yeah houses they used to be one hundred three houses here but when the flash flood happened everything was washed out so that's what happened here all the homes and livelihoods gone and we have nine thousand families as of today that are affected and listed to be in our evacuation centers russia says the u.s. is encouraging new bloodshed in eastern ukraine by providing weapons to kiev the u.s. says it will give care of enhanced defense capabilities to fight pro russian separatists the conflict in eastern ukraine has claimed more than ten thousand lives since two thousand and fourteen. israeli forces have shot dead three more palestinians in the past two days fourteen have been killed since protests began over the u.s. decision to recognize jerusalem as israel's capital twenty five people have been killed by air strikes in yemen a saudi led coalition reportedly targeted a protest rally in the district of north of the capital sana'a it's thought some of the dead were pro who'd be tribal leaders now

a program that uses sesame street characters to help syrian and iraqi children traumatized by war is said to expand after receiving extra funding the program and clothes visits by therapists to refugee communities those are the headlines on al-jazeera inside story that's coming up next thank you for watching. the u.s. issues another strong warning to pakistan saying it's hiding what it calls terrorist groups pakistan denies that and he's angry but between the two countries hit a new low so where does it go from here this is inside story.

hello and welcome to the program. trump has put pakistan on notice that was the mass has from the u.s. vice president during a surprise visit to america's largest military base in afghanistan mike pence addressed five hundred troops in. four months after president trump unveiled his strategy for afghanistan pakistan has hit back saying allies don't not put each other on notice that the focus instead be on creating peace and reconciliation but relations between the two countries have deteriorated with the u.s. accusing pakistan of providing safe havens for terrorist groups a charge pakistan strongly denies we'll hear from trump in

a moment but first my pants. as the president said america's enemies must never know our plans they must never believe they can wait us out. and we will never ignore the dangers you face even when they emerge from beyond the borders of afghanistan. you know for too long pakistan has provided safe haven to the taliban and many terrorist organizations. but those days are over . in the pakistan that while we desire continued partnership we must see decisive action against terrorist groups operating on their territory and we make massive payments every year to pakistan they have to help. the relationship between the u.s. and pakistan goes back to nine hundred forty seven when pakistan was created it

chose to build an alliance with the u.s. over the soviet union fast forward to two thousand and one and after the nine eleven attacks pakistan became one of the most strategic allies in the us a so-called war against terrorism a one billion dollar loan was wiped out and pakistan was declared non nato ally in two thousand and eight pakistan admitted using money it was given by the us to fight groups including the taliban to strengthen its defense against india instead then in two thousand and eleven the relations saudi again when the us killed al qaeda is found osama bin laden in a surprise raid in pakistan without telling islamabad since two thousand and fourteen pakistan has increasingly turned to russia and china for military and economic deals and now donald trump tells pakistan to help the u.s. defeat the taliban in afghanistan by denying the group safe favors let's bring in our panel in islamabad yaz was the former pakistani ambassador to afghanistan and

in kabul. in international affairs of cards on university and in washington richard white director of political and military analysis of the hudson institute gentlemen thank you very much indeed for joining us let me start by asking mr was is this do you think that this is just an angry are lie asking pakistan to do more. in afghanistan or this is a shifting pattern in the u.s. strategy towards pakistan well it's unfortunate but i would look at it as if they are shifting their failure. into pakistan sitting the no one has done for so long and they have still not defeated the taliban if you really call them out of having a presence along with nato forces for more than one hundred fifty thousand troops. but the alabama admitted defeated though they claimed i mean by by day i mean

american there claimed that al qaeda is finished destroyed and taliban have completely been removed and weakened they would not be able to regroup or to be a threat to us but now we see again it is a threat to them again so they have bed leave failed didn't have a understand lit them accepted fact and tried to find a peaceful solution. of our problem cannot be dissolved through cool as methods of whether it is it was in afghanistan or putting pressure on pakistan so they have to they have to leave isn't their policy and they need to revisit the policy as you say take interest in the resulting ok let's go to in kabul is it the case do you think this is a failure and the need for the americans and the afghans on their own to review the whole strategy not to lay the blame of the pakistanis. i don't think so i think id

