Looking back at how the Pakistan situation developed

A reader emailed to remind me what I wrote just three weeks ago:

Musharraf claims the declaration of a "state of emergency" in Pakistan -- which is for all intents and purposes an imposition of martial law -- is due to terrorist threat. This, by all credible accounts, is false. Musharraf is reacting to approaching elections, an impending supreme court decision on his role in the government, and the ascension of opposing political groups, highlighted by the return of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto. [...] [T]he idea that this was some big, out-of-nowhere surprise is also totally false. Foreign policy observers have been worrying about this for a while.

Unfortunately, according to WaPo, there's literally no one at the wheel with this issue:

"The problem is exacerbated by a dramatic drop-off in U.S. expertise on Pakistan. Retired American officials say that, for the first time in U.S. history, nobody with serious Pakistan experience is working in the South Asia bureau of the State Department, on State's policy planning staff, on the National Security Council staff or even in Vice President Cheney's office."

The article says "even in" the VP's office, of course, because that's where US foreign policy is run, so apparently it's the most important place to have experts.

More after the jump... If you thought it was bad that the US government had a "dramatic drop-off" in expertise three weeks ago, it's now a full-blown disaster. A few commenters were unhappy that I said the Bush administration deserves some blame for this deterioration, that the US has no responsibility for this kind of thing, but *we do.* And the Bush administration does. And nothing from today gives me any confidence that the next year will contain anything but continued foreign policy blunders.

And some -- many, perhaps -- will end in tragedy, however remote or disconnected from our direct foreign policy actions. Read the rest of this post...

Bhutto and the US elections

(NOTE FROM AJ: I said in my post earlier that I was skeptical about any impact this would have on the primaries, but I've been very impressed by how well the Edwards camp has responded to the unfolding events. In his initial statement, along with the appropriate and requisite lamentations, he reminded voters that he had dealt "firsthand" with Pakistan and had "meetings with" Bhutto and Musharraf. Bringing it to an entirely new level, though, Musharraf called him today, demonstrating a level of connection between Musharraf and Edwards that I, for one, was certainly unaware of. There's occasionally criticism of Edwards for having a thin resume on foreign affairs, but this reminds people that he's player on the world stage, which can only be a plus for him.)

Chris Cillizza of the Wash Post weighs in on how Bhutto's death may impact the US election:

While it's too soon to fully gauge the effects here of Bhutto's assassination, it could well work most to Giuliani's benefit by enabling him to thrust himself back into the daily political conversation after steadily losing ground to McCain and Huckabee. With his decision to all but skip Iowa and play only at the margins in the New Hampshire primary, Giuliani has watched as the campaign in its final stages has largely passed him by.

But, with the Bhutto's death and the broader implications of the fight against terrorism worldwide likely to dominate the coverage for the next day or two (at a minimum), Giuliani immediately becomes relevant again.

The assassination coincides with Giuliani's decision to directly invoke the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in a new commercial that is running on broadcast channels in New Hampshire and Florida as well on cable nationally.

The key line? "Islamic terrorists would make a terrible mistake if they would confuse our democracy with weakness."

Giuliani must hope that the Bhutto assassination will remind voters that terrorists can strike anywhere, any time, and that with his experience as mayor of New York at the time of the 9-11 attack, he would be best qualified among all the presidential candidates to navigate those dangerous waters.

Read the rest of this post...

World markets nervous after Bhutto assassination

Oil was already high and facing bad economic news on Thursday, so it is very likely to increase once again. Investors are eager to find safe havens for the time being as they see what happens in the nuclear armed Pakistan. All of this is happening on top of an already faltering economy and softening banking industry. Read the rest of this post...

Candidates on Bhutto assassination

Statements from the big three Dems and quick-hit commentary:

Obama: "I am shocked and saddened by the death of Benazir Bhutto in this terrorist atrocity. She was a respected and resilient advocate for the democratic aspirations of the Pakistani people. We join with them in mourning her loss and stand with them in their quest for democracy and against the terrorists who threaten the common security of the world."
- Pretty tame, straightforward. He'll likely frame this as an issue demonstrating the importance of judgment in foreign policy, along the lines of his current themes.

