Former Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry made big revelations regarding 'Cypher'

ARY NEWS

#11thHour #ChairmanPTI #CypherLeaked #WaseemBadami  ARY News is a leading Pakistani news channel that promises to bring you factual and timely international stories and stories about Pakistan, sports, entertainment, and business, amid others.  Official Facebook: https://www.fb.com/arynewsasia  Official Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/arynewsofficial  Official Instagram: https://instagram.com/arynewstv  Website: https://arynews.tv  Watch ARY NEWS LIVE: http://live.arynews.tv    Listen Live: http://live.arynews.tv/audio  Listen Top of the hour Headlines, Bulletins & Programs: https://soundcloud.com/arynewsofficial #ARYNews  ARY News Official YouTube Channel. For more videos, subscribe to our channel and for suggestions please use the comment section.

Transcript

00:00 We will talk about two or three stories today.

00:02 Very important and very interesting.

00:03 Let's start with this story.

00:05 Yesterday night, almost at the same time,

00:07 an American website published a news.

00:11 Their claim was that this is the same cipher

00:15 about which the chairman of the BTI has claimed

00:17 that his government was overthrown.

00:19 Cipher in simple words is that

00:22 if our ambassador or any such official

00:24 meets an ambassador from another country or from our position,

00:27 then what happened in that meeting,

00:30 he writes in his own words and sends it to his country.

00:34 And if he wants to recommend something, he recommends it.

00:37 Which in this case, the chairman of the BTI kept telling

00:39 that it was a threat.

00:41 And he was told that the relations of the United States and Pakistan

00:45 are dependent on the government's presence or absence.

00:47 The story is that relations cannot work with this government,

00:50 the government of the BTI at that time.

00:52 And if the method of communication is successful,

00:54 then we will see what happens.

00:56 The substance of this cipher

00:58 is very much in accordance with what the chairman of the BTI was saying.

01:03 But is this cipher the proof that a real conspiracy was committed?

01:08 Or is this cipher the proof that a very undiplomatic language was used,

01:12 which should not have been used,

01:14 which both the orders of the BTI and the government of Shahbaz Sharif

01:18 also understood it.

01:20 That's why both of them also objected to it.

01:24 This is the question.

01:26 Let's start with a very related person

01:28 who has been associated with the same foreign services for a long time.

01:32 He was an ambassador to Pakistan in America.

01:35 He was also a former foreign secretary.

01:37 Let's start with Mr. Izaas Chaudhry.

01:41 There is another very interesting thing in this story.

01:43 Before I start the conversation,

01:45 he says that usually the journalist does not tell his source.

01:49 This is true.

01:51 But he does not tell the source.

01:53 He does not tell the source.

01:55 But he does say that someone told him in a military way.

01:59 This is a bit strange.

02:01 It is unusual.

02:03 Usually it does not happen that we get to know from here and there.

02:07 In fact, he even says that no one can tell us that the PTI did not tell us.

02:11 The chairman of the PTI did not tell us.

02:13 This is also a bit unusual.

02:15 Usually the source is not told.

02:17 This also usually does not happen.

02:19 Anyway, let's talk to Mr. Izaas Chaudhry.

02:21 Thank you very much for your time.

02:23 I am sure you have seen the whole story.

02:25 Now I will ask you a question.

02:27 After reading this story,

02:29 there was only a statement before this.

02:31 Now, as a clarification,

02:33 how can anyone say that this is the same story?

02:35 Has the authority confirmed that this is the same story?

02:39 Let's assume that this is the same story

02:41 that the chairman of the PTI was talking about.

02:43 Now it has passed through our eyes.

02:45 Now you tell me,

02:47 after reading this story,

02:49 did you reach the conclusion

02:51 that it is decided that

02:53 the government will be overthrown

02:55 through the method of non-diplomacy

02:57 or did you think that it was a very undiplomatic language

02:59 which should not have been there at all

03:01 and should have been banned?

03:03 There is no doubt that

03:07 it is not clear to us

03:09 whether it is authentic or not.

03:11 But as you said,

03:13 with this provision,

03:15 if it is not confirmed

03:17 that there is a big contradiction

03:19 between the contents of this story

03:21 and the contents of the real cipher,

03:23 which I am not sure about

03:25 because I have not read the cipher myself.

03:29 So, I will only say

03:31 on the basis of my experience

03:33 that many such ciphers

03:35 have been coming.

03:37 I can give many examples of very subtle things.

03:39 Sorry, I am sorry to interrupt you.

03:41 You are saying that I have not read the cipher.

03:43 You are saying that you have not read the original cipher.

03:45 The news on which you are commenting

03:47 has passed through your eyes, right?

03:49 Yes, I have read it.

03:51 You are saying that you can give many such examples.

03:53 Yes, I remember

03:55 when we exploited

03:57 the atomic devices of Pakistan

03:59 in response to India,

04:01 then in between

04:03 11th May and 28th May,

04:05 the United States

04:07 had put up a wall

04:09 with various kinds of threats

04:11 and sometimes something

04:13 and sometimes something

04:15 and sometimes incentives.

04:17 President Clinton spoke very harshly on the phone.

04:19 But, Pakistan,

04:21 this happens.

04:23 You cannot construe

04:25 that the regime will change because of this.

04:27 The history of the United States of changing

04:29 is a separate debate.

04:31 The language used

04:33 reportedly in this news

04:35 and also

04:37 what has been told

04:39 is certainly

04:41 an undiplomatic language

04:43 and can be used

04:45 as an excuse for interference.

04:47 And there is a possibility of a protest.

04:49 I do not want to

04:51 give it

04:53 any importance.

04:55 Okay, fine.

