free and fair elections, proposed the appointment of a special envoy, discussed revamping U.S. foreign aid, and a renewed commitment to a stabilized India-Pakistan relationship.

The following is a full transcript of Hillary Clinton’s interview:

Wolf Blitzer: There are conflicting reports coming in from the Pakistani government right now about the cause of death, who may have been responsible; perhaps al Qaeda, maybe not. The bottom line: do you trust the Pakistani government right now to conduct a fair and full investigation so that all of us around the world will know who killed this woman and how she was killed?

Hillary Clinton: I don't think the Pakistani government at this time under President Musharraf has any credibility at all. They have disbanded an independent judiciary, they have oppressed a free press. Therefore, I’m calling for a full, independent, international investigation, perhaps along the lines of what the United Nations has been doing with respect to the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri in Lebanon. I think it is critically important that we get answers and really those are due first and foremost to the people of Pakistan, not only those who were supportive of Benazir Bhutto and her party, but every Pakistani because we cannot expect to move toward stability without some reckoning as to who was responsible for this assassination.

Therefore, I call on President Musharraf and the Pakistani government to realize that this is in the interests of Pakistan to understand whether or not it was al Qaeda or some other offshoot extremist group that is attempting to further destabilize and even overthrow the Pakistani government, or whether it came from within, either explicitly or implicitly, the security forces or the military in Pakistan. The thing I’ve not been able to understand, Wolf - I have met with President Musharraf, I obviously knew Benazir Bhutto and admired her leadership – is that President Musharraf, in every meeting I have had with him, the elites in Pakistan who still wield tremendous power plus the leadership of the military act as though they can destabilize Pakistan and retain their positions; their positions of privilege, their positions of authority. That is not the way it will work. I am really calling on them to recognize that the world deserves the answer; the Bhutto family deserves the answer, but this is in the best interest of the Pakistani people and the state of Pakistan.

Blitzer: Senator, just to be precise; you want a United Nations international tribunal, or commission of inquiry, whatever you want to call it, along the lines of the investigation into the assassination of Rafik Hariri?

HRC: There are other institutions that are international that have credibility, like INTERPOL and others. It doesn’t have to be the exact model of the Hariri investigation but it needs to be international, it needs to be independent, it needs to have credibility and nothing that would happen inside of Pakistan would. I’m reluctant to say it should be an American investigation where we send our law enforcement personnel, because I’m not sure that would have credibility for a different reason. So that’s why I’m calling for an independent international investigation.

Blitzer: This is a damning indictment of President Pervez Musharraf. Some are calling on him to step down, do you believe he should step down?

Clinton: What I believe is that he should meet certain conditions and quickly. We should immediately move to free and fair elections. Obviously, it’s going to take some time for Benazir Bhutto’s party to choose a successor. Nawaz Sharif has said that he won’t participate at this time. I believe again some kind of international support for free and fair elections in a timely manner would be incredibly important. If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election, then he should abide by the same rules that every other candidate will have to follow. We also want to see a resumption of the move toward an independent judiciary. I think that was a terrible mistake. This is an odd situation, Wolf. The people in the streets are wearing suits and ties, they are lawyers, they are professionals, they are the middle class of Pakistan, which really offers the very best hope for a stable, democratic country and that is in America’s interest, but more importantly, it is in the interest of the Pakistani people.

Blitzer: I think I understood what you were implying when you said a U.S. investigation probably wouldn’t have credibility for different reasons but explain to our viewers out there why you’re suggesting a U.S. investigation into the death of Benazir Bhutto probably wouldn’t have credibility either.

Clinton: I think it would politicize it at a time when what we want to do is, as much as possible, support the continuing move toward democracy. We need, frankly, an international tribunal to look into this where there can be a broad base of experts who are not aligned with any one country. Obviously I would certainly offer our expertise through the FBI and others to assist that tribunal. But I think it would be much better for it to be independent and impartial and be seen as that. Part of what our challenge here is, is to convince the Pakistani people themselves and particularly the business elite, the feudal elite, the military elite that they are going down a very dangerous path. That this path leads to their losing their positions, their authority, their obvious leadership now. Therefore we need to help them understand what is in their interest and that of course includes President Musharraf.

