Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Failing Pakistan Policy 'Essentially Being Run From Cheney's Office'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 10:24 AM
Original message
Failing Pakistan Policy 'Essentially Being Run From Cheney's Office'
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/18/cheney-pakistan

Failing Pakistan Policy ‘Essentially Being Run From Cheney’s Office’

The extremely close U.S. partnership with Pakistan’s General Musharraf is has come under increasing scrutiny, as Musharraf continues to crack down on the country’s civil society and a new generation of al Qaeda leaders under Osama bin Laden have led a resurgence in Pakistan.

The Bush administration “has put itself in the embarrassing position of propping up the Muslim world’s most powerful military dictator as an essential ally in its half-baked campaign to promote democracy throughout the Muslim world,” the New York Times editorialized last week. “Washington needs to disentangle America, quickly, from the general’s damaging embrace.”

In yesterday’s Washington Post, respected Pakistan analyst Ahmed Rashid explained a key problem with current U.S. policy:

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. Anne W. Patterson, the new U.S. ambassador to Islamabad, is an expert on Latin American “drugs and thugs”; Richard A. Boucher, the assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, is a former department spokesman who served three tours in Hong Kong and China but never was posted in South Asia. “They know nothing of Pakistan,” a former senior U.S. diplomat said.

Current and past U.S. officials tell me that Pakistan policy is essentially being run from Cheney’s office. The vice president, they say, is close to Musharraf and refuses to brook any U.S. criticism of him. This all fits; in recent months, I’m told, Pakistani opposition politicians visiting Washington have been ushered in to meet Cheney’s aides, rather than taken to the State Department.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Cheney needs to be arrested for treason. Soon. Today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. Rec'd. What a failure, just like *. They can't be gone too soon for me. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
partylessinOhio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. Not yet enough to impeach the tandem team of evil, Madame Squeaker?


    Iraq now ranked second among world's failed states
    Reuters - 1 hour, 23 minutes ago

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iraq has emerged as the world's second most unstable country, behind Sudan, more than four years after President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. invasion to topple Saddam Hussein, according to a survey released on Monday.

    The 2007 Failed States Index, produced by Foreign Policy magazine and the Fund for Peace, said Iraq suffered a third straight year of deterioration in 2006 with diminished results across a range of social, economic, political and military indicators. Iraq ranked fourth last year.

    Afghanistan, another war-torn country where U.S. and NATO forces are battling a Taliban insurgency nearly six years after a U.S.-led invasion, was in eighth place.

    "Iraq and Afghanistan, the two main fronts in the global war on terror, both suffered over the past year," a report that accompanied the figures said.

    "Their experiences show that billions of dollars in development and security aid may be futile unless accompanied by a functioning government, trustworthy leaders, and realistic plans to keep the peace and develop the economy." ...

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070618/ts_nm/iraq_usa_states_dc;_ylt=AjH3B__ZEc4sRANfAry.B7.s0NUE



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. It has become apparent to everyone in the reality-based community
that national freedom from imperial occupation is more important to indigenous people than is economic or personal security. The peoples of of the "Greater Middle East" are evidently prepared to fight to the death for their national freedom. Personal "freedom" under a foreign occupation is apparently not an acceptable trade-off. The US appears to be willing to kill-off whole populations of people just to...well...do whatever it is that they are actually doing. No real explanations regarding the actual reasons for the various occupations have been forthcoming from the current US dictatorship and none or likely. The only reasonable outcome for this situation is massive death and ongoing destruction. Bush smiles and gets wood...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. grrrrrrooolllllll
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. Of course, everything Midas Cheney touches turns to shit, but let's examine
the reasons WHY he's allowing Pakistan to go down the shitter. Is an increasingly militant, terrorism-supporting Pakistan going to menace (and thus contain) India? Does a resurgent Al Qaeda in Pakistan create ongoing opportunities for our military presence in the Middle East? Or is this sheer incompetence? Going to have to ponder this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-18-07 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
7. "impeachment" shouldn't be our first response to this -- Pakistan is a NUCLEAR power
yes, they need to be impeached -- but that can't be our only response to every new outrage. at some point (now would be a good time), we need to just assume impeachment is the only moral response and continue the work of examining what's at stake right here, right now should our "only moral response" not bear fruit.

this article makes it sound like (begs us to assume) there's no Pakistani expertise in the south asia bureau b/c of some oversight or incompetence. come on -- there's no expertise b/c Cheney doesn't want any oversight. Pakistan has been a keystone of this mess from the beginning.

Pakistan has a history of being on the brink of civil war and destabilizing Asia. What strategic interests are served here? Given that Cheney is the puppetmaster -- what's his goal?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC