Pakistan has its share of violent Islamic extremists, military and civilian. But they are clearly in the minority. The best hope for diluting their political, and geopolitical, influence lies not in heating the pressure cooker of repression, but in promoting the earliest possible democratic elections, Pakistan's Dictator, June 11, 2007.
I should point that the NYT has been dissing the General [on the Editorial page] since 2004. Good for them.
"I should point that the NYT has been dissing the General [on the Editorial page] since 2004. Good for them." They have... but mostly on realpolitik, geopolitical terms. At times, the NYT has sounded more like an analysis for the State Department to take into account, rather than what is really going on on ground in Pakistan, in regards to Pakistani citizens. Very rarely do they ever talk about issues concerning everyday Pakistani citizens. They mostly report on how Pakistan figures into the geopolitical calculus of the US: "The best hope for diluting their political and GEOPOLITICAL influence..."
Given that Al Qaeda and the Taliban control large chunks of the country and ISI, is there anything that can possibly keep them from taking over the whole country?
AlQaedaâ‰ Talibanâ‰ ISI. Lets leave alone the "control over large chunks of the country". Now the editorial precisely makes it clear [or any of my previous 10 posts], that the overwhelming majority of the Pakistani population want the rule of democratic law, a free judiciary and a open media. Musharraf/Army/MMA/post-Taliban elements are the ones facing vast resistance from this groundswell of ordinary citizens across Pakistan.
Hmm... I could be getting things totally wrong (I know beans about South Asia), but ISTR news reports of Al Qaeda flags flying in the parts of Waziristan that were ceded to the Taliban. And my previous comment was more of a worry that serves as an appendage to a general optimism regarding the groundswell of democratic opposition to M.
Al Qaeda has a flag?
FYI, FWIW, TPM is reporting that US intelligence doesn't expect the General to be President much longer: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003408.php
Jonathon, thanks for linking to that article, as it serves as a reminder of how Pakistan is depicted in the American media.. Memorable highlights from this article: "It may be time for the U.S. to face what it's long feared in the nuclear state: the prospect of chaos, rising Islamism or anti-Americanism that follows Musharraf." "Some see the Pakistani Army remaining powerful enough to prevent a chaotic transition or an Islamist takeover." "Musharraf's vision is to make Pakistan like Turkey, where Islamic currents ebb and flow with popular sentiment, "but who enforces what they call democracy? The military." "Within three months, Musharraf has grown steadily weaker in the eyes of the security services, the Islamists, and the general public, compounding the doubts that some in the U.S. have over his commitment to taking on al-Qaeda." And etc. If I come across one more article that talks about "Islamism," "Islamic takeover," or basically anything with the word "Islamic," I'm simply going to stop reading it. No point in wasting time reading incredibly redundant spiels- we've heard it all before. It's infuriating, this real politik talk. I'm on Sepoy with this- "this tunnel vision" leaves me incredulous.