Blitzer: Over the years, since 9/11, the United States has provided the Pakistani military with some $10 billion. Will you as a United States Senator continue to vote for funding of these billions of dollars going to the Pakistani military?

Clinton: No, and I’m very pleased that finally the Congress began to put some conditions on the aid. I do not think that we should be giving the Musharraf government a blank check and that’s exactly what the Bush Administration has done. Even after Musharraf cracked down on the judiciary and the press and the pro-democracy movement in Pakistan, President Bush was saying he was a reliable ally. Well, I don’t think he’s a reliable ally when he undermines democracy and when he has failed to reign in the Al Qaeda Islamist elements in his own country.

So I think we do need to condition aid. I would do it differently. I would say, look, we want to know very specifically what accountability you’re going to offer to us for the military aid that we believe should be going in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The Department of Defense is equally unaccountable with the money that passes through them.

I’d like to see more of our aid shifted toward building civil society. I’ve been calling for this. I have legislation that is bi-partisan, Education for All that is particularly aimed -- I’ve talked to President Musharraf about the necessity for us to raise the literacy rate, to reach out with health care and education that would help the Pakistani people to really concentrate on civil society.

We should be working with these rather heroic lawyers and others who are in the streets demanding democracy instead of giving the Bush blank check to President Musharraf and the military.

Blitzer: But aren’t you afraid, Senator, that as imperfect and as flawed as President Musharraf is, there’s a possibility whoever comes to replace him in this large Muslim country with a nuclear arsenal already, heavy al Qaeda presence, a resurgent Taliban - that the alternative could be even worse from the U.S. perspective?

Clinton: Of course. We all fear that and that’s why we need to take remedial action immediately. When I came back from my last meeting with President Musharraf in January of this year, I called the White House, I asked that they appoint an American envoy, a presidential envoy. I suggested that a retired military leader who could relate to President Musharraf on a one-to-one basis and could shuttle back and forth between President Musharraf and President Karzai because there were a lot of tensions.

And also perhaps serve as a kind of support to President Musharraf, military man to military man, about what it takes to really move toward democracy that President Musharraf in every conversation I’ve ever had with him has given lip-service to. But I don’t think the Bush Administration has frankly asked enough of President Musharraf, has provided the right kind of assistance, has given the support needed.

We have this difficult problem in the military. We have a lot of the senior leadership that we have relationships with, we don’t have those relationships for a lot of reasons with the junior leadership. I just think we have given a blank check under President Bush to President Musharraf and the results are frankly not in the interests of the United States, they are not in the interest of Pakistan and they are certainly not in the interest of the region. We should begin to try to have an ongoing process that includes India and Afghanistan. A lot of what you see happening in Pakistan is driven by the very strong concern coming out of the Pakistani government toward Afghanistan, toward India.

We have really had a hands-off approach. We have said, okay, fine, you be our partner in going after Al Qaeda, we’ll turn a blind eye to everything else. That has undermined our position. I believe Pakistan is in a weaker position to combat terrorism today then they were after 9/11, in large measure because of the failed policies of George Bush.

Blitzer: I interviewed your rival, Barack Obama, for Democratic presidential nomination last night and he had some implied criticism of you saying some of your past decisions do not necessarily warrant your stepping up and becoming the next president of the United States. Listen to this:

Obama: I think it’s important for the American people to look at the judgments they’ve made in the past. The experienced hands in Washington have not made particularly good judgments when it comes to dealing with these problems. That’s part of the reason we are now in this circumstance.

Blitzer: Now I think he was referring to your vote giving the President authority to go to war against Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and your more recent vote to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. In effect, he says that gave a blank check to the President to go to war against Iran. You want to respond to Senator Obama?

