Hitchens has some unkind words for Pakistan. Some of his motivation is likely his anti-theism, but he does point out the following:
“Successive U.S. administrations used to keep certifying to Congress that Pakistan was not exploiting U.S. aid (and U.S. indulgence over the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan) to build itself a nuclear weapons capacity.”
We’ve been sending a lot of checks to Pakistan (and Musharraf played us quite well, as I don’t think you can ask a leader to be too far from his people). Pakistan is not an entirely reliable partner in pursuing our aims due to the circumstances on the ground. Yet, we need Pakistani support to prevent haven across the border if the plan in Afghanistan is going to work. So, we’re making more deals and sending more checks.
He also takes a parting shot at anti-war liberals:
“American liberals can’t quite face the fact that if their man does win in November, and if he has meant a single serious word he’s ever said, it means more war, and more bitter and protracted war at that—not less.”
Part of my fear has been a sitting liberal President picking up a war and feeling pressure to act aggressively. But let’s not put more of that kind of pressure on him to spite liberalism. He’s been pretty reasonable so far in my opinion.
Also On This Site: From The CSM: ‘WIll Pakistan Military Go After Taliban In North Waziristan?’
See Also: Philip Bobbitt Discusses His Book ‘Terror And Consent’ On Bloggingheads