04:57 You are saying that when

04:59 this incident happened in May 1998,

05:01 and then in October 1999,

05:03 the government left.

05:05 The government that was two-thirds.

05:07 Now, let's interpret it

05:09 as the United States gave such harsh statements

05:11 and was angry with us.

05:13 And after a year and a half, the government left.

05:15 Hence, it is proved that the United States has fallen.

05:17 It is not that simple.

05:19 Yes, I am saying that this is not a one-plus-one.

05:21 Because,

05:23 where the United States has intervened,

05:25 just google it.

05:27 America and the regime change.

05:29 Google it.

05:31 You will see that in Latin America

05:33 and all over the world,

05:35 the United States has overt and covert the regime.

05:37 And Dr. Musaddi's biggest example

05:39 is with us in the neighboring country, Iran.

05:41 How the CIA

05:43 brought back the proper regime.

05:45 This is history.

05:47 But, every case is different.

05:49 But, it never happens

05:51 that an assistant secretary

05:53 writes it and it is because of him.

05:55 Later, you saw that

05:57 the PTI leadership also said

05:59 that this

06:01 may not have happened.

06:03 And the chairman himself said it.

06:05 This is true.

06:07 Then, you said that there was an intervention.

06:09 Now, they say that there was an intervention.

06:11 So, is this an intervention?

06:13 In those terms,

06:15 when we used to read the news in 2006,

06:17 we used to read the statement every day

06:19 that our foreign minister or secretary

06:21 said that the statement of the Indian Prime Minister

06:23 is contrary to our internal

06:25 intervention.

06:27 So, in those terms, you say that there was an intervention.

06:29 When you repeatedly say that there was an intervention.

06:31 Yes, that is

06:33 an internal matter.

06:35 An inter-interviewer says that

06:37 you do not give your comments in those terms.

06:39 And the spokesman

06:41 of the US

06:43 is also saying this repeatedly

06:45 that we did not have

06:47 any such intention.

06:49 If this was the intention.

06:51 So, I think that

06:53 this story has become

06:55 a victim of our internal politics.

06:57 Otherwise, the CIFRS comes.

06:59 In that, a very strict language

07:01 is used many times.

07:03 And Donald Due also certainly

07:05 did not say anything appropriate.

07:07 National Security Committee

07:09 also objected to this.

07:11 Sir, when you are a secretary,

07:13 if you can quote, then quote.

07:15 If you cannot, then it is your choice.

07:17 But if you can only say yes or no,

07:19 did you ever feel that

07:21 the officials of another country

07:23 have shown you extreme displeasure

07:25 about the sitting government?

07:27 Yes, sir,

07:29 not about the government,

07:31 but they used to talk very strictly

07:33 about our Afghan policy.

07:35 And you know that their opinions

07:37 were sometimes overt.

07:39 And they used to say that

07:41 you are not playing straight with us,

07:43 you are playing double.

07:45 And we used to tell them that

07:47 you are looking for military victory,

07:49 there is no military victory,

07:51 there is a political solution.

07:53 Like in this case,

07:55 they are talking about our Russian policy.

07:57 But again, with the assumption

07:59 that this cipher is correct,

08:01 then it means that

08:03 a newspaper website has been

08:05 caught by the cipher.

08:07 This is a very unusual thing.

08:09 So, if this is true,

08:11 then only those people

08:13 who have access to the cipher,

08:15 have been given access.

08:17 So, tell me,

08:19 which people have access

08:21 to the cipher?

08:23 So that it is decided that

08:25 the military determines

08:27 its distribution.

08:29 This kind of document must have

08:31 gone to a few people in

08:33 no circulation.

08:35 The Prime Minister is definitely

08:37 included in it, the Foreign Minister,

08:39 the Army Chief, and some such

08:41 people must have gone.

08:43 But two ciphers are made,

08:45 each copy is an original copy.

08:47 And it is an accountable document,

08:49 it is necessary to return it

08:51 or destroy it.

08:53 Because we have to answer

08:55 for it later.

08:57 So, whoever gave this cipher,

08:59 I don't know who,

09:01 he is really a criminal.

09:03 If it is found out that he is a criminal,

09:05 then he is a criminal.

09:07 I think its authenticity

09:09 must be checked first,

09:11 whether it is the same content or not.

09:13 And then the second question will come,

09:15 if it is the same, then

09:17 I think the Interior Minister

09:19 was also talking about the investigation.

09:21 The investigation has to be done,

09:23 how did this document reach there?

09:25 If it is correct.

09:27 They say, in a very innocent way,

09:29 that a military source gave it to them,

09:31 and the PTI did not give it.

09:33 Now, if we agree with this again,

09:35 then to what level does it reach in the military?

09:37 Is it just the Army Chief, DGISI,

09:39 Chairman Joint Chief of Staff?

09:41 Or does the cipher go to a lower level?

09:43 No, it goes up to the maximum CGS.

09:45 So, I don't think

09:47 that the military is such an

09:49 organized institution.

09:51 To leak it there and

09:53 to insult our own Pakistan,

09:55 this is incomprehensible.

09:57 And the last question,

09:59 if it is a former Prime Minister,

10:01 any Prime Minister,

10:03 in this case it is Imran Khan,

10:05 in his television interview,

10:07 he says that he had a cipher copy,

10:09 but I don't know where he lost it.

10:11 It is strange, unusual?

10:13 Yes, I think,

10:15 I don't know what his background is,

10:17 but it is not usually the case.

10:19 Because it is there,

10:21 in the name of the Prime Minister,

10:23 for the Prime Minister.

10:25 So, it is usually kept with the Principal Secretary.

Transcript

Recommended