Clinton: First, Wolf, I really regret that anybody would try to politicize this tragedy. I personally knew Benazir Bhutto. She was Prime Minister when I visited Pakistan on behalf of our government. I stayed in touch with her over the years. I don’t think politics should be playing a role in how our country responds, both on the personal level to the tragedy of this assassination.

But furthermore, Pakistan has been unstable for a long time. Benazir Bhutto’s father was deposed and killed. Obviously, we know that President Musharraf came to power in a military coup. So the instability in Pakistan has long pre-dated any of the recent events. Therefore, I think you need to have an historic understanding. You need to look at Pakistan as a country that still today - the best information that we have - wants to have a better standard of living, wants to have a democracy and the United States should be doing more to promote that. I regret that President Bush’s policies have failed to create that kind of environment. I hope it’s not too late. I really do. And that’s why I’m calling on the President now to begin to make some of the changes. If he has a good relationship with President Musharraf, which he claims to have, then let’s have an envoy. Let’s have this international investigation. Let’s do what we know will work to try to stabilize Pakistan at this time.

Blitzer: What about the specific criticism of your foreign policy judgment that we heard from Senator Obama, we heard earlier in the day from his chief strategist, David Axelrod. What about that, that implied criticism that some of your decisions on these national security, foreign policy issues raise questions about whether or not you should be president?

Clinton: I just regret that both of them would be politicizing this tragedy and especially at a time when do we need to figure out a way forward. That’s what I’m focused on. I’m focused on extending my sympathy to Benazir Bhutto’s family. I’m focused on doing everything I can as a Senator, as someone with a platform running for president, to try to be both positive and effective in helping to set a course. We have a year to go with President Bush as our president. A year is a long time. We know the threats that could be posed with a nuclear armed country like Pakistan becoming more and more unstable.

I have found that President Musharraf is someone that needs, in my opinion, to have a very consistent message and then frankly the help that would come with helping him and those who are in leadership positions understanding that this is not just about the United States - obviously, we have a very important national security interest. This is about what happens to Pakistan. President Musharraf could become as important to the future of Pakistan if he changed course and began to act in a way that would create more confidence to have these free and fair elections, to restore an independent judiciary, to take the shackles off the press, to say that he trusted the Pakistani people. That’s what I’m hoping will happen over the next weeks.

Blitzer: We’ve got to leave it there. We’re out of time, Senator. Thanks very much for spending a few moments with us.

Clinton: Good to talk to you, Wolf.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4942
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DemKR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
2.  "I don't think the Pakistani government at this time under President Musharraf has any credibility"
"at this time"? It's been a military dictatorship ever since the coup that threw out the democratically elected goverment.

This part, though, is spot on:
Blitzer: What about the specific criticism of your foreign policy judgment that we heard from Senator Obama, we heard earlier in the day from his chief strategist, David Axelrod. What about that, that implied criticism that some of your decisions on these national security, foreign policy issues raise questions about whether or not you should be president?

Clinton: I just regret that both of them would be politicizing this tragedy and especially at a time when do we need to figure out a way forward. That’s what I’m focused on. I’m focused on extending my sympathy to Benazir Bhutto’s family. I’m focused on doing everything I can as a Senator, as someone with a platform running for president, to try to be both positive and effective in helping to set a course. We have a year to go with President Bush as our president. A year is a long time. We know the threats that could be posed with a nuclear armed country like Pakistan becoming more and more unstable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avrdream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
3. She showed her knowledge in that interview.
And didn't rise to the bait of Wolf.

Good job, Senator Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
4. I disagree with her on this. (And almost all the others, too)
Speedy elections are not a panacea.

You need an independent judiciary to referee elections. You also need candidates who weren't just assassinated.

You have to know that the outcome of the election won't be determined after the fact.

You need elections that everyone believes in, otherwise people boycott the election, and it's just a cynical exercise.

The last election they had, it was left to be determined after the election what the requirements were to be on the ballot. That kind of political grab-ass is not conducive to public confidence in the electoral process.

If we have any leverage it should be to restore the judiciary, not for speedy elections. An independent judiciary is a pre-condition.

