Pakistan: The Real Teetering Domino of the Middle East

We're used to seeing Iraq and Afghanistan in the news, but recently, reports from the greater Middle East's teetering domino, Pakistan, have appeared on the front pages of newspapers across America.

Today's New York Times features a three-page article by Mark Mazzetti and David Rohde detailing the strength of al Qaeda on the border of Afghanistan. According to the article, "Leading terrorism experts have warned that it is only a matter of time before a major terrorist attack planned in the mountains of Pakistan is carried out on American soil."

The title of the Times' piece, "Amid U.S. Policy Disputes, Qaeda Grows in Pakistan," raises important questions: What should be America's policy towards this nation armed with nuclear weapons and possessing the rocket technology to deliver them? How should we conduct relations with this country populated by almost 150 million Muslims? Given that even staunch Bush/Cheney supporters now admit colossal blunders in the Middle East, the United States cannot afford a misstep in dealing with Pakistan.

The dilemma is that fighting the Taliban on Pakistani soil jeopardizes what currently stands for stability in the Pakistani government. As we know from our 1979 experience in Tehran when extremists seized the U.S. embassy and ousted the shah, governments can collapse in a flashpoint. The sad truth is that the Bush/Cheney administration's endless record of poor decisions in the region should disqualify them from even attempting to address the complex issue of U.S.-Pakistani relations.

Think of the mistakes they have made. Hamas has been democratically elected in the Palestinian territories. Iraq is an endless see-saw of good news and mostly bad news. The Iranian government publicly thumbs its nose at the international community. In Afghanistan, a resurgent opium industry thrives and a fragile government struggles to maintain power.

Bush/Cheney only has six months left. But that would be plenty of time to make the situation in Pakistan worse. The best course of action would be for our feckless Congress to assert itself. Traditionally, the executive branch has dictated U.S. foreign policy. But through the power of the purse, Congress should tie any future funding of administration initiatives to having a greater voice on what decisions are made regarding Pakistan. Congress should also seek a role for the United Nations on this issue, particularly the voices coming from the Security Council. I believe firmly that it will be important to consider a broad range of opinions of this critical issue of American military action on Pakistani soil.

Comments

[DumbDad]

Calming down a tad, it seems more to the point that Pakistan like virtually all predominantly Muslim countries is vulnerable to political collapse and therefore to manipulation by America's rivals. We used to pump money into Pakistan to offset Soviet interests, annoying India abjectly. Pakistan's only real interest apart from avoiding insurrection is India. The reason we can't invade Pakistan is insurrection. Our best bet is to be a lot more intelligent about using Pakistan's powersthatbe and a lot less afraid of them.

[Mogamboguru]

This Bush-administration won't back down before it has turned the whole middle-east into a burning sea of blood and oil.

The longer I watch the situation in the ME unfold, the more I come to the clue that, the USA has put a gang of Doomsday-apologists in power, who will not let go their bloody grip on Planet Earth before they have caused so huge a mess, that nobody - Not even CHRIST himself - could undo it and clean it up afterwards.

[z2]

Sen. Chaffee, thank you.

[marinemomof3]

Senator Chafee:
As a former Rhode Islander (and Providence Plantations) born and raised in Coventry, I am so proud to be able to say that BOTH of my (former) Senators voted against the war. I think we are the only state do have done so. I hope to see you back in government soon.

I live now in Cali near my marines. I used to be a groupie of your late sister, at horse shows.
Thank you for a great article!

[TXfemmom]

Pakistan was and is the Clear and Present Danger that Iraq was not and even in the mess it is in, is not.

The Nukes of Pakistan existed and they were sharing their techology like candy to the highest bidder.

We should have neutralized their nukes, their nuclear facility, and their nuclear scientists instead of going into Iraq. They earned it and deserved it.

[ScottCandage]

What really bothers me about Pakistan is that the Pakistani authorities call their Northern territories "autonomous" when they want to give Al Qaeda or the Taliban room to operate, but when anyone dares try to say that military action should be taken in that area by an outside nation, somehow that "autonomous" region is part of Pakistan. I think it has come time for United States diplomats to tell Musharraf or whomever that Pakistan cannot have it both ways. Either the Northern Territories are part of Pakistan (then Pakistan should get in there and deal with Al Qaeda militarily) or they are not (and the United States or a coalition should go in to deal with Al Qaeda or the Taliban militarily).

P.S., I interned for your father in the summer of 1993 and greatly admired him.

[wldnswmmr]

According to Seymour Hersh's latest article in the New Yorker, Congress just finished authorizing another $400 million for covert ops in Iran. They aren't about to stand up to anyone. What you are writing, Mr. Chafee, makes eminent good sense. What could be a worse combination of factors than al Qaeda operating in an unstable country which has both nuclear weapons and missiles? That sounds like a combination guaranteed to bring about disaster. But Pakistan is not an important country in the Bush/Cheney universe, and this Congress, as you know too well, is not going to change its "feckless" ways and assert itself. We may see Joe Biden sound off on this on "Hardball" but that will be it. A rudderless ship of state drifts over stormy seas.

[syllepsis]

You would think that if we were at war with anyone, it would be al Qaeda. But it seems like we have purposely gone OUT OF THE WAY to fight anyone but them..

Congress, whether Democratic or Republican, has been a rubber stamp for Bush's insane , possibly treasonous policies and should be ashamed of itself.

[jimdog1954]

Treasonous? The reason we haven't captured or killed OBL yet is because his daddy is a long-time business partner with the Boooosh crime family. "The Family" has sold out the vital, strategic interests of the American people in order to preserve a financial relationship. That sir, is the very definition of treason.