People throughout Pakistan mourned the loss of Benazir Bhutto, the opposition leader in Pakistan, after she was assassinated December 27, 2007. Her death marks a huge increase in violence in a nation where the pro-U.S. government is already in turmoil for having supported the United States in its War on Terror.
Bhutto, “considered by Western leaders and her many supporters to have been the best hope for bringing stability and full democracy back to Pakistan,” according to the Chicago Tribune, leaves a power vacuum for the Pakistan People’s Party. Her death also leaves the Bush administration with “severely limited options there [in Pakistan].”
The continued reliance on Pervez Musharraf has put the White House in a seemingly bad position in regards to the current foreign policy concerning the Middle East. The real issue here is that the United States must try to retain the allies that it has in the most volatile area of the world, especially while the U.S. still maintains a significant troop level in Iraq and Afghanistan. The debate over Musharraf’s “questionable” leadership of Pakistan is actually pointless as far as domestic opinion in the United States is concerned.
Musharraf has remained the United States’ staunchest Middle Eastern ally as we try to complete our military operations in that region. His suspension of Pakistan’s democratic process almost two months ago was a necessary evil in a country that remains largely divided by ethnic and religious lines. Despite Musharraf remaining committed to helping the United States win the War on Terror while maintaining peace in Pakistan, the assassination of Bhutto has placed Musharraf between the proverbial rock and a hard place.
Has Musharraf been the model of democratic influence? No, he hasn’t really been such a political leader, but then again he is only doing what he can with the resources he has at his disposal. One of the more important reasons he remains in power today is that he can still guarantee, despite having stepped down as army chief, the security of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. This security is pivotal because Pakistan remains the only known Islamic controlled, nuclear-enabled nation in the world. This is especially true when one considers that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda are extremist Muslim factions that are opposed to democratic rule anywhere in the world.
So now one must consider the possibility that Musharraf is deposed during the riots that have followed Bhutto’s death. The safety of the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan and the implication of having someone come into power that is not allied with the United States are paramount now for the White House. Bhutto’s reputation for strong, even vehement opposition to radical Islam would have placed her in a precarious situation had she been elected prime minister for a third time or president for a first time. More so, it would have placed U.S. military personnel in greater peril in a region that does not want the United States there.
On the one hand, we can allow the persistence of an evil we already know. We can support Musharraf as he supports us while we work cooperatively to beat terrorism in the region where it takes root. We can accept the democratic process however, it can start and continue growing if at least there is democracy to be had. We can help restore stability to the region with friends rather than alone.
On the other hand, we could just hand it over to the terrorists.