Pakistan is seething with Islamic fundamentalism and ethnic hatred. It is the creator of the Taliban and possesses nuclear weapons.

And now it is being called a failed state.

Great.

We were warned. Foreign policy analyst Dr. George Friedman of Statfor.com wrote several years ago that the war on terror would end in Pakistan. I remember thinking at the time that that statement sounded odd. Pakistan? Aren’t they a stable ally?

Then as recently as last week, Salim Mansour wrote in the Toronto Sun that Pakistan is already a “ruinous failed state” that risks “imploding as another Somalia or former Yugoslavia.” I thought that Mansour’s warnings sounded inflated. But he was right.

Over the weekend, Pakistan's President  Musharraf imposed martial law; a “state of emergency” to prevent the nation from, in his words, “committing suicide” and to allow him to arrest his opponents wholesale.

But Stratfor asks a cogent question:  “What exactly is this entity" that Musharraf is trying to save from suicide? Is it a future democracy or a future radical Islamic state, or will it soon cease to function as a state? I’ve gotten an earful over the years from members of the U.S. military that Pakistan plays a double game in the war on terror, posturing as our ally, and then aiding Islamic militants and tipping off al Qaeda leaders.

Pakistan's worst days could be ahead. William Rees-Mogg in the London Times asks if Pakistan “has reached the stage of being ungovernable.” There is  also talk Musharraf now faces the threat of a coup.

I confess to not understanding the depth of Pakistan’s problems, or all the risks.

But the presence of nuclear weapons in such an unstable Islamic nation sounds like trouble enough.

Bruce Riedel, the former senior director for South Asia on the National Security Council, told Newsweek, "If you were to look around the world for where Al Qaeda is going to find its bomb, it's right in their backyard."

<< LATEST ENTRIES >>