A Foreign Policy Nightmare

Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction, Iran's nuclear weapons are merely a potentiality at this point, but Pakistan has nuclear weapons that work (yes, they have been tested). The meltdown in Pakistan is being called a "foreign policy nightmare" by the New York Times, which makes me ask "so why is the story otherwise being underplayed?":

General Musharraf’s move to seize emergency powers and abandon the Constitution left Bush administration officials close to their nightmare: an American-backed military dictator who is risking civil instability in a country with nuclear weapons and an increasingly alienated public.

The Bush Administration tried to head off Musharraf's declaration of an emergency by threatening Musharraf with cutting off military aid ($10 billion since 9/11) and Musharraf essentially has called Bush's bluff. The U.S. appears to have everything to lose and very little ability to influence the course of events.

The best way to get past the media filter on this story is to watch Musharraf's speech (and read an English translation of the Urdu parts) at the blog Chapati Mystery. As commenter Akbar trenchantly summarizes the speech:

1) It is difficult to fight extremism with enlightened moderation so I am escalating to Enlightened extremism, meaning decapitating the supreme court and other institutions of civil society including press

2) Judiciary has become an arm of terrorist and is responsible for bomb blasts after releasing 61 terrorists (a compelling point but now that judiciary is neutralized we shall see what happens to bomb blasts).

3) Press by siding with courts and terrorists has invited this treatment on itself.

4) I am imposing something between emergency and Martial law to complete the third and final phase of democratization as envisioned in October 1999 (George Orwell will be proud).

In a highly relevant essay by Prof. Phillip Cunningham, the author quotes historian Herbert Bix as comparing the United States under Bush II to Tojo Japan at the time of World War II, based on our willful disregard of international law, pursuit of diplomacy by force, and failure to account for war criminality. Another comparison is our choice of who we regard as loyal and valuable allies. If it continues to include this particular megaomaniacal dictator, that becomes another point of comparison.