>>Fawzia Koofi: Post-2001 when the Taliban
regime was falling apart, the important thing
for me as a woman and for many people, for
many Afghans, although we were left with an
almost destroyed country, was how could, as
a woman, I breathe normally in the streets
of Kabul without fear of being beaten up by
Taliban and without fear of having to wear
a burqa, which of course limits the freedom
of individual's choice.
There was a lot of enthusiasm and interest,
despite the fact that Afghanistan was almost
a destroyed country because of the war and
because of the Taliban regime, but there was
a lot of hope for the future.
By then, for us, Afghans, it was not important
who had occupied our country, who is in Afghanistan.
The important thing was that we enjoyed the
basic freedom.
And so when those opportunities opened for
Afghans, women managed to go to the parliament,
the same women that almost the world opportunity
was closed to them, and I and other thousands
and hundreds of Afghan women had to look at
the whole world from a small window of our
houses during Taliban, managed to go to the
Parliament, managed to open our own organization,
get involved in business, have Twitter and
Facebook accounts, access to Internet.
So there was a lot of hope for the future.
And part of this hope and change, I came to
the Parliament.
Although there was enormous challenges, and
there is enormous challenge -- you mentioned
about the security, personal threats, but
that is part of a challenge.
As a woman being in a country which is hugely
traditional, I have to fight basically putting
my forehead in the stone every day to fight
for a small change because Afghanistan need
that change.
You know, because the country has been ruled
almost by the same people for more than 40
years, there is need for a change.
So if I don't come forward, and if other people
like me don't come forward, we automatically
gave the space, the political arena, for the
conservatives to rule the country.
>>Eric Schmidt: When you were -- When you
were born, you were largely mistreated because
you were a woman.
How bad was it under the Taliban?
How bad were they?
>>Fawzia Koofi: If you compared now life for
women in Afghanistan with the Taliban regime,
I think it is a golden opportunity now, with
all the challenges.
During Taliban, basically there was no life.
Now, when some people talk about the fact
that at least there was security during Taliban,
what kind of security it was that, as a human
being, you couldn't breathe.
You couldn't have the freedom to put a certain
amount of beard.
Taliban will measure your beard as a man to
make sure it's an Islamic beard, and if it
was not Islamic, they would start beating
you up in the streets.
If you had not wear proper burqa, even you
had no right to choose your color of socks.
If your socks were white, it was the color
of Taliban flag, it was a disrespect to their
flag so they would start beating you in the
streets.
Now, when many countries argued about Taliban
coming back to power because security is needed
in Afghanistan, yes, peace is essential for
a country.
But in the meantime, justice is equally important.
>>Eric Schmidt: When you -- I've been to Afghanistan,
I've been to Kabul, and I actually liked the
people I met a great deal.
Can you give us a sense of why you love your
country?
What is, in fact, special about Afghanistan?
>>Fawzia Koofi: What you have been hearing
about Afghanistan through media usually is
a country that is under war these attacks,
and it has been under civil war.
That's one page of Afghanistan, one side of
Afghanistan image.
There is the other side of the country which
is full of culture and tradition.
It's an enormously rich country in terms of
having natural resources.
It's untouched kind of resources.
We'll have huge potential for economic growth.
People of Afghanistan are so friendly and
strong, especially women.
We have been hearing about poor women of Afghanistan.
I'm not pro using "poor" anymore for women
of Afghanistan.
Women of Afghanistan are poor, but in the
meantime they have demonstrated enormous resilience
during war and conflicts that prove them to
be strong characters.
It's a country of strong protection system
for the families.
Can you imagine if any other country would
have been under 30 years of war and conflict?
All the social structures would have been
damaged by now.
But because of the strong system of protection
and the sense of relationship and culture
we have in Afghanistan, despite the fact that
we have been under war, still there is like
a -- we don't have such problem that you have
it in other post conflict countries.
Like street children as yet, or women prostitution
houses because there is no other place for
women to go.
Yes, women are suffering, but these are like
typical kind of traditional problems that
women are suffering with.
>>Eric Schmidt: Let's talk a little bit about
security and the current security environment.
It's very difficult to have a country do very
well with the level of fear and the insurgent
attacks.
80% of the political leadership that have
been assassinated have been assassinated by
insurgents.
This is a very, very real threat to the way
the country is run.
How would you characterize the security now
as opposed to a few years ago?
When I was in Afghanistan, for example, the
president and -- sorry, earlier this year,
were very concerned about the American training
and support of the military and they were
very concerned that in 2014, the support would
be withdrawn too quickly.
>>Fawzia Koofi: Well, I -- there is a great
amount of uncertainty and concern about American's
withdrawal in 2014, first of all because 2014
is critical and important year.
We have the presidential election.
And so this is the year that the Americans
would like to withdraw.
Security is deteriorating in some parts of
the country.
If you compare it to few years back, after
2005-2006 and up to the time that the Iraq
war started, I think the situation was took
for granted in Afghanistan that security will
not deteriorate.
But when the Iraq war started, most of the
focus shifted to Iraq, and that was the time
that it gave space and time for Taliban and
their intelligence supporters to kind of re-emerge
and start supporting Taliban.
So, therefore, Taliban became once again a
potential security threat.
Yes, Afghan forces security and, you know,
the police and army, we're proud of them because
they do work under a very difficult situation.
Along with your troops, they invest blood
and treasure.
But I guess Afghanistan has been under a lot
of regional kind of attack.
Afghanistan has become a battlefield between
the regional powers.
Pakistan, Iran relationship certainly affect
Afghanistan security.
So, therefore, I think, yes, I agree with
President Obama's statement that we need to
end this war responsibly and properly, but
there should be a definition of this responsible
ending.
For me, responsible ending of war means my
daughters don't have to look at the world
with its opportunities from -- once again
from a small window of our house.
Other women and children of Afghanistan should
have the privilege to go to school.
I, as a woman, don't have to go back and wear
burqa, and I think this time even with burqa
Taliban will not allow me to stay in Afghanistan.
I think just before coming to here they sent
a letter saying that there are 30 Taliban
trying to assassinate me, a group of 30.
So when the security situation deteriorate
and Taliban return, in the worst-case scenario,
I think even with burqa they will not allow
women to live because the woman issue has
become a matter of revenge.
So I think 2014 withdrawal, from an Afghan
perspective, although we fought for the world
of sovereignty and freedom, I think it's too
early and it's not realistic.
>>Eric Schmidt: So my sense is that much of
the strategic danger in Afghanistan is in
the federally administered independent areas,
basically, between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
For those of you who haven't been there, there
are these impossibly difficult mountains to
get up, think of the Alps or the Rockies or
so forth, which I have flown over where the
insurgents are refueled, if you will, by forces
associated allegedly with the ISI of Pakistan.
Is there any way for you to negotiate a good
outcome with Pakistan over these areas?
Much of the funding and support seems to be
coming out of elements of Pakistan of one
kind or another.
>>Fawzia Koofi: Exactly.
Well, unfortunately, Afghanistan has been
suffering from the having wrong neighborhoods,
both Pakistan and Iran.
And the question for us in Afghanistan is
why the world only focuses on Afghanistan
but not in the country where it's source of
terrorism, where they receive training, they
receive financial support, and they have been
trained and planned for insecurity in Afghanistan.
Why the world less focused in those areas.
We have historical unsolved problems with
Pakistan.
The border issue.
And my sense is unless we don't come to a
conclusion about the border issue between
Afghanistan and Pakistan in (saying name)
area, the conflicts will continue.
So for that I think we need great amount of
support from our allies, particularly United
States, to look to a regional kind of support
or regional settlement in the peace process
in Afghanistan because when you look at the
peace process, it's not just -- there's not
one stand-alone element that brings peace
to Afghanistan, but we have to look at the
relationship between Afghanistan, China, of
course, Pakistan, India.
All of those elements contribute to insecurity
in Afghanistan.
So I think for the United States, it's the
time to continue to pressurize Pakistan for
its kind of double-faced politics in Afghanistan.
>>Eric Schmidt: So there are many American
scholars who have looked at this, and they
have roughly said -- this is not the President
but other people who have said that the only
solution that's possible in Afghanistan is
a negotiated settlement with the insurgents
-- in particular, the Taliban -- negotiated
of some kind.
And the reason they make that argument is
that there's too much support coming from
Pakistan of these; that you can't cut off
the flow, you can't interdict, if you will,
the weapons and so forth.
There were a series of such negotiations.
There have been a series of claims that these
negotiations have been under way.
What is your -- And there's another group
of people in America who believe that it is
better to essentially fight and weaken the
other side before the negotiation.
So choice "A" is negotiate, choice "B" is
fight and then negotiate, or kill, I guess.
What is your view of the -- of the steps that
you would like to see taken to bring to a
genuine peace?
>>Fawzia Koofi: I think I am more with choice
"B" because, yes, negotiation is a means of
political settlements in 21st century.
