Pull My Finger
Most troubling detail about the accelerated hunt for Osama is the delicate position of Pervez Musharraf as an un-elected leader of Pakistan. It’s easy to say “no deal was made” regarding the recent flurry of activity by the posse because his symbiotic relationship with President Bush is so obvious that nothing need be said. Musharraf needs to keep stiff-arming the Shiite majority in Pakistan as mush as Paul Bremer does in Iraq. Both men have survived two assassinations attempts in recent months.
That’s not as impressive as Gerald Ford, who survived two assassination attempts in less than 3 weeks during September, 1975, and admittedly Osama’s gang is at least as frightening as Charlie Manson’s, but neither of those cults represent a large unhappy majority.
However, The Shi’a Muslims do, in both Iraq and Pakistan. Before the pivotal year of 1492 in Spain (Expulsion of the Jews, the capture of Granada, the discovery of the New World – a year easily more decisively historic than 1968, some say), quiet infiltration was the key to Islamic imperialism. Advance, but do not assimilate.
That sounds horribly politically incorrect, but it has always been the way of suppressed political majorities. Go with the flow, look for an opening, and advance ever so slightly. It is called survival.
Back at the ranch – I mean Pakistan – Pervez must go through the motions of a leading a diligent manhunt but he’s a walking dead man as soon as he succeeds. He knows that. Bush knows that. Bremer knows that - and we don’t have the resources to protect Musharraf 100%. But still, he is practically unknown in US domestic politics, therefore expendable, and getting Osama would practically guarantee Bush’s reelection. The allure of that short-term gain might overrule longer-term wisdom.
I’m no fan of domino theories, except the one that says Chubby Checker took his pseudonym as a tribute to Fats Domino, but the dominoes are lining up. I’m no fan of conspiracy theories either. I don’t even particularly like wave theory or the theory of evolution, but this is not a theory. It is a potential scenario of the type you really want to believe the state department occasionally conjures up to examine planned appropriate responses for each contingency (rather than "wing it" as each consequence occurs inevitably like falling dominoes). It’s a little like chess, maybe more like Go. It's about overall strategy and right now we have some serious strategic weaknesses. Here is one troubling potential endgame:
Phaze I: Osama gets captured, the Shi’a in both Iraq and Pakistan rebel. US armed forces must commit to one or the other because they are insufficient forces to cover both squares. Most of the world, since the days of Bomber Harris, has realized that things that are dropped from the sky and go “boom!” are useful for terrorizing the civilians, but are of little use strategically. Though they do make politicians feel good because they can say they are “inflicting damage,” eventually you must commit your real live humans to one square or another.
Iraq represents the recent spoils, lending it heavy political mojo, and Pakistan is at best a fair-weather friend (look at the expedient and emotional reflexive pardon of Khan). So if “my main man” Musharraf is assassinated, a temporary victory could still be claimed. He was a brave man, he was an honorable man, he helped us nab Osama, and Pakistan now has the example of Iraq to follow towards truth, justice, and the Kurds and whey, etc.
But Pakistan, with 30-50 nukes (and an apparent enthusiasm to share them) will slowly fall to the Shiite majority unless someone intervenes. Who do you suppose those nukes are aimed at?
Phaze II: India and Pakistan have resumed talking to each other (much like American and Japanese envoys were in early December 1941), even playing cricket (and what could be more gentlemanly than that?), but there is still this troublesome little wedge of land called Kashmir. It is not going to disappear, not right away anyway, and with radicals taking charge in Pakistan there is a real potential of having two nuclear powers squaring off.
Phaze III: The troubling thing about a map of Kashmir is not the border between India (maybe 50-100 nukes) and Pakistan (30-50, recently tested 2,000 km delivery system) - it is the eastern border wrapped around by China. China helped settle the last dispute over Kashmir in a peaceful manner, but with US Troops committed to preserving an Iraqi victory to guarantee reelection of Bush, they might not be as patient this time. 100 battles, 100 victories. Timing isn’t everything; it’s the only thing, as football coaches and conductors of major symphony orchestras like to say.
With a separatist referendum due in Taiwan that will certainly rile China, it’s the perfect season to stir the stew. Wait for Pakistan to attack India. If nuclear, wait for the predictable MAD retaliation, and possibly use a little nuclear intervention to end it all mercifully, if necessary - then invade Taiwan while the dust is still clearing. They probably won’t bother with Korea, Kim Jong-il is just too fucking weird for even the Chinese, (though South Korea is still a pearl that might someday help complete their necklace of (nearly inevitable) Far East economic domination), but they will be applauding the emerging democracy in Iraq. To further support the War On Terror, they might even commit a few million troops in Pakistan to help contain our mutual enemy. The economic power of the world will have shifted as dramatically and subtly as it did to the good ol’ USA following WW-I.
None of this is likely, of course. It’s just one of those nightmare scenarios that you want to have covered in the game plan when your position on the board is this vulnerable.
7:19:47 PM 
|