the reason there has been much success in the past sixteen years because for the past in the past sixteen years pakistan has been proactive in providing safe havens training. training facilities financial support military support to the taliban otherwise if without that support and i show you that the taliban would. if not evan survived. evan evan evan days to continue the. proxy war and side afghanistan i mean look at all the facts that we have in the past sixteen years when it comes to pakistani support to the taliban. all that all the need or ship of the taliban are inside pakistan they have there have been they have been treated in their hospitals their wounds has been wounded soldiers have been taken to the to the park to be treated to in the parks and the hospitals their leadership their families are reside inside pakistan

so i don't think that was really the failure it's because pakistan continued to support them in a way that they have did back in the seventy's and eighty's and they have those networks and they have successfully managed to use this again when it comes to supporting taliban and the past sixteen years ok so why do you think this is the ideal way to deal with an ally when you badly need them to put forward a plan for a new strategy for afghanistan because ultimately this absolutely no way you can win the war in afghanistan without having the pakistanis aboard don't you think. i would i would put i would put it this way i would think that ending the support within pakistan and it's not clear to you know what how to extent it's fully supported by the government or elements within the i.s.i. or whatever but anyway ending the support within pakistan for the taliban or related groups is a necessary condition for bringing peace and or suppressing the insurgency but it's

not sufficient there are still other things that we quire and said would be needed strengthening the afghan security forces and taking other measures so that's and that context putting pressure on pakistan to curtail assistance to that those groups is not known and that's that seem of us foreign policy towards the afghan conflict for the past dozen years or so what's different about trump is that he can more credibly threaten i think to cut off aid or take out their radical actions just because some of his foreign policy actions by deliberate intent are unpredictable and go outside the mainstream of u.s. foreign policy. but there are some other things that have changed as well with ok but what i think may make a difficult to achieve the success ok the missile was the

a i mean one of the accusations leveled against the pakistani government throughout the last sixteen years is basically god has done is not able to rein in groups like the hakani need to and that's where the top leadership of the taliban movement based in. in pakistan is in any way to just to hold this issue i mean what's the way forward for the pakistani government. look pakistan has made it absolutely clear that there may have been something like what has been. by my friends before i. entered into a personal comfort on titian with each other that i have so many things to say about safe haven i could ask about it but what pakistan now have said is that there are no safe heavens and they have given an open challenge or open proposal to the americans to choose

a day in time it should be fewer troops in the day in time and then let's go to the places that you suspected there are safe havens there's a visiting together if they are who take action if i may just we have taken action i might just add one thing you know me so was he that the reason why pakistan has been accused of providing safe haven to the taliban is basically notion of the damning attacks against the afghan government afghan soldiers are there and i can just basically happened in areas all the border with pakistan love if they are unable to guard themselves within afghanistan you can blame pakistan for that can it didn't it is effective within a vanity stand their foot soldiers from within afghanistan to fight the foot soldiers are are a lot of them sitting in afghanistan fighting that i mean you know when it's done if they're under bill to to to defend told to remove them from there what

can pakistan do pakistan is even gone to the extant to have a giant budgeted for trolling which is against the. local system of the government system but to satisfy our brothers in afghanistan and the international community the mere that of al saw and now we are making an effort to defuse us back there are seven government lives. ok good that's not denying that there would not. be order to see ok there doesn't mean this ban are given military support financial support they have now far far other places from where they are supported but this time certainly is not supporting them where we need to we need to move forward i want to be both down in this whole issue of the safe havens because we have loads of details to talk about and let me go to mr issa boy we've seen the accusations counter-accusations so all these years the pakistani government saying the afghans

are not doing anyone anything to help themselves the back is the afghans are saying the brain whizzes why we're failing is because of pakistan isn't there any way to have the two countries in gates. and have genuine talks about solve all problems they face. absolutely i think there's a room for. to engage pakistan but i think this has to be a very sincere cooperation and i think it has to be very concrete steps by pakistani sites too to be taken for and since those those groups that are operating from where ten pakistan has to be either did leadership has to be detained are they have to be there have to be sure that they did they don't have a safe haven and so pakistan i think talks on the house has to. mean their military intelligence wing i think this is something for after sixteen years the international community is finally seeing it clear and loud that they have not but

