AS PAKISTAN continues to twist in the maelstrom of violence following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, it's almost anyone's guess where the country will go from here. Already the conspiracy theories as to who was responsible are mounting, with some believing it to be the work of Islamic extremists and others suspecting some kind of government connivance.
Pakistan's recent political history has been murky to say the least. Few would argue that, within the country's military and intelligence establishment, especially the Inter-Services Intelligence directorate (ISI), there are those who have been sympathetic to the Islamists.
We should not forget that the very existence of the Taliban is in part a result of the support the ISI provided in the years following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. To many ISI cadres, the prospect of Bhutto gaining a political foothold in the country would have been tantamount to Washington calling the shots over who does what in Pakistan. Indeed, Bhutto herself expressed concern over hardliners within ISI who she felt were plotting against her.
As for President Pervez Musharraf, it's hard to see what he would gain from Bhutto's slaying. He seems to have had his eyes fixed on some power-sharing deal. Now, with ever-growing numbers of Pakistanis suspicious of his intentions, and faced with the prospect of increasing instability inside the country, he will most likely be the first political casualty of the ensuing crisis.
Whoever played a part in Bhutto's death, the assassination certainly had all the hallmarks of Pakistan's al-Qaeda-linked Islamic militants. Eyewitness accounts and pictures of snipers and suicide bombers suggest a co-ordinated attack - possibly an al-Qaeda hit squad. Moreover, despite the denials of al-Qaeda leader Baitullah Mehsud that his organisation was not involved in the attack, both the Taliban and any al-Qaeda affiliates would have much to gain by Bhutto's demise.
Her pledge to crack down on militants in the Northwest Frontier Province and South Waziristan was a direct challenge to al-Qaeda and its leaders, who use these tribal regions as sanctuaries on the border with Afghanistan.
It is a simple fact that the answer to defeating the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan in great part lies in the border areas where these groups recruit, regroup and resupply.
If indeed al-Qaeda killed Bhutto, they have ensured the continued preservation of a crucial stronghold. More worrying though, they may also have begun destabilising the most crucial frontline ally in the fight against Islamic militancy.
Oh, and did I hear someone say Pakistan has nuclear bombs and missiles? David Broder wrote What Presidents Must Know in today's Washington Post.
It is a dangerous world out there, especially for those who embody the hopes of their people and freedom's friends in the places where extremism and repression are far too familiar.American foreign policy has been preoccupied with Iraq for almost five years now, and the situation in Pakistan has deteriorated during that time. Pervez Musharraf, the strongman the United States has relied upon to keep order in the country, has become -- like Vladimir Putin -- as much of a problem as a prop.
In such places as Pakistan, the next president of the United States is likely to confront the most difficult challenges of the time, and the lives of many Americans will rest on those judgments.
Yes, and in the meantime we have that great mind attuned to the pulse of world affairs George W. Bush to guide us for the next year.
Comments for this post
