Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
Will Pakistan Impeach Pervez Musharraf?
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
Also in PEEK
White House Refuses to Deny Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister
Amanda Think Progress
Fox News: 'McCain's TV Commercials Contain ... Out-Right Lies'
Steve Benen Washington Monthly
Van Halen, Heart, Others to GOP: Stop Using Our Songs!
Dave Burdick Huffington Post
It looks like Pakistan is moving to impeach Pervez Musharraf. And it also looks like they have the votes to pull it off. The big question is whether the Pakistani military will allow the impeachment to go forward. Musharraf could dissolve parliament, but he can't do that unless he is sure he has the backing of the military. And, as of right now, things are not looking too good for Pervez.
Pakistani politics give new meaning to the term Byzantine. It's extremely difficult to parse out what is going on and even what is desirable from an American point of view. With so many of our troops stationed in Afghanistan and with Iran's territory denied to us for purposes of resupply, it is critical that the Pakistani government is cooperative. Unfortunately, Pakistan has been playing a double game with us since the very beginning of our occupation of Afghanistan. Their intelligence service, the ISI, has supported warlords, provided training and sanctuary to the Taliban, and recently bombed the Indian Embassy in Kabul (probably to signal their displeasure with a deal whereby Indian goods will be imported through Iran). At the same time, they keep America at bay by turning over a trickle of bad guys, doing occasional sweeps through the Tribal Areas, and by taking advantage of our absolute dependency upon their territory for supplying our troops.
We have every reason to be furious with the performance of Musharraf and the ISI. But we prefer to maintain the fiction of good cooperation. Yet, it's not all that clear that things would improve with Musharraf gone. Musharraf's ostensible cooperation with the United States goes a long way toward explaining his vast unpopularity. For example, how are we to read this?
One politician, part of a parliamentary bloc that could go either way on impeachment, said in a telephone interview on Thursday that he had instructed his colleagues to vote in favor of impeachment.
The politician, Munir Orakzai, who represents the Kurrman district in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas where the Taliban insurgency has gathered huge strength, said Mr. Musharraf was to blame for the problems. "He has made things worse for us," Mr. Orakzai said.
Has he made things worse by tolerating the strengthening of the Taliban in Mr. Orakzai's territory or by authorizing military sweeps aimed at rooting out Arab and Talib extremists? Without more context it's impossible to say whether Mr. Orakzai supports impeachment because Musharraf supports the radicalization of the Tribal Areas or because he opposes it. Is Orakzai pro-American or anti-Taliban?
Things are not made any clearer when we learn that the impeachment drive is being led by the widower of Benazir Butto, Asif Ali Zardari (head of the Pakistan Peoples Party), and Nawaz Sharif (head of the Pakistan Muslim League-N). Both Butto and Sharif have long and complicated relationships with the West, but they can both be broadly described as pro-West. Of the two, the Bhutto faction is the more westernized and secular, and it was the Bush administration that pushed for the return of Benazir Bhutto to Pakistan (which resulted in her assassination). Sharif, meanwhile, was ousted in the coup that brought Musharraf to power in the first place. His natural constituency is more religious and conservative, but his record on those issues is decidedly mixed.
Both Sharif and Bhutto have had extremely strained relationships with the Pakistani military and intelligence services. It is probably time for Musharraf to retire from Pakistani politics, but it is not at all clear what will replace him and how they will interact with America. Will they continue to play a double game, giving lip service to assisting U.S. policy while actively undermining our position in Afghanistan? Will they seek to end all cooperation? Or will the situation improve?
And, anytime we are looking at this level of instability and unpredictability in a country that is armed with nuclear weapons, we have to be extremely nervous about our inability to anticipate or steer events. Those worries are only magnified by India's possession of nuclear weapons and our reliance on Pakistan to keep our soldiers supplied in Afghanistan.
It is probably the extreme perils involved with instability that have led us to tolerate a failing status quo. It is very worrisome that Pakistan is moving into this degree of uncertainty now, while we still have the Keystone Kops at the helm of our national security apparatus.
Tagged as: sharif, iran, afghanistan, bhutto, pervez musharraf, pakistan
Booman is the proprietor of the Booman Tribune.
| Also in PEEK | |||
| White House Refuses to Deny Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister White House Press Secretary Dana Perino wants to make it clear, the White House IS NOT denying spying on Maliki. Post by Amanda. September 5, 2008. |
Fox News: 'McCain's TV Commercials Contain ... Out-Right Lies' Wait, we're seriously talking about Fox News? The Fox News? Post by Steve Benen. September 5, 2008. |
Van Halen, Heart, Others to GOP: Stop Using Our Songs! GOP ignores copyrights, raises ire of multiple recording artists. Post by Dave Burdick. September 5, 2008. |
|