Bhutto Backlash

Today's assassination of Benazir Bhutto will surely reverberate all the way to Iowa and New Hampshire. Her death not only has long term consequences for Pakistan's future, but will impact the presidential race at home since it will compel Republican and Democratic candidates to shift attention away from domestic issues to highlight their relative foreign policy experience as the world focuses on Bhutto's murder, and on Pakistan -- one of the most dangerous and unstable countries in the world.

During the coming days in the minds of many voters surely "experience" will trump "change" as Americans grapple with the unfolding tragedy and its potential impact on American national and homeland security.

Insofar as Pakistan is concerned, the only Muslim nation that has nuclear weapons, Benazir Bhutto promised that should her Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) win the upcoming parliamentary elections, she would clamp down on Taliban and Al Qaeda sympathizers that vowed to kill her when she returned from exile on October 18. She leaves no identifiable successor to lead the PPP, and Pakistan today faces the prospect of more internal violence and consequently, more danger to American interests in this volatile region.

What can we expect in the coming days?

1. Under Muslim law, Bhutto's funeral will likely occur tomorrow, and it may descend into a violent, anti-government protest. President Musharraf will declare several days of official mourning and may reimpose emergency rule, or even declare Martial Law.


2. Bhutto had many enemies inside Pakistan, including President Musharraf, Islamic extremists parties, Taliban and Al Qaeda sympathizers and opponents within her own party. Which group or groups claim responsibility will determine how the all-powerful Pakistani army reacts to her murder and whether the country will spiral into a sustained period of violence and chaos.

3. Musharraf himself has been the target of 9 assassination attempts. The ease by which an assassin was able to penetrate Bhutto's security detail illustrates the determination of Pakistan's extremists to kill anyone who is a threat to their anti-democratic agenda. It will also cause many of Bhutto's supporters to point an accusing finger at Musharraf claiming that he intentionally did not provide enough security to Bhutto since she was a political threat to his rule.

4. For the U.S., the highest priority is whether Pakistan's nuclear weapons will remain under tight lock and key should the country descend into further chaos. The midnight oil will surely be burning in the Situation Room and in the Pentagon as Bush administration officials cope with the assassination's aftermath -- the most important challenge being whether Musharraf will be able to keep control of Pakistan's streets.

Pakistan may be 10,000 miles away from Iowa, but in the aftermath of Bhutto's assassination, events in Pakistan may very well shape the course of the closing days of the campaign.

Read more reactions from HuffPost bloggers on Benazir Bhutto's assassination

Comments

[GuiltyByStander]

Interesting comment from NYT columnist David Brooks and commentator Mark Shields with Judy Woodruff. Worth 30 seconds for a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRJ2us-0ZaU&feature=user

[bobh]

The security of these weapons my be the "highest priority", but that does not mean we have any contingency plans to deal with securing them if all falls apart. As with Bhutto's lack of security, the administration's motto seems to be "Que sera, sera".

[Dunnage]

"midnight oil" indeed. If anybody was surprised by this turn of events, they should stick to t.v. programing -- like take a hint.

[Troubledgoodangel]

I doubt we can deny Pakistan the nuclear power status just like that. Pakistan is a British incubus that is now beginning to haunt the world. But the Pakistani people are not responsible for what the Powers-That-Be orchestrated! The people are good and they deserve support and respect. The fact that Pakistan has a bomb, although partially accidental, is also a product of the callousness of the Powers that allowed this to happen! I am talking about the world security arrangements that allowed the leaking of the atomic secrets, but also about the Pakistani inability to defend a single woman, Benazir Bhutto, by President Musharraf, in spite of 10 billion dollars given to him for that purpose by the U.S.! This is a shame! We cannot do business like this! How can he assure us that he will protect those atomic weapons better? These weapons must somehow be secured until Pakistan becomes a self-sufficient democracy! The U.N. might have to pass some resolution to protect those weapons internationally!

[OhgReaTone]

True enough. Every terrorist attack in the world impact the Presidential election - and the reaction of Presidents. Fear must not rule!
Ohg.
http://thefiresidepost.com/2007/12/28/fear-must-not-choose-a-president/

[fourex]

"For the U.S., the highest priority is whether Pakistan's nuclear weapons will remain under tight lock and key should the country descend into further chaos."

To be more blunt, run with the generals. Nixon on hearing of Allende's assassination said through his State Department, Now we run with the Generals, no time to moralize about democracy.

[Norge]

Embassador,

All of Pakistan's nec's should be disarmed as soon as possible. Remove and secure all radioactive material.

Rolf

[Uosdwis]

And instead of someone like you, who do we now have as ambassador to Pakistan? Anne Patterson, who has no middle east experience, although maybe South America works the same way..

[researcher]

whatever happened to bush jr speech that anyone that harbors terrorists we will consider our enemy.

the media is bought and paid for by corporate america.

this country is becoming a joke. we look dumber with each passing day to the rest of the world.

and we wonder why the rest of the world considers us the worst threat to world peace in the world.

[Rule Of Law]

Let's see, Musharraf declares martial law, suspends the constitution, and his only viable rival ends up dead--and these are our "allies" in the war on terror?

Seems to me that whoever is nominated to run against Bush should double their protection, as Pakistan is looking more and more like a dry run for Amerika.

We have a history of propping up dictators--can anyone spell C.I.A.?

[Rescisco]

Given the propensity of the U.S. to influence the internal politics of Pakistan (i.e. promoting "democracy") and its incredible record of botching all things strategic (i.e. promoting stability in a troubled country), it seems that the unfolding drama in Pakistan will see the U.S. (without a foreign policy and without a clue) drawn into a wider "war" against "evil doers" at the expense of its own security interests. Our priorities should center on stability for Pakistan and U.S. security interests. "Democracy" (as we define and seek to promote it in cultures we do not understand) is a "goal" that will lead to more ill advised adventures and historic blunders. Our "reign of error" in the U.S. must end. That is the most necessary and effective step we can take in addressing the threat of terror.

[peterg76]

"whether Pakistan's nuclear weapons will remain under tight lock and key"

Of course they won't. They need a nuclear weapon to end up in Iran so they can bomb that country. It will probably be the CIA that steals and then delivers it.

If only we had counter-proliferation expert Valerie Plame....

[ChristopherLib]

It may seem cruel to talk about the political raminfications, but 7 days before the Iowa Caucuses how can't we talk about it? For the Republicans it's probably going to help Giuliani and McCain. For the Democrats I think Biden and Hillary will get a bounce; Biden might have a shot at placing top three in Iowa. It hurts Huckabee and Obama the most I think. Edwards and Romney are unknowns.

Now how much it changes things is anyone's guess. This is going to be a major news story for days. Every candidate is going to have to speak expecially on foreign policy issues. Domestic issues will take a back seat. Negetive campaigning will likely be minimal. It will be a differnt kind of campaign at least through New Hampshire.

[bethinCary]

you can cite all of the differing groups in Pakistan that you wantbut it sounds like the security forces-and the ISI are who think they re in charge of politics there.

[MilwaukeeDan]

Why are the Americans worried about Pakistans nuclear weapons? The Czechs,the Slovaks and the Swiss could care less. Gee, could it be our f**ked up foreign policy?