![]() |
By Teresa Albano (about the author) Page 1 of 5 page(s)
For OpEdNews: Teresa Albano - Writer
identity meets regional influences. However, it does not seem to be at a
crossroads, as some have described, between a nuclear-armed democratic
state vs. a nuclear-armed failed state.
The Taliban's emergence as an armed force in Pakistan has led the Obama
administration to prioritize Pakistan along with its neighbor
Afghanistan as a top foreign policy challenge.
The Obama administration is sending more troops to Afghanistan in an
attempt to stop the Taliban's growth, and has used drone attacks inside
Pakistan against Taliban operatives. As a result of the military
operations, the number of civilian deaths in both countries has risen,
thereby fueling anger at the U.S. and driving people to the Taliban's
side.
Obama faces opposition to his unfolding military initiatives in the
region. Antiwar Democrats insist there needs to be an "exit strategy"
and much more aid for development controlled by the Afghans and
Pakistanis themselves than for military hardware.
Obama will also face opposition from right-wingers who had thrown
their lot in with dictators like Pervez Musharaff and who are now helping to
whip up the idea of Pakistan as a "failed state."
Debunking 'failed state-ism'
Corporate-owned media have trumpeted, almost hysterically, the idea that
Pakistan's nuclear weapons are on the brink of falling into Taliban
hands.
While the security situation is serious especially for the Pakistanis
caught in the violence more reasonable voices insist that Pakistan is
not a failed state.
There are many government institutions functioning in Pakistan. For
example, the Pakistani judiciary system functions, after a huge recent
struggle for its "independence" and integrity.
Arguing that the failed-state-alarmism is being pushed by some forces
within Pakistan, professor and analyst Juan Cole categorize the claim as "frankly
ridiculous" that "some rural Pushtun tribesmen turned Taliban are about
to sweep into Islamabad and overthrow the government of Pakistan" with
the government's ready, and well-armed military.
Cole believes that the deposed president and former U.S. ally, Pervez
Musharraf, may be behind the alarmism, along with "civilian politicians
in Islamabad, who want to extract more money from the U.S. to fight the
Taliban that they are secretly also bribing to attack Afghanistan."
Rejecting extremism
The Pakistani people have rejected both dictatorship and Taliban-type
extremism in the last couple of years. In 2007, after Musharraf dismissed
Pakistan's chief justice, a tidal wave of protest ensued, eventually
leading to the election of a civilian government headed by Pakistan
Peoples Party (the party of slain-leader Benazir Bhutto) and the
resignation in August 2008 of Musharraf.
In the February 2008 elections, extremist right-wing clerical parties
got even lower vote totals than the tiny percentage won by Musharraf's
party.
This is not to say that there aren't political wheelings and dealings
between Pakistani power centers, including the civilian government
headed by Bhutto's widower Zardari, the army and Pakistan's
intelligence service (ISI), and the elite land-owning families and
external forces that sow division, backwardness and confusion.
www.pww.org
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
| No comments |
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |