Paking It In
by
William S. Lind
by William S. Lind
The riots in Pakistan are hardly news anymore: if
they appear in the paper at all, it is on page C17, between a story
on starvation in the Sudan and a report that Mrs. McGillicuty fell
down the stairs. The riots continue nonetheless, seemingly unconcerned
that the rest of the world is no longer watching.
Perhaps it should. Periodic riots are normal in
parts of the world; England was famous for them in the 18th century.
But when rioting continues day after day, it can serve as a sort
of thermometer, taking the temperature of a population. Pakistan,
it would seem, is running a fever, one that shows little sign of
breaking.
On the surface, the rioting is a protest against
cartoons of Muhammad. Throughout the Islamic world, the anti-cartoon
demonstrations are both an expression of rage at Islamic states'
impotence and a demonstration of Islam's power outside the state
framework. But in Pakistan, the immediate target of the riots is
all too evident: Pakistani President Musharraf and his working relationship
with America's President Bush (in Pakistan, Musharraf is often called
Busharraf).
After 9/11, when Bush announced that anyone in the
world who was not with us was with the terrorists, Musharraf had
to make a strategic choice. He had to make it fast, since America
wanted to attack Afghanistan, and it needed Pakistan's help to do
so. Musharraf chose to ally with Bush. That choice has paid Pakistan
dividends internationally, but at a price: Musharraf's legitimacy
at home became dependent on the Pakistani people's view of America.
In effect, Musharraf reincarnated himself as a political satellite
of Bush.
Not surprisingly, America's popularity among Pakistanis
was not helped by our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. The Taliban
was largely a Pakistani creation, and its fall was not welcomed
in Pakistan, especially when Afghanistan's American-installed president,
Mr. Karzai, quickly cozied up to India.
Then, the strong American response to Pakistan's
disastrous earthquake turned Pakistani opinion around. Only America
really came through for the tens of thousands of people de-housed
by the catastrophe, and other people noticed; when mullahs in radical
mosques denounced the Americans, their congregations told them they
were wrong.
Of course, America blew it in classic American fashion,
with the Predator strike on homes in a Pakistani border town. As
always, the target wasn't there, because, as always, we depended
on intelligence from "systems" when only humint can do the job.
The resulting Pakistani civilian deaths threw away all the good
will we earned from the earthquake response and made America the
Great Satan once more. Musharraf paid the political price.
If the riots continue and grow, the Pakistani security
forces responsible for containing them will at some point go over
and join the rioters. Musharraf will try to get the last plane out;
perhaps he will find Texas a congenial place of exile. If he doesn't
make that plane, his head will serve as a football, not just of
the political variety.
A new Pakistani government, in quest of legitimacy,
will understand that comes from opposing Bush's America, not getting
in bed with it. Osama will be the new honorary president of Pakistan,
de facto if not de jure. Our and NATO's operation
in Afghanistan will become strategically unsustainable overnight.
That nice Mr. Karzai will, one hopes, find a seat on a C-17.
The fall of
Pakistan to militant Islam will be a strategic disaster greater
than anything possible in Iraq, even losing an army. It will be
a greater disaster than a war with Iran that costs us our army in
Iraq. Osama and Co. will have nukes, missiles to deliver them, the
best
conventional armed forces in the Muslim world, and an impregnable
base for operations anywhere else. As North Korea's Dear Leader
has shown the world, nobody messes with you if you have nukes. Uncle
Sam takes off his battle rattle and asks Beijing, or somebody, if
they can possibly sponsor some talks.
That ticking
sound Mr. Bush hears is not Mr. Cheney's pacemaker. It's the crocodile,
and he's getting rather close.
February
25, 2006
William
Lind [send him mail]
is Director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the Free
Congress Foundation. The views expressed in this article are those
of Mr. Lind, writing in his personal capacity.
Copyright
© 2006 William S. Lind
William
Lind Archives
|