Wobbly governments in Afghanistan and Pakistan
For just a minute, let's presume a best case in Afghanistan, the Taleban are pushed back out of the country, and the opium problem is magically improved. Then what?
The day foreign forces pull out, Karzai will be left with only his small ill equipped army to face the Taleban/extremists that would certainly begin to flow once again from the Pakistani tribal regions. Unlike Maliki, who depite all his flaws could align with the Shia militias, the "mayor of Kabul" has no such natural alliance. The minute foreign forces leave, he would be weak and alone, protected only by the "ideology of freedom" against an extremist fighting force that has been together since the early 80's.
Even with best case assumptions, I can't see a positive endgame for Afghhanistan. I don't see how foreign troops ever leave.
Also: I caught some of that Musharraf press conference yesterday, and while he was defending his actions in working with the US and the deal on the tribal regions, all I kept thinking was, "this is not a man who looks firmly in control of his country." How wobbly is the Musharraf regime?
A week ago, Peter Bergen cited a poll on CNN that 65% of Pakistanis approve of Bin Laden and don't want him caught. (Sorry, I don't have the original poll.)
The WaPo has an article on the three meeting yesterday.
The day foreign forces pull out, Karzai will be left with only his small ill equipped army to face the Taleban/extremists that would certainly begin to flow once again from the Pakistani tribal regions. Unlike Maliki, who depite all his flaws could align with the Shia militias, the "mayor of Kabul" has no such natural alliance. The minute foreign forces leave, he would be weak and alone, protected only by the "ideology of freedom" against an extremist fighting force that has been together since the early 80's.
Even with best case assumptions, I can't see a positive endgame for Afghhanistan. I don't see how foreign troops ever leave.
Also: I caught some of that Musharraf press conference yesterday, and while he was defending his actions in working with the US and the deal on the tribal regions, all I kept thinking was, "this is not a man who looks firmly in control of his country." How wobbly is the Musharraf regime?
A week ago, Peter Bergen cited a poll on CNN that 65% of Pakistanis approve of Bin Laden and don't want him caught. (Sorry, I don't have the original poll.)
The WaPo has an article on the three meeting yesterday.
posted by mikevotes at
8:15 AM
2 Comments:
Let's not forget, Musharraf came to power in a military coup and installed himself as president over the deposed democratically elected government. The US didn't make too much of a stink because the democratically elected government was backed by fundamentalist Islamists.
Now Pakistan is even more radicalized and Musharraf must tread a very careful line between appeasing the US and controlling the wrath of the masses at home.
Is Musharraf himself just months away from a coup of his own? I don't know. All I do know is that US foreign policy over the past 5.5 years has resulted in a drumbeat of radicalization in the Islamic world and spreading resentment of the west and the alienation of our traditional allies.
Ditto on Karzai.
By
-epm, at 8:52 AM
Yes and yes and yes.
I don't really know how close Musharraf is to being deposed. I also don't know the regional breakdowns of his support. Obviously in those tribal regions he is weak, but what is the penetration into the cities.
Generally, dictators are favored among the wealthy urban and hated among the rural and urban poor. This is a little different because of the religious emphasis of the resistance.
Yeah his cooperation with the US has left him in very bad stead. He was in a no win situation, buck the Us and risk going down, or resist and stand going down.
US policies have certainly resulted in increased radicalization, and western Pakistan has become the headwaters of it.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 9:27 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home