I would like to start my speech about my book because I am neither an expert nor do I have knowledge about Siachen or this Conflict. As a journalist I have 20 to 25 years of experience during which India-Pakistan conflict and regional politics were on my mind, as happens with every other journalist. In finding answers to those questions, the question I asked myself while writing this book is…. I have had the opportunity to listen to Pakistani political leadership and those in the uniform. I aslo interviewed many Indians and I asked myself, “How do we understand this Pakistani military mindset?” And I answered myself, “Talk to those who took off their uniforms and retired.” Now they have an independent position as well as experience. This was the concept behind our book “Warriors After War”. I will not talk about the Indian side in this discussion because my co-writer Tridivesh Singh Maini who is a Delhi-based journalist did the interviews in India and covered the Indian mindset. The Pakistani mindset, as far as I could see, and I have tried to be objective … There are two things I understood about Pakistani military mindset after speaking to the retired people. The first thing is the thinking that Pakistan needs the Army, that it’s a big strength. That it is necessary to save Pakistan, that Pakistan has enemies, and there are regional sensitivities. But along with these, I noticed that, they also say that to have an army and a regional conflict does not mean you don’t end the conflict or end with a war. They are of the opinion that we should pursue regional cooperation while keeping the army. If someone sees Pakistan with negativity, you should be prepared and be strong. This is the first perspective. Along with this, the other perspective I noticed and understood, which I think is related to Siachen is that Pakistan’s location and its religious background are natural assets. In our North, from where our Frontier Province begins, Allah has established a factory of natural warriors that is four thousand years old. For 1400 years, they kept invading India. If we add this strength of warriors to Pakistan’s ideal location, then we can dominate the larger Indian economy. When we go into Muslim History, there are many instances in the last 1400 years where we ruled India with our warrior background. This line of thinking, which I recorded in my book, is followed by Gen. Aslam Beg and Lt. Gen. (Retd) Hamid Gul practically owns this type of thinking. Now the question is when Siachen happened in 1984, these two were in higher positions and Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff was Gen. Zia-ul Haq. I felt that this Pakistan Army’s arrogant part in the Siachen Conflict that we are warriors, that we are Muslims and have Jihadi power.. They also did some mathematical calculations that ten Hindus are equal to one Muslim and in that respect we have superiority. My opinion is that, you may agree or disagree but I think, that warrior mindset in the top echelons of Pakistan Military in 1984 felt that Siachen episode hurt their feelings (of superiority). There was no media at that time. No hundreds of TV channels and newspapers. So Siachen remained a secret. Siachen slipped out of our hands. In 1999, Pakistan did exactly the same thing in Kargil. When you came down from the Siachen in the winter, India took the Siachen. Now this warrior mindset people, like Hamid Gul, Aslam Beg and Zia-ul Haq who felt that we are superior, Muslims and that we have a traditional force in the North, call them Taliban or Jihadis or True Musalmans or Friends of Pakistan, thought how can we accept this defeat in Siachen and just give up? I see such relation with Siachen. Other guests and friends will comment on Siachen but I, as a journalist, will share two observations. I also delved into how the world today looks at international relations. In simple terms, may be there is not much of a difference between international and human relations. For example, I call Sadiq Azhar as nana (grandpa) with affection. He is someone like a grandpa to me. He called me and said, “Come here. You need to give a speech.” I don’t know whether I am here in my self-interest or as a journalist. I felt that we can’t live alone. I need a wife to produce off-spring. She too can’t live alone and needs me in return. In the same way, nations too need each other for their self-interest. As far as I could understand, in international relations, when the interests collide the last instrument to pursue them is war. War means you have failed in 10,000 things and you are left with the last instruments of war and army to achieve your interests. In my opinion, the most unfortunate thing about Pakistan is that what should be the last resort in this civilized world, we made it our first resort. From 1947 to till now, we failed to understand that in international relations you have 10,000 other instruments. There is communication, diplomacy, people to people interaction. There is media. You can trade and develop economic interdependence. When you diplomacy fails, trade fails, images fail, then at last you can fight. I think, without using any of these we just went to the extreme with this warrior thinking that we are Muslims, jihadis and superior. We are paying price for that today. With the kind of arrogance we built this nation, strange thing is this that our own warriors numbering 150 attack Bannu prison and free 400 prisoners. You decide whether this can be called a nation or not. In the end, I would like to say that…I will also give examples of two countries… I also studied Turkey. I was amazed to know that Turkey’s exports today are $180 billion. I thought what’s so special about Turkey that the world is buying nearly $200 billion goods. For your information, Pakistan’s entire GDP is $125 billion. And this is world’s six largest nation. I thought what has happened Turkey that it’s buying goods worth $200 billion. Then I understood that Turkey said to the European economies, “Come here and promote tourism.” It bettered its image. Now all European tourists come to Turkey. There are low tariffs. Things are cheap. What Turkey does is that it buys goods from all over the World and the Europeans buy them from Turkey. Turkey makes a profit of $30 to $40 billion. At this time, Turkey’s per capita is $10,000. These are the people who were warriors. Every now and then they used to fight Greeks and the East Europe. This is how they extricated themselves from the Second World. Now it is the leader of the Muslim World. When you feed the stomach, God will bestow beauty and delicacy. Leadership went to Turkey. I will quote the second example of India. India still has a conflict with China but it did not stop the trade. There is a $50 to $100 billion annual trade between India and China. What I was trying to say is that the time has come for the Pakistan to understand that war can only the last and desperate solution to any conflict. You need to work on building relations and a soft image. When I was a teenager…I am from Lahore… we were told that Kashmiris are like gold and Indians are little, small, like this and like that. That was the image of Indians in 70s and 80s. Then India produced four Miss Worlds in 1990. It changed its image in the world and told the world that we are beautiful, we have the alcohol, there is no law and order issue, no Taliban. Now see their per capita income and the investments. This is the way the world is fighting, pursuing its interests. Through image and relationship. And we tell the world that we are the fighters. Thanks to Allah, after much crying, we took this one badge from Bangladesh and got the applause. In this situation, we need to ponder over whether we should run Pakistan with this warrior mindset or with sanity. The decision is in the hands of Pakistan.