still just think what are you how trucks are your vision same thing the same thing applies here the need to address the genuine strategic security concerns by the pakistani government for example when they say that the indians are taking advantage of this it's a situation again playing massive military and political influence in the country the afghans are doing nothing about it. absolutely i think it's a legitimate concern but it has to be have to see some sincerity from the pakistani side so that we are assured that that pakistanis are not really continuing that support to the to the to the groups that are. that are putting pressure that are that are having arms and fighting inside afghanistan destabilizing a country that has been going on for such a long time and if it wasn't the case i don't think so the international community particularly the united states would come up and publicly explicitly accuse

pakistan of that particular supported taliban and other terrorist groups i think i understand the fact that this has to come to an end there has to be room for negotiation but that the bottom line is that pockets. one has to be sincere in that effort not just words that the afghan these are our brothers afghan afghans our brother we have here that for the past sixteen years haven't really changed anything parks ok i'll go beyond the call us brothers i think that has to go a step ahead which means that taking concrete actions mr white's. but he said it concerns about iraq about indian growing influence in afghanistan do you think this is one of the main reasons why the pakistanis are very rich but this and when it comes to engaging with the americans with the international community when it comes to the future of a lot is done i would put this way i mean i don't want to give the wrong impression the pakistani authorities and the in the u.s. officials have worked a lot on countering terrorism there's a lot of cooperation the pakistanis for example let the u.s.

fly drones over their territory they could have shot them down. but the problem is there are some other competent factors and the one you just mentioned is probably the key there is that there are groups within pakistan concerned about india and seen support for paramilitary forces. which you know we would consider to be terrorists here too as a means to compensate for their inferior position in a conventional battle for example and some of the blowback is if you encouraged that kind of counterbalancing strategy against india then that also kind of power them to pursue their own agenda such as in afghanistan so yes we have to somehow deal with the india pakistan afghan triangle to really achieve an enduring result here the so was if you've heard what mr white's. been saying about the need to move forward oh i'd like to ask you this question i mean from

a pakistani perspective what do you think is the best way since you've been addressing all those concerns what is the best way for the americans the afghan government of the pakistanis to negotiate you have a bestseller. for a full of got. to come out of. using each of the heavens we have done that for the last saw them in the of the using those you had accusing them of people doing no one is them who doing that you want to do . about of security forces people have been killed and that accusing so this really bonded and with no solution we do want to be done embarrassed completion of the yeah please go ahead but yeah exactly i think we should we should leave it to richard to come out of it vision to stop it to be should look at the positivity as if we can find and. the best in my assessment would be

that kabul and islamabad should give. i can say give instruction or teach them how the reason why i'm asking here they say you are a diplomat you served as an ambassador to afghanistan you know the core issues give us an idea or bullet points about the tough issues that need to be addressed now the dead that is what i am trying to do with you because on both side that is a lot of suspicion against each other trust deficit is so strong that until the government islam bothered to put out a bit closer other things would not move for. everything in iran revolves around kabul and islamabad so let's go to the quiet i lived through contact to grope or the forums like where are the three foreign ministers would be meeting in beijing let these forums a lot of hard to bring the two sides together leave the accusation powers side.

apart then i'll give you an example when president of any visited pakistan where back there doors visit i heard on weiss of america gentleman from kabul admiring saw good that illusion between us and he gave an example of a good vision that pakistan has named all of them is. named after the heroes in afghanistan so if we go into american in the pilot got a got your point he can. we can find them ok mr. this conflict has been going on for sixteen is you remember the time of the surge of the u.s. troops more than one hundred thousand soldiers backed by fifty thousand from the nato we haven't seen significant change all the ground the government now in afghanistan controls less territory the taliban control many areas in the east in the south and in the north don't you think that also the government itself is to

blame for the failures of the past. i think absolutely i mean we do have problems internally political book the political and military and we are fighting within. our country we are fighting the twenty different kind of terrorist groups that are operating inside afghanistan destabilizing the country and also groups that are that are coming across the border so yes we had the government in the past sixteen years had some failures but that doesn't mean that the aft afghan government did not open up to our public parks on the counterparts and you mentioned about the shaft on yourself when you visited in two to three years ago and made it very clear to the pakistan that we are ready to cooperate evan sidelight india for prefer first person time and then after that what happened was no clear action and commitment from from the parks and now it's not accusing but