Clinton, Edwards, Dodd and Biden after the jump...

Clinton: "I am profoundly saddened and outraged by the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, a leader of tremendous political and personal courage. I came to know Mrs. Bhutto over many years, during her tenures as Prime Minister and during her years in exile. [...] Let us pray that her legacy will be a brighter, more hopeful future for the people she loved and the country she served."
- I expected something a little more impassioned, as she apparently knew Bhutto pretty well, but she too hits the important notes. She'll frame this as demonstrating the importance of experience.

Edwards: "Benazir Bhutto was a brave and historic leader for Pakistan. Her assassination is a sad and solemn event, and our hearts go out to her family and to the Pakistani people . . . I have seen firsthand in Pakistan, and in meetings with Prime Minister Bhutto and President Musharraf, the instability of the country and the complexity of the challenges they face. At this critical moment, America must convey both strength and principle."
- This is a pretty savvy statement from Edwards, as it includes the appropriate mentions of sorrow but also includes his "firsthand" experience with Pakistan including "meetings with" Bhutto and Musharraf. A gentle reminder that his foreign policy resume perhaps isn't quite so thin as sometimes alleged.

Dodd and Biden both had solid statements as well, with the only outlier being Richardson, who called for Musharraf to step down. That is, of course, a terrible idea -- the last thing you want is a leaderless nuclear nation in a time of crisis during the lead up to likely-postponed elections. But everybody else handled this well.

A final note: the people on my teevee are already telling me this will help Hillary and Giuliani. I think that's totally ridiculous, and it's time we stop assuming that any crisis benefits the (perceived) most hawkish candidates. Plus, as I said earlier today, ultimately I'm pretty skeptical about the impact of this on the primaries. But we'll see. Read the rest of this post...

Initial policy implications of Bhutto assassination

The first thing to say about Bhutto's assassination is that any kind of rush to judgment, especially along the lines of impending doom, is probably imprudent.

In terms of policy implications, this is reflective of a massive US foreign policy blunder, in that the Bush administration, in a monumentally stupid move, shoved Bhutto down the throat of Musharraf (and the rest of Pakistan) as a savior, despite her lack of broad popular support and general reputation as corrupt. In making someone who didn't necessarily have the ability to deliver the savior for democracy in Pakistan, we simultaneously set up our own policy to fail and offered Musharraf a return to (or continued) total power in the event that our little power-sharing arrangement didn't work. We also -- though not only us -- painted a big fat target on her back. Really a debacle all the way around.

I'm not sure how much today's tragedy can be pinned on Musharraf, or even "the military" in general, other than to the extent that some military figures are working with al Qaeda and/or other extremist elements in Pakistan. There have been attacks on several of the major candidates running for office in Pakistan over the past few months, and it was really only a matter of time before one succeeded. It does appear evident that Musharraf has not helped create the proper security environment, though, obviously.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced this will have as large of an impact as many might initially think. I'm curious to see how it plays out, but rarely does one lose money betting on a quick show of power followed by domestic clampdown followed by renewed centralized authority in a military dictatorship in crisis.

Just initial impressions, though; I'll have more as this develops. Tragic, disastrous, sad . . . Read the rest of this post...

"It is almost impossible to imagine how much turmoil this is going to cause within Pakistan"

Sky News:

The Russian foreign ministry said it feared the country could descend into terrorism or civil war....

British political campaigner Mohammed Shafiq said: "This has destroyed any chance of election in Pakistan. It will cause more friction and more problems."

Sky's Asia correspondent Alex Crawford said: "It is almost impossible to imagine how much turmoil this is going to cause within Pakistan. There is going to be team of people who will want to avenge her death. There will be team of people who want to capitalise on the turbulence after her death."

