Complicated situation, hard to follow what's going on, who's on first. I recommend reading this article by Adrian Morgan, Pakistan: From Bad to Worse to Dangerous, first published at Family Security Matters. Morgan provides a decent overview of the major players and what forces are at play. Musharaff has played a balancing game for a long time, but I don't think he's going to be able to continue his Clintonesque triangulations between the military, the pro-Taliban extremists, and the U.S.
I also like to check out what expatriot Pakistanis think about the ongoing turmoil in their country, so by all means please read Watandost (a Boston blogger) and Khalid Hasan (based in DC). Harold Doornbos, a Dutch journalist who is frequently in Pakistan, is another good resource for what's happening in the street. So much better than typical US-media info. Harry talks about the differing standards of judging Pakistan and Dubai here, and here he writes about what martial law actually looks like in Ialamabad.
Although Musharaff has been a disappointment, to say the least, I think the U.S. is better off with Pakistan as an deeply flawed ally, as opposed to being an ally of another major power. "Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer" sort of thing. Keep developing nations with nuclear weapons closer still.
Has the U.S. simply been played by Musharaff? Has our support of Musharaff been beneficial in any way for our country's national interests? Or for the interests of the Pakistani people, or for the safety of the rest of the world?
Comments