The Failing Empire
by
Patrick
J. Buchanan
by
Patrick J. Buchanan
DIGG THIS
"Things are
in the saddle, and ride mankind."
Emerson's
couplet comes to mind as the New Year opens with Pakistan, the second
largest Muslim country on Earth, in social and political chaos,
trending toward a failed state with nuclear weapons.
Former
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, whom the White House pressed to return
home from exile to form an anti-Islamist alliance with President
Pervez Musharraf, is dead, assassinated on the second try in two
months.
Her 19-year-old
son, who has spent most of his life outside the country, is now
the declared leader of her Pakistan Peoples Party but is remaining
at Oxford. Her husband, widely regarded as the bag man of the Bhutto
family, is playing regent, denouncing the Pakistan Muslim League
with which Musharraf is affiliated as a "murderers' league."
As riots
ravage the country, the PPP is demanding that the Jan. 8 elections
go forward and calling on the nation to repudiate Musharraf and
bring the PPP to power – in her memory.
Nawaz Sharif,
a two-time prime minister like Bhutto who presided over Pakistan's
test of an atom bomb, who is close to the Islamists, who was also
ousted for corruption, and who is detested by Musharraf, had declared
an election boycott. Now his party, too, is urging that the elections
go forward. Sharif wants Musharraf out and himself in.
If Musharraf
postpones the elections, or they are not regarded as free and fair,
the whole nation could erupt. If he does not postpone the elections,
he will almost surely be repudiated.
Revealed
by all this is the inability, if not the impotence, of America to
assure a desired outcome in a nation whose support is indispensable
if we are not to lose the war in Afghanistan, now in its seventh
year.
Moreover,
the reactions of some U.S. presidential candidates suggest they
are not ready to run this country, let alone Pakistan. After Bhutto's
assassination, Bill Richardson called on Musharraf to resign. Hillary
Clinton has suggested that Musharraf could be toppled and demanded
that he submit to an outside investigation of the murder of Benazir
Bhutto.
Nancy Pelosi
is suggesting a cutoff in U.S. aid if there is no outside investigation
and demanding the White House ensure that Pakistan's elections are
"free and fair." Perhaps the Pakistanis will demand observers this
year in Florida and Ohio.
But if
Musharraf stands down, who steps in? Do we know? And if elections
go forward, are we ready to accept any outcome?
After all,
this is a country whose provinces bordering on Afghanistan, the
Northwest Frontier and Baluchistan, are ruled by a coalition of
Muslim parties sympathetic to the Taliban. Tribal regions along
the border play host to the Taliban and perhaps Osama himself. Elements
of Pakistan's military and intelligence services are Islamist. The
nuclear proliferator A.Q. Khan and Osama are far more popular than
Musharraf or Bush. Lose Pakistan in the war against al-Qaeda and
the Taliban and you lose the Afghan war.
In recent
elections in the Near and Middle East, many of them called at the
insistence of President Bush, the winners were Hamas, Hezbollah,
the Muslim Brotherhood, Moqtada al-Sadr and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
What are
the primary U.S. interests today in Pakistan? That its nuclear weapons
remain in secure and friendly hands and that Pakistan remains an
ally in the war against al-Qaeda.
Whatever
happens in the elections Jan. 8, or later, the United States should
retain close ties to Pakistan's military. As Rome's emperor Septimus
Severus counseled his sons on his deathbed, "Pay the soldiers. The
rest do not matter."
But
the United States must begin now to look at the longer term.
It seems
clear that we are so hated in that country that any leader like
Bhutto, seen as a friend and ally to the United States, is ever
at mortal risk. Musharraf has himself been a repeated target of
assassins.
Second,
our ability to influence events is severely limited. What does democracy
mean in a country where 60 percent of the people are illiterate
and parties are fiefdoms of families and political instruments of
religious radicals?
As Burke
reminded us, "It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things
that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge
their fetters."
We
need to ask ourselves hard questions. Has the blood we have shed
in Afghanistan and Iraq, the hundreds of billions we have plunged
into these wars, and into foreign aid, made us safer? Has it made
us more friends than enemies? Perhaps, as is seen today in Anbar,
locals are better at dealing with al-Qaeda than even our American
soldiers.
Russia,
China, India, and Japan are closer to Pakistan than we. Yet, none
of them feels the need we apparently do to be so deeply enmeshed
in her internal affairs.
January
2, 2008
Patrick
J. Buchanan [send
him mail] is co-founder and editor of The
American Conservative. He is also the author of seven books,
including Where
the Right Went Wrong, and A
Republic Not An Empire.
Copyright
© 2008 Creators Syndicate
Patrick
J. Buchanan Archives
|