John Kiriakou, a former CIA officer, revealed that the United States poured millions of dollars into Pakistan during Pervez Musharraf’s rule, essentially “purchasing” his loyalty.

In an interview with ANI, Kiriakou said that corruption ran deep in Pakistan, while former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto lived a lavish life in the Gulf as ordinary citizens went hungry.

Kiriakou, who served in the CIA for 15 years, first as an analyst and later in counterterrorism, said, "Our relations with the Pakistan government were very, very good. It was General Pervez Musharraf at the time. And look, let's be honest here. The United States loves working with dictators. Because then you don't have to worry about public opinion, and you don't have to worry about the media anymore. And so, we essentially just purchased Musharraf."

He said Musharraf allowed the US to act freely in Pakistan.

"We gave millions and millions and millions of dollars in aid, whether it was military aid or economic development aid. And we would meet with Musharraf regularly, several times a week. And essentially, he would let us do whatever we wanted to do. Yes. But Musharraf also had his own people that he needed to deal with," he said.

Kiriakou said Musharraf’s main focus was keeping the military “happy”, even if that meant turning a blind eye to extremism and pretending to support the US on counterterrorism while allowing attacks against India.

"He had to keep the military happy. And the military didn't care about Al-Qaeda. They cared about India. And so, in order to keep the military happy and keep some of the extremists happy, he had to allow them to continue this dual life of pretending to cooperate with the Americans on counterterrorism while committing terror against India," he said.

"India, Pakistan were on the brink of war in 2002. December 2001 was when the parliament attack also happened during that time" Kiriakou said.

He also expressed concern that Pakistan’s ongoing political instability could spill into chaos.

"I'm worried about continued disagreement in Pakistani politics that has the potential to spill into the streets because the Pakistanis have a tendency to get themselves spun up and people die during demonstrations and there are attacks against political figures and assassinations and the country is not known for its transformative leaders making positive decisions," he said.

Kiriakou then shared a personal memory of a meeting with Benazir Bhutto, describing it as a “Marie Antoinette moment.” He recalled how Bhutto complained about her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, buying another luxury car.

"When Benazir Bhutto was in exile in Dubai, I went to see her with another senior officer. I went as the note taker. And she lived in this $5 million palace on the Gulf. And we were sitting in the front room, the salon of the house, and we heard a car pull up. And she said, her exact words, so help me God, if he came home with another Bentley, I'm going to kill him!" he told ANI.

On being asked, "Is that Zardari?"

"Yeah. Her husband."

"And I said to my boss afterwards, she makes $60,000 a year," he recounted.

Kiriakou questioned how such leaders could face their people after living so extravagantly while millions struggled for basic needs.

"She lives in a $5 million house, and he has a collection of Bentleys. Aren't they ashamed of themselves? Like, how can they go back to Pakistan and look the Pakistani people in the face when their people don't even have shoes and enough food to eat? Like, I understand corruption is a problem there, but that level of corruption? Come on!" he said.

He added that such politicians were the reality the Pakistani people had to live with.

"Well, those are the kinds of politicians that the Pakistani people have to deal with. Right. And so, you know, you talked about Benazir Bhutto, you talked about Zardari. Zardari is the current president over here," he said.

According to Al Jazeera, in his autobiography In the Line of Fire, Musharraf explained how he decided to change his foreign policy and withdraw support for the Taliban.

He wrote that he had first considered whether Pakistan could withstand a confrontation with the United States.

"I war-gamed the United States as an adversary," he wrote, saying he assessed whether Pakistan could survive such a conflict.

"The answer was no, we could not, on three counts," Al Jazeera quoted.

Musharraf wrote that Pakistan’s military would have been destroyed, its economy could not have survived, and the nation lacked the unity needed to endure such a confrontation.

"Nothing, literally nothing good will come of an actual war between India and Pakistan because the Pakistanis will lose. It's as simple as that. They'll lose. And I'm not talking about nuclear weapons, I'm talking just about a conventional war. And so there is no benefit to constantly provoking Indians," he said.

Kiriakou, who spent 15 years in the CIA and led counterterrorism operations in Pakistan, said the United States could have neutralised Abdul Qadeer Khan, the key scientist behind Pakistan’s nuclear programme and a central figure in nuclear proliferation, if it had followed a tougher Israeli-style policy. But, according to him, A.Q. Khan was protected by Saudi Arabia, which asked Washington to stay out of it.

He recalled that when he was posted in Pakistan in 2002, he was quietly told that the Pentagon had a degree of influence over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. Over time, he said, attitudes in Pakistan have hardened, and officials now insist their generals alone control the arsenal.

"The United States has nothing to do with the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, that Pakistani generals are the ones who control it," he said.

When asked if Washington had ever informed India about the alleged US role, Kiriakou said he did not think so. He added that the State Department was then focused on keeping tensions under control, urging both sides to avoid escalation. If fighting broke out, he said, it was advised that it remain limited and conventional, since any nuclear use would change the situation for everyone.

Kiriakou also referred to India’s firm stand on nuclear threats, noting that New Delhi has made it clear it will not tolerate any form of nuclear blackmail and would respond strongly to terrorist attacks.

He pointed to India’s military actions over the years as evidence of that resolve, mentioning the 2016 surgical strikes across the Line of Control, the 2019 Balakot airstrikes, and Operation Sindoor in May 2025, when India announced it had hit terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. He said the latest operation came in response to the Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 people.

Speaking about his own life, Kiriakou said his CIA career was divided into two parts, the first focused on intelligence analysis and the second on counterterrorism missions.

He also recalled his decision in 2007 to publicly expose the CIA’s interrogation programme, which later led to a 23-month prison sentence. Even so, Kiriakou said he has no regrets, insisting he "did the right thing."