« How To Beat Your WifeNot Quite Enough Rope »

Pak It In

Is the advice to Musharraf re his SOE from Pak press and friends abroad, as his PM hints at backtrack on elections and Bhutto threatens a “Long March.” Pak news and opinion: 

Pak Dawn: Mush, listen to your friend abroad, civil society at home.   

Peshawar Frontier Post: SOE brought no pacification. Reverse course now, tomorrow will be too late. 

Pak Nation: Jitters, backtracking at the top? Good.

UK Telegraph: Mush to end SOE in 2-3 weeks. Elections could be held in March.

NYT:  Bhutto calls for mass demonstration

Reuters: Bhutto threatens “long march,” Lahore to Islamabad, Nov. 13

Bhutto NYT oped: Dangerous to stand up to a military dictatorship, more dangerous not to.

Taheri at NYPost: Mush still the best option. Lean on him, don’t alienate him.

Klinghoffer: Mush is following the old Muslim tyrant script, make sure Islamists are the only alternative to your rule.

Rupert at Newsday: Mush gambit leaves him weaker than before.

Toronto Star: Pakistan’s Suit-and-Tie Revolution

Nawaz at BGlobe: Pak Army is Key

WSJ: A more effective way to defeat the extremists is by respecting the rule of law and introducing a democratic government that reflects the wishes of Pakistan’s mostly moderate population.

Elections, what then? Bhutto email to UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave, AdB’s thoughts: 

“The fact that militants hold open meetings without fear of retaliation proves the Musharraf regime is totally inept, unwilling or colluding in their expansion.”

“Our rapprochement talks with Musharraf have foundered in the quicksand of his failing promises. There is no move toward democracy. It’s either back to dictatorship (1999) or back to a rigged election (2002). Or Musharraf is replaced with a pliant interim government for two years run from behind the scene by the same military hardliners. They claim in 2 years they can push NATO out of Afghanistan and replace president (Hamid) Karzai with one of their own betting that the U.S. will be caught up in presidential elections for one year and it will take another year for the new administration to settle in.”

“The situation is grim, the risks are high, but I have faith in the people to turn around the problem if we can get a real election.” That horizon seems to be receding. In recent opinion polls, Musharraf was in single digits, President Bush in the teens and Osama Bin Laden close to 50 percent. Pakistan’s extremist militants reject a woman as the nation’s leader, as well as an alliance with the United States.

Meanwhile, Stratfor (Nov. 6):

… In spite of media reports, the demonstrations against President Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s state of emergency were sporadic, relatively small and easily quelled by police. Police and intelligence agencies reportedly have arrested hundreds of people. The army appears to be unified.

…

Pakistan released 25 high-ranking Islamist militants in exchange for 213 army prisoners being held in South Waziristan. This can only be read as a gesture toward the radical Islamists in the northern areas — and is unlikely to please the United States. But at this point, Musharraf is far more interested in heading off any Islamist explosion and stabilizing his regime than he is in U.S. or international opinion. In short, Musharraf has made his move, and so far it appears to be working.

That puts the United States in a bind in a number of ways. The United States needs Pakistan if it is to have any hope of continuing to contain the remnants of al Qaeda and keeping it from re-forming. Not cooperating with Musharraf is the same as abandoning the battle in northern Pakistan or continuing the battle in direct opposition to Musharraf and much of his army. It is collaborate or oppose, with very little wiggle room. Releasing the militants helped Musharraf secure his political flanks inside Pakistan, and also signaled the United States not to take his cooperation for granted.

The United States is now in its classic bind. Ideologically, it claims to be in both Iraq and Afghanistan to create a democratic regime. An indispensable ally — Pakistan — has now chosen to suspend democracy, at the very least. The United States must pirouette around the issue, condemning Pakistan while continuing to work with it, and thereby opening itself to even more criticism than it already has taken. The United States has little leverage. Musharraf knew what the U.S. response would be and factored it into his actions. Releasing the militants was, in part, his answer to the United States.

…

A tough situation for the United States keeps getting tougher.

Topics: Pakistan

  Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:51 am on Wednesday, November 7, 2007

2 Responses to “Pak It In”

1. RebeccaH Says:
   November 7th, 2007 at 5:22 pm

   The United States must pirouette around the issue, condemning Pakistan while continuing to work with it, and thereby opening itself to even more criticism than it already has taken.

   “Criticism” is the least of our problems. The real decision is how much military power we’re ready and able to commit to combatting al-Qaeda/Islamic militant ideology. Pakistan, in its essence, is already lost to us.

2. saltydog Says:
   November 7th, 2007 at 6:12 pm

   But…but…, I thought that “realist” thinking said it is imperative that we sidle up to “moderate” tyrants! It’s worked out well with Pak and the bloody Sauds. Hasn’t it?

   Lie down with dogs and you end up with blood-sucking, disease carrying ticks attached to the body politic.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.