Musharraf has made his choice, perferring power and stability over democracy and liberty. It's time for us to make ours, or suffer the consequences of hypocrisy. The situation in Pakistan is both serious and complicated, but one certainty is that enemies, allies and fence-squatters alike are watching how the United States reacts.

For many years the Bush team has made the argument that the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were necessary to reverse the Cold War stategy whereby Western nations chose stability over liberty in the Middle East.

"Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe," President Bush said in November 2003, "because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty." Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice reiterated in September 2005, "For 60 years, we often thought that we could achieve stability without liberty in the Middle East. And ultimately, we got neither."

They were right then. It's time to be right now.

One understands the dilemma and contradictory view, most recently aired by Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte, that should Musharraf fall it may not bring in an era of Bhutto-led democracy, but rather empower the very Islamic fascists with whom we're at war. But given a choice in this no-win scenario, at least stay true to your founding values. We have far more to lose than a strongman in Central Asia.

Here's a related commentary from the Wall Street Journal:

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf says he imposed a state of emergency to limit terror attacks. Then why is he arresting so many nonterrorists?

Beginning Saturday, the main targets of police have been human rights workers and Mr. Musharraf's political opponents. While precise figures are hard to come by, more than 1,500 people -- mostly lawyers who participated in anti-Musharraf protests -- are thought to be incarcerated, either in their homes or in jails.

Topping the detainee list is Asma Jahangir, the Lahore-based head of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. Ms. Jahangir, a lawyer who is also a United Nations' special rapporteur on freedom of religion, agitated publicly for an independent judiciary and has represented the families of "disappeared" political dissidents. She was placed under a 90-day "preventative" house arrest on Saturday in Lahore.

Next comes Aitzaz Ahsan, president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, a member of Parliament and a former law minister. Mr. Ahsan, who defended former Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry earlier this year when Mr. Musharraf sacked him, stood up at a press conference Saturday and denounced the state of emergency. Mr. Ahsan is now in Adiala Jail near Rawalpindi.

Then there's Ali Ahmed Kurd, another lawyer for former Chief Justice Chaudhry, who human rights groups claim is now under the supervision of the Inter-Services Intelligence agency. Other lawyers in that case, including Munir Malik and Tariq Mahmood -- both former presidents of the Supreme Court Bar -- have also been arrested.

Other detainees include Javed Hashmi, the acting president of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's party; Imran Khan, a famous cricketer and leader of a new, small political party; and hundreds of workers for Jamaat-e-Islami, a large religious party. Mr. Khan managed to give the slip to his minders at his home and is now on the run.

If Mr. Musharraf wants to fight terrorism and move Pakistan toward democracy, arresting democrats and lawyers is an odd way of doing so. By targeting members of civil society, he's weakening the very forces that would have supported him had he moved forward with a power-sharing arrangement with Benazir Bhutto. Instead, he's angering the country's middle class and empowering militants.

Labels: Afghanistan, al qaeda, bhutto, defending liberty, National Defense, pakistan

Last week Benazir Bhutto returned to promote a power-sharing arrangement with Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Because Bhutto is 1) a woman, and 2) not an Islamic fanatic she was greeted with a bombing that killed 136 Pakistanis. Shame on the Islamic militants who committed murder, right? Oh, no! Not to Ann Curry of NBC's Today Show.

Instead, Ms. Curry took Bhutto to task with hysterical browbeating for daring to return to her country's politics. The "interview" Ann Curry conducted with Benazir Bhutto was mostly accusatory rhetoric and is both shameful and a telling statement about our mainstream media. I'm not exactly sure what Curry's point was. Mark Finkelstein opines that Curry's tone was "an over-the-top emotionalism that had the show's news anchor lurching from shouted accusations to the verge of tears."

CURRY: If you had not returned, these women would have their husbands, they would have their children. These 140 people [Curry's voice breaking] would be alive, these 500 people would not have been wounded. Do you regret coming back now, seeing what has happened? You knew it was going to happen.

BENAZIR BHUTTO: I knew an attempt would be made.

CURRY: So, you knew that people would be at risk!

BHUTTO: I knew that people would be at risk.

CURRY [shouting]: So was it worth that risk, given what has happened?

...CURRY: This was a very slow-moving motorcade, surrounded by millions of people. Did you make the right choice [pause for dramatic effect, then shouting again] TO COME BACK IN THIS WAY?

BHUTTO: Ann, I find this question very uncomfortable.

CURRY: Of course you do, it's a painful question.

BHUTTO: I'll tell you why. It means that terrorists can dictate the agenda.
I guess Ms. Curry's point is if we would just elect a bunch of illiberal, theocratic extremists who dictate Islamic Sharia-law to every aspect of our life we'd finally have the "peace" all the left-wing appeasers have been dreaming about since the death of their last utopia called Communism. But wait... last time I checked the Palestinians did just that and these days Islamic radicals from Hamas are killing Islamic radicals from Fatah... never mind then.

Labels: bhutto, defending liberty, media bias, pakistan