Read the rest of this post...

Bhutto assassinated 12 days before elections. Was "shot at close range"

Details continue to emerge from the Bhutto assassination. From the Washington Post:

Bhutto, 54, was shot at close range as she was leaving the rally in this garrison city south of Islamabad, aides said. Immediately after the shooting, a suicide bomber detonated explosives near Bhutto's car, killing at least 15 other people.

Bhutto was rushed to a hospital with extensive wounds to her torso, her supporters said. Shortly after she arrived at the hospital, an official came out of the building and told a crowd of supporters Bhutto was dead.

Analysis of the impact of the assassination is also starting. I'm no foreign policy expert, but let's just say, it's pretty clear this isn't good for Pakistan's future:

Bhutto's death is a devastating development, coming 12 days before Pakistanis are set to vote in national parliamentary elections already marked by enormous political turmoil. President Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency in November -- a move which he said was to combat terrorism, but which was widely perceived as an effort to stave off legal challenges to his authority. U.S. military officials said last week that the terrorist group al-Qaeda increasingly is focusing its efforts in Pakistan.

Keep in mind, Pakistan is allegedly our stalwart ally in the war against terror and the fight for democracy. Read the rest of this post...

BREAKING: Benazir Bhutto is dead from attack

NBC, CNN and Fox News are reporting that Bhutto was killed in the attack earlier today.

Updated Reuters:

Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was killed in a gun and bomb attack after a rally in the city of Rawalpindi on Thursday, her party said.

"She has been martyred," said party offical Rehman Malik.

Read the rest of this post...

Pakistan's Bhutto wounded in attack at rally

Initial reports indicated Benazir Bhutto was safe following a suicide bomb attack killed several of her supporters.

However, CNN and other news outlets are now reporting that Bhutto was injured and is undergoing surgery. Reuters:

Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto was wounded in a gun and suicide bomb attack after an election rally in the city of Rawalpindi, a party security official and police said.

"She is injured," said party security official Rehman Malik. She had been taken to hospital.

Read the rest of this post...

Thursday Morning Open Thread

One week til the Iowa caucuses. Finally.

But, seriously, how can anyone focus on politics or other pending world issues when a tiger escaped from the San Francisco zoo? The Today Show is now having an in-depth -- and breathless -- discussion about whether zoos are safe. In the history of zoos in the U.S., this is apparently the first time any visitor was killed by an animal at a zoo. No matter. It is THE issue of our time: are zoos safe? Everyone wants to know.

Still one week to go til the Iowa caucuses. Reporters are already checking the weather reports because so many factors can impact turnout. (It looks good, cold but no snow or ice, according to Weather.com.)

Let's start threading the news. Read the rest of this post...

Home price decline sets new record

The last time the housing market suffered such a decline was April 1991 during Bush I. A real bunch of economic experts we have in the GOP. If the Democrats have any backbone at all (I know, I know) they will ram this down the throats of the GOP and remind voters of the disastrous economic performances during Republican administrations.

Home prices in the United States fell in October for the 10th consecutive month, declining a record 6.7 percent compared with a year ago, according to the Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller home price index.

“No matter how you look at these data, it is obvious that the current state of the single-family housing market remains grim,” said Robert Shiller, who helped create the index, in a statement Wednesday.

Read the rest of this post...

Britain says "enough"

Gordon Brown looks worse every week. His attempt to extend the so-called anti-terror laws has received a very cool reception by MPs. How much longer can Brown survive before he is shoved out of office?

Gordon Brown's hopes of securing a parliamentary majority for his plans to extend the time terrorist suspects can be detained without charge have been dealt a severe blow by a survey of Commons opinion showing only a third of MPs back tougher laws.

The survey also reveals the appetite for further anti-terror legislation among Brown's own MPs is faltering, with 48% of Labour MPs agreeing there has been too much anti-terror legislation.

Read the rest of this post...