There are security measures adopted for all political heads. But we are not here to protect everyone and guarantee their security. As far as Mr Zardari is concerned, let me tell you that he himself has provided his own security through his tribal people. Even during Benazir Bhutto's public address (on Dec 27), other than the police who were deployed and the superintendent of police who was hand-picked by her to manage her security, there were many of her own people around her. And I agree with you that these two may be under threat. I'm under threat. How can we blame the government as if we have to guarantee their security? No sir. There is no guarantee of security against a suicide bomber.

Well, she was brave. Certainly she was brave.

No. In the euphoria of public support at her fatal rally, when thousands of people are there to cheer you, you do get carried away. When people start waving, you do things that you might not otherwise do. But certainly I would say that getting out of the vehicle was an unwise thing to do at that time.

We hope that this can be solved through technical means with all the photographs coming in. So many people with mobile telephones photographing everything. Hordes of people (are) sending photographs now.

A lot of people talk of bullet wounds on the body and the neck. Obviously, I didn't see the body. But I know for sure what the doctors saw. One thing is very clear to me - and I'm sure our people are speaking the truth. There appeared to be no bullet wounds anywhere other than possibly in the right side of the skull. Now a lot of people are saying there are bullet wounds in the neck. The only possibility of establishing the truth is to exhume the body and see. Now, if that is not to be allowed by anyone her husband Mr Zardari has forbidden it, then we have to trust the photographs of the skull and other evidence that we have.

Yes. An X-ray.

No. An X-ray of the head. Nobody was allowed to take photographs. Otherwise we must depend on freelance cameras. People are saying that I said it was a bullet wound. I have not said that. I've said that that there is a massive portion of the skull that has been pressed in and there was a chip, a broken piece. But whether a bullet (killed her)? I've been a soldier and I know bullet wounds. I know that a bullet wound (is) a small hole and it always comes out somewhere. Now here there is no small hole. So is it possible that a bullet just hit at such an angle that it ricocheted and went through...I don't know. I can't say that. So I can't say whether it was a bullet or anything else.

No. It depends on with what force. An explosive has a tremendous force. The body can get blown apart. So it's not as simple as if she was going down inside moving down through the vehicle's sunroof. It's not like that.

Nonsense! Absolute nonsense! I go to hotels, restaurants. I wish you could come with me once and you'll see what happens there. People come and want photographs with me. They cheer me. You must come with me once. Maybe I will take you to a restaurant. You'll see the people in the restaurant. This is absolute nonsense! I go to play tennis. I go to opening ceremonies. My security people are very upset with me that I keep escaping from them. I'm going to Karachi to inaugurate a big industrial estate and there'll be hundreds if not thousands of people. The other day I went to the beach near Clifton Park in Karachi and a lot of people came to surround me.

It has to survive. It can survive. We have to defeat these people - through unity, national consensus and political reconciliation.

Yes, it does. The hotels used to have over 90 per cent occupancy. I've asked the Prime Minister to see that a strong macro economy is maintained. I'll be personally chairing a conference after the Prime Minister has studied the problem to see what corrective measures can be taken.

On dealing with the Taleban

That is absolutely wrong. The ISI is manned by military officers. Military officers come under military law. A person can be fired today and out of a job tomorrow. The ISI is a very disciplined force. They do what we tell them to do. There are no rogue elements. If at all, with a stretch of the imagination, there is one odd person in the whole of the organisation who is following his own agenda, we'd trace him and remove him. I don't think that anyone conscious of his career progression can show disloyalty to government policy. That would be a very serious charge.

Not at all. Absolutely incorrect.

Yes, it is a good idea. Anyone who is for militancy is a dangerous person. When we talk of negotiating with the Taleban, (we mean that) if there are senior elements within the Taleban who are for a negotiated political settlement, we should try to make inroads with them. If there are people that want coalition forces out for no rhyme or reason, without any solution of the main political issues...no, that's not the way. But we have to gain access to the population to find some kind of political solution.

Well, what are we doing in regard to such Taleban behaviour? We are also following up on this. The military cannot provide the ultimate solution. The military can buy you time. The military can create an environment. But I think that a solution in such a crisis is a political solution.

But these people are terrible people. They have imposed their will on (many tribes). In tribal culture, for centuries it was the tribal malik (inherited or appointed leader) who held sway over the tribe. They were the people who held the tribe together. It was only in 1995 that the Taleban emerged. And these Taleban were clerics, who never had had a position of authority. Now they are dominating the scene. Where are those tribal maliks? Have they vanished? No, they are there. So therefore, political interaction, reaching out to the population, weaning away the population through interaction with those people who are against militant Taleban. Help those people (who are for peace) stand up to the Taleban. This is the overall political strategy.

The problem unfortunately is that, in the West and the United States, if you are talking to the Taleban you immediately hear the accusation, 'You are with the Taleban!' But we should try to talk. Even if you can reach 25 per cent success, even if there are double-crossers, it does not mean that we should not move forward. So there is a total misunderstanding of what my strategy offers. My strategy is very clear: we are to move on the military front, on the political front and the socio-economic front. All three. Parallel.

Yes. You have to do it. We deal with people whom we think are for peace, including maulvis (mullahs). Not every maulvi is with the Taleban. Let's think of some way of shutting the foreigners, Al-Qaeda out.

Now and then, maybe we're talking to the wrong man. We'll find out soon enough. We'll correct course. But if someone says, 'Don't do that at all. Don't talk to anyone', and keep to military action alone? No. That is not possible.

It was not premature. We knew Osama bin Laden was involved in attacking the World Trade Center. I sent a delegation to (Taleban leader) Mullah Omar (asking him) to surrender Osama bin Laden, to expel him. But he would not agree. So the action against Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan took place (Oct 7, 2001, attack on Al-Qaeda's Tora Bora redoubt).

Let me disclose one more thing. We were criticised before Sept 11 because we were the only ones who had a relationship with the Taleban. When I came on the scene in 1999, I spoke to the Saudis, to the United Arab Emirates...they had also recognised the Taleban but had removed their embassies from Kabul. I told President (Bill) Clinton, who was visiting Islamabad, that we should accept the reality (of the Taleban in power in Kabul), have diplomatic relations with them and then change them from within. Had that happened, some things might have been different today.

anthonypaul@asiahand.com