We are living in a world of dialogue and engagement
and politically talks.
No war has an end with war.
But in the meantime, we have to talk from
a position of power.
We are not with an organized group of insurgents.
There are different groups with different
interests that are involved in war in Afghanistan.
So it's not one identified politically defined
group of Taliban being leaded by Mullah Omar
that you talk to them.
There are different groups within Taliban
with different interests.
So unless we don't talk from a position of
strength and power, I think it has been a
failed project that since 2006, our government,
with our international supporters, have been
pushing the so-called peace process.
The outcome we get in this process is more
assassination of our leaders --
>>Eric Schmidt: Yes.
>>Fawzia Koofi: -- more chain assassination
of our leaders, more terrorist attacks not
against us only but against our partners.
Recently, I mean, two years back your own
embassy in Kabul was a target.
On daily basis there are threats to us and
our friend.
This peace process has not had the result
that we have expected.
So, therefore, I think we need to talk from
a position of power, first.
And second, we need to convince the source
of terrorism, those countries that they support
Taliban --
>>Eric Schmidt: Which would be Iran and Pakistan?
>>Fawzia Koofi: Primarily Pakistan, but also
with conflict of interest of Iran in terms
of U.S. presence in Afghanistan.
I think they will also -- they will be kind
of more interested to influence the situation,
especially post 2014.
You know, both Pakistan and Iran, with the
withdrawal, they are kind of reshaping themselves
to influence the situation.
And if that happens, in the worst-case scenario,
it will be kind of backwarding for Afghanistan.
So, therefore, for us to avoid, because Afghanistan
has experienced, socially, enormous changes.
There are more than 400 media.
Yes, we have experienced barbarian regimes
with tortures, but now I think the social
changes are huge that we cannot take backward.
We cannot reverse the changes.
Previously Taliban would beat a woman in the
street or beat a man for doing small mistakes,
but now if they do that, there are hundreds
of mobile phones, people are connected to
Twitter and Facebook, they will put the images.
There is flow of information.
So I think it's for our leaders and the world
that support Afghanistan to avoid, once again,
Afghanistan fall in the hands of terrorism
and extremism.
It's for them to kind of put the steps along
with the nation's steps.
The nation is a few steps ahead of our leaders.
We need to address kind of our visions with
what our people want.
Afghanistan has been socially -- it is a country
that is in change, but the leaders don't adjust
themselves with this change properly.
>>Eric Schmidt: If we imagine five years from
2014, and you're president, and you've managed
under this scenario to negotiate some form
of peace process, tell us the good side about
Afghanistan.
Tell us about the culture, the economy, the
things that you're proudest of.
>>Fawzia Koofi: Well, as I said before, Afghanistan
is strategically located in a country which
borders China, Pakistan, Central Asia, Iran.
So strategically it's located in a very important
area.
With the wealth, untouched wealth of Afghanistan,
underground wealth, which according to our
estimation, billions of dollars or minerals
of different mines are underground, we could
use those potentials to become a reliable
partner to the world; not only a country that
receives aid but a country which is suitably
proper for investment.
And we could be a reliable partner to the
world but also a country that, through a moderate
way of thinking, both ideologically but also
economically, it's a proper country for its
citizens as well.
So there is huge potential growth for economy,
but also the country.
It's a young nation.
65% of the population is young.
>>Eric Schmidt: Very young.
>>Fawzia Koofi: These are the motives for
the future progress.
We need to use them properly.
If we don't use them properly, they could
be used otherwise for -- to promote insecurity.
So I think the country has huge potentials.
The only thing we don't have at this stage
is a visionary leadership that could reshape
our foreign policy with our strategic partners,
primarily the U.S., and also reshape our policy
with our neighborhood, with a very conflicting
neighborhood.
That is something that we lack at this stage.
We hope that 2014 will result in an election
and a leadership that is decisive, that uses
the potential and opportunities that exist
in Afghanistan both in terms of the foreign
presence but also in terms of what we have
in Afghanistan.
>>Eric Schmidt: I think it's fair to say,
Madam Vice President, that you represent real
courage in humanity.
When I think about what you have gone through
and the sort of personal risks that you have
taken to try to lead your country forward,
I think it's fair to say that I and everyone
here admires your courage and your stamina.
And I suspect that we all support you very,
very much.
I want to thank you so much for coming to
our conference.
It's been fantastic.
[ Applause ]
>>Eric Schmidt: Thank you very much.
