The Pakistan Predicament: A No Win Choice

In the Democrats Las Vegas debate, the most interesting question was posed by moderator, Wolf Blitzer.  He asked the candidates [… in foreign policy] “which do you consider most important, the protection of human rights or our national security?”  The candidates all had some difficulty answering the question.  However, recent events in Pakistan have brought that hypothetical question into the real world. 

What should the United States do with Pakistani President, General Pervez Musharraf, and with Pakistan?  Pakistan is our only route for getting military supplies and aid into Afghanistan.  General Musharraf has been a staunch ally in our fight against al Qaeda.  We have invested $10 billion in aid to the Pakistani military. 

To make the situation even more spicy, we know that Pakistan has nuclear weapons.  We don’t know how many or where they are, but we know they have them and that some Pakistanis are willing to share nuclear technology with people and governments that don’t like us very much.  Evidence of this is that at one time nuclear programs in North Korea, Iran, Libya (now defunct) all received help from Pakistan.    

President Bush has made the spread of democracy a cornerstone of his foreign policy.  Yet, it is clear, from recent events, that General Musharraf is more interested in staying in power than in the democratic rights of the Pakistani people. 

So the United States is faced with this lose-lose choice.  We can threaten to withdraw our support from Musharraf and stop our aid to the Pakistani military, unless he ends the state of emergency, releases the opposition party prisoners he has arrested, and holds free elections.  If free elections are held in Pakistan we really have no idea what or who will come to power.  It is worth remembering here what happened when we insisted on elections in Palestine last year.  On the other hand, we can continue to support Musharraf and his tyrannical rule.  The latter, of course, does violence to the spread of democracy, a major component of the Bush foreign policy. 

There is no good solution here.  President Bush must provide a real-world answer to the hypothetical question Blitzer put to the democratic presidential candidates.  Which is more important aiding our national security or promoting human rights?  I’m really glad that I don’t have to come up with a solution.  

This whole situation makes me earnestly wish that our next president has a good deal more experience and knowledge of foreign affairs than this one has demonstrated.  The one absolutely clear conclusion we get from this whole affair is that the Bush foreign policy has been a complete disaster, and particularly so where the Muslim world is concerned.

Technorati Tags: Foreign Policy Musharraf Nuclear Weapons Pakistan Politics President Bush