What Should The United States Do About Pakistan?
Musharraf's move are especially troubling to the United States and the Bush Administration because Pakistan has been embraced as an ally in the "War on Terror" ever since the 9/11 attacks. President Bush needs Musharraf to keep control of the lawless lands around the Afghanistan-Pakistan border--an area many believe contains Osama Bin Laden. Plus, an end to Musharraf could mean the rise of an Islamic-extremist government in Pakistan. (Don't forget that Pakistan has nuclear weapons.)
The dilemma all of this poses for U.S. foreign policy is being roundly discussed in the blogosphere. The best online discussion of America's role in Pakistan is happening at the PostGlobal blog (a joint venture of the Washington Post and Newsweek). Columnist David Ignatius touched off the debate when he wrote, "Changing Pakistan is a job for Pakistanis, and the more we meddle, the more likely we are to get things wrong." Many experts have responded, including Daoud Kattab who says, "U.S. cannot wash its hands of Pakistan."
On The Washington Note blog, Sameer Lalwani said Senator Joe Biden looked "presidential" in laying out a four point plan for how the United States should respond to the crisis in Pakistan. The plan includes, "...large, unconditional financial support for non-security projects such as schools, roads, clinics, etc; conditioning of security aid on performance; support for judicial, political, and good government reforms; and finally and increase in public diplomacy and high impact support."
But over at the Foreign Policy Passport blog, Blake Hounshell says Joe Biden is "peddling pie-in-the-sky ideas."
Finally, a very good video debate on the U.S. role in Pakistan features Washington Note founder Steve Clemons and Eli Lake of the New York Sun.