again in order to restore that that confidence between the two countries i think there has to be very firm steps has to be taken by particularly by pakistan and then i surely that the afghan government government where it's upon ok positively and return political collapsed because those steps are not taken as i think that will be that dogman it's a must as you know this is a massive problem and political issue has different dimensions i would like to dissect some of those dimensions for our international audience to further understand the issue mr wyatt's we're talking about president trump. talking about his new strategy he says he is not going to be involved in nation building he's just going to go after the terrorist you know as everyone knows that with sixteen thousand soldiers you won't be able to make an impact on the ground unless you have to commit more troops and the pakistanis commit also provide significant intelligence sharing with the americans and swan and so forth why would we think

today that we're succeeding where bush and obama failed in afghanistan. well i probably go back then to the way phrase the initial question on pakistan is sort of a necessary but not sufficient addition so certainly having a u.s. military role in afghanistan supporting the development of the afghan national security forces working to strengthen the capacity of the government to deliver local service of helping the cold the border working with pakistan to ensure supplies and and training afghanistan can can pass through pakistani territory so one that's a sufficient condition but it's not it's not necessary it's on our own it won't end cars unless there is not sufficient attention on its own it won't solve the conflict the u.s. as we've said before had ten times as many troops in it and it didn't so it's clearly not going to be a military strategy i think the ambassador made an interesting point which is

they're actually new for for diplomatic negotiations which is something that i don't think i don't not sure the u.s. is fully develop a policy towards them but we know that for example china russia. and has been trying to work out a broader dialogue to bring in initially it was just a random pakistan now they've got the afghan government and the indians involved so this may provide another framework to try and work on some of the other issues we discussed need to strengthen cooperation between afghan and pakistan and the u.s. role there wouldn't be very large of just be supporting and so there and there are other areas where i think the u.s. can play some role but it's also depends a lot of what the other actors ok now with the russians express and a desire to help with the political dialogue with the. missile was the what kind of help with the pakistanis bring about if. finally everyone

agrees the taliban the political leaders in afghanistan should come together and negotiate a political settlement we know that the leverage you have in afghanistan particularly over the past to an ethnic group so what kind of input help would you provide to the afghan people. well i didn't the best reward to be. taliban and the of i'm government should meet independent of. that are suspect of influences or who serve or have on them if they meet independently i'm sure they will find a solution but the problem is who will do that there is a billion dollar question so pakistan is willing they're there they have said it's repeatedly and i have no doubt that by christan will contribute again but the taliban let me let me make it clear that taliban today is not is the most under

pakistan's influence says there was there found other people other must have been must of the other people looking after them so it is not only for pakistan to do that back to stand for itself as the government is willing to come to be able to come to any forum where it can contribute to find a solution to the problem. there are there are lots of changes within pakistan which i have no time to explain but i have no doubt that the government in pakistan is now sincere and wants a solution of the problem we both have suffered and of the must come out of the surgeon and in my own assessment the problem would not be solved until carland islam by which i said before i come closer to it despite of that is that immersion in the barrel of the dura leaders the must trust each other thank you general running you know the prime minister must speak in a confidence kept running out of time it will be interesting to see how things

develop later in the future in afghanistan now say as was the n.s.a. hammett's a boy and the said richard white thank you very much indeed for your time and thank you for watching you can see the program again any time by visiting our website al jazeera dot com and for further discussion go to our facebook page that facebook dot com for wesley. you can also join the conversation on twitter that is. the whole team here.

on counting the cost of a robin hood in reverse it's the same plan to cut taxes for the rich do little for the poor but link between electric cars cobalt and illegal mines result prices means for the economy counting the cost of this time.

scene is a holy city by the three major monotheistic religions jerusalem has been contested for centuries al-jazeera brings you a special program about the status of jerusalem and its importance with our correspondents across the palestinian territories and opinions from around the world we explore the reality on the ground and the impact the u.s. has intention to move its embassy to jerusalem will have on the peace process the holy land on al-jazeera. this is this opportunity to understand a very different way where there. is and we don't need. an arm of the problem and the headlines on al-jazeera at least to.