The problem is that the entire US strategy began and ended with Bhutto. (Typical of the no-plan-B Bush style) So we are back to the drawing board, and everyone ought to scale back the rhetoric until we even know what's going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. she did say that they need to give the party time to find a new candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. What a great interview--and her response to the Obama criticism was perfect
They need to have a historical understanding, that the upheaval in Pakistan has been going on for generations. Bhutto's father was killed in the 1970's.

Great response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. I think it's an impressive interview overall. I just quibble with that point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. Thnaks! I didnt see the interview.
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
desi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks Billy...
What a difference from the mumbo-jumbo from you-know-who regarding David Axelrod's nonsense.

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Anytime.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Wonderful post, Billy..
So glad Hillary has taken the high road and is providing alternative solutions to the situation in Pakistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Well someone has to be Presidential, considering it's been missing for about 8 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durrrty libby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
7. Intelligent and thoughtful. Just what I love about her
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
10. Thanks for a Hillary post with some substance
A welcome change
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
23. I SAID, THANKS FOR A HILLARY POST WITH SOME SUBSTANCE
IT IS A WELCOME CHANGE.


As opposed to a Hillary supporter post attacking Obama, for instance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. like you just did.
Nice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Like I just did what?
I offered the OP a compliment. The problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
12. Oh my God, this was very revealing! She is not for cutting off aid as Obama wnats to do?
Edited on Fri Dec-28-07 04:04 PM by Dems Will Win
Why shoudl we continue sending aid to prop up a murdering dictator?

That's what she is suggesting by not calling for an aid cut-off as Obama has!

And what does Hillary want???

An investigation! Of a person whose body was buried without an autopsy...

This is absurd.

When Wolf asked her about her vote she went all defensive and whined about politicizing. That is not going to work, as her vote is a bigger and bigger mistake every single day now.

Cut off aid to Musharaff, as Obama said. Clinton is continuting to prop up the dictator and "hope" that he reforms himself!

Here is the most revealing sentence, where she expresses her hope in Musharaff! What is she thinking??

President Musharraf could become as important to the future of Pakistan if he changed course and began to act in a way that would create more confidence to have these free and fair elections, to restore an independent judiciary, to take the shackles off the press, to say that he trusted the Pakistani people. That’s what I’m hoping will happen over the next weeks.


Talk about NAIVE AND IRRESPONSIBLE...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. So your one of those...
Edited on Fri Dec-28-07 04:07 PM by William769
Your either with us or against us?

I won't even comment on the other you said, since it is clear you are dyslexic and could not read what was said on spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durrrty libby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. They have nuclear weapons. Musharaff can't just be pushed around
You want to turn him into another Saddam or worse? "Talk about NAIVE AND IRRESPONSIBLE..." Indeed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
By all means, let's stop sending aid - then watch as the extremists take over the country and have their finger on the nukes. Brilliant ploy!!! I never really bought that notion that Obama wasn't ready for the presidency until now. Naive indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dems Will Win Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #18
28. Don't be dumb - she's sending more money down the Musharaff rathole
If we cut aid off, the extremists won;t take over, the military will run out of bribery money and run for the hills as they are swept out by a secular People's Power revolution of the mostly moderate middle class. The extremists taking over Pakistan is just right-wing BS that the ignorant and fearful buy into. That's what gives neo-cons like Bush and Clinton power.

Do your homework...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftynyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. You're delusional
The military is going to run for the hills?!! Why? If you're naive enough to believe the extremists aren't real, you have no hope. And if you believe Hillary is a neocon, you're simple minded as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
31. If aid is cut off then so is influence
There's too much at stake here to pass up a chance to have influence on the outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rock_Garden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
14. Big old K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
adapa Donating Member (427 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
19. link to video, *great* interview!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. As fine a performance as I have EVER seen. Amazing interview.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
20. I just saw it on CNN
She was awesome. I liked her response to Obama's attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
27. K&R. Interesting interview.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
29. Thank you. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-28-07 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
32. Hillary really understands the situation
How was she able to learn so much from drinking tea? I guess she must have done more than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC