Pakistan: Who Saw This Coming?

Just about everyone but the White House and the State Department, it looks like.

No, that's not fair... of course they saw it coming; they just didn't really have the time to spend on the fact that

• one of the world's eight nuclear powers,
• next door to India, a fellow nuclear power who's contributing greatly to the fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan, thus pissing off those in Pakistan who support the Taliban,
  
• ruled by a general who seized power in a coup,
• (and he's the good guy, if you don't count exiled former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, who can't even enter the country without an attempt on her life)
• a good proportion of whose people support the Taliban and view Osama bin Laden as a hero while burning George Bush in effigy (sure, he's not my favorite person, either, but he ranks a lot higher on my list than Osama... not saying much, I know)
• who most likely are sheltering bin Laden, if he's still alive, as well as other top Al Qaida leadership, not because Musharraf wants to, but because he can't control entire regions of his country,
• which recently have come to include his own capital.

So now Musharraf's declared martial law, and speculation is that it has more to do with an upcoming supreme court decision that would have prohibited him from being re-elected in January, than with any other of the overwhelming problems facing his country.

So far, all we've had is a "statement" from our secretary of state, the same person who threw around the term "mushroom cloud" back when it was oh-so-safely hypothetical...

Quote du Jour: Tony Blair on his hopes of personal redemption...

... and a salvaging of his legacy...
... or, more precisely, a peace deal between Olmert and Abbas.

from "Late Edition" this morning.

And so, for all sorts of reasons, strategic, tactical, immediate, long-term, we've got to just make this work. And however difficult it is for the leaders, in a way, this is the toughest option at one level for them but also the surest way to show people the leadership they want to have shown.

And now let's welcome our very special guest, "a petty and cruel dictator."

I've always been a fan of dwelling comfortably with ambiguity, but Columbia University's president seemed to take it to an extreme today by inviting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and then discussing him in the introduction pretty much like he wasn't in the room (he had a translator, you know.)

Given the quality of Ahmadinejad's public discourse thus far, just not inviting him would have been a pretty decent decision.

He did offer some historical perspectives that were of merit, like pointing out the hypocrisy of the U.S. with regard to the nuclear issue (to applause) and our tendency to keep memories of the hostage crisis alive while burying those of our complicity in several decades' worth of intervention in Iran, from coups to Saddam's eight-year war against them.

However -- and effusive, flowery language aside -- he also said a bunch of stuff that was frankly unbelievable (painting his nation as a gentle, peace-craving haven of democracy where the press is entirely free, Jews are beloved, and women enjoy dizzy heights of freedom) and some stuff that was just plain nutty, which inevitably casts a shadow of discredit on the entire speech, even the snippets which may have contributed in some small way to a dialog. He and his Western Hemisphere counterpart Chavez are pretty good at doing that.

The excerpt below is probably the nuttiest part (and no, Mr. President, they weren't laughing with you for your remark about living in a straights-only zone. You have your 10 percent non-straights like everyone else, unless you've executed them all out of existence, which is the question you dodged and haven't yet answered. And I'm not sure all of the women in your country consider being "exempt from many responsibilities" as a sign of respect. We tried that argument in the West during the Victorian days, and it didn't quite hold up.)

AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country.

(LAUGHTER)

We don't have that in our country.

(AUDIENCE BOOING)

AHMADINEJAD (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it.

(LAUGHTER)

But, as for women, maybe you think that being a woman is a crime. It's not a crime to be a woman.

Women are the best creatures created by God. They represent the kindness, the beauty that God instills in them. Women are respected in Iran. In Iran, every family who is given a girl is given -- in every Iranian family who has a girl, they are 10 times happier than having a son. Women are respected more than men are.

They are exempt from many responsibilities. Many of the legal responsibilities rest on the shoulders of men in our society because of the respect, culturally given, to women, to the future mothers.

New Sudan Sanctions: A Different Perspective

Not everyone agrees that the U.S.'s unilateral sanctions are the best approach. My sense remains that they are necessary, but the truth is, I don't have a clue what's actually going on over there, so how could I possibly say for certain?

This guy, the Sudanese ambassador, John Ukec Lueth, a former government dissident now representing the so-called unity government, spoke rather passionately to the National Press Club yesterday about his perspective:

We just want the people of the United States to know that their government is going the wrong way. The situation in Darfur is more complex. You know, don't run away with the issue of genocide. We do not like any woman to be raped. We do not like anybody to be killed. These are our brothers and sisters. We are more concerned about them than anybody who pretends to say that. If they have a fiduciary interest, they should stop that. They should think that, "These are our brothers. They are our brothers and our sisters."

And in the end, I was fighting the Sudanese government. I am back now. They embraced me, and we are trying to build a new Sudan. That's what we said. And as a result, leave the custody of our people in our hands. Leave the solutions of the problem in our hands and help us where we ask for.

We have asked for the African Union to come and help us. Let them come. We will determine on the ground how many troops we need. We will also provide them with what we have. And we will have the U.N. and the African Union, as well as the Europeans, to help us also.

We appreciate also the help that the United States has given us. They have spent $1.3 billion in Darfur and southern Sudan. We do not ignore that.

We must go on the right track. And this unilateral taking of decisions is not a good thing in diplomacy, in good neighborlihood. You know, even though a country is so small, like my country, it has its guts. It belongs -- it is -- we own that country. It is our home. And we cannot be overtrodden about it.

Anything else?

I appreciate you all coming. I am available any time. If you want to know more, I will give you more. I'm around here. I came here to do this. And I want people out there -- you are the medium for getting the truth out there. You know better of how things should be constructive and objective.

I believe most of you are objective. That's what made you come here this afternoon. And thank you for coming. Thank you very much.

Obama to world: Don't give up on us yet.

Barack Obama* at a campaign event today in Philadelphia
*Note that this quote does not indicate an endorsement of any particular candidate, just an endorsement of these particular sentiments. ;)

Listen, when George Bush steps down, the entire world is going to breathe a sigh of relief.

(APPLAUSE)

And we will have an opportunity to go before the world, to stand before them and say, we are back; that we want to work with you, that we want to work to deal with the transnational threats of climate change and nuclear proliferation.

We want to work with you to deal with global poverty. We want to end the genocide in Darfur.

(APPLAUSE)

We want to bring an end to malaria and HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa.

And while we're at it, we want to close Guantanamo and we want to restore habeas corpus...

(APPLAUSE)

... because that's who we are. We want to lead not just with our military but with our values and with our ideals.

Pat Leahy: You're funny, Al, but not haha funny.

At today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Department of Justice, Chairman Patrick Leahy questions Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on the details regarding a Canadian citizen sent to Syria to be tortured.

GONZALES: I think General Ashcroft confirmed this publicly, that there were assurances sought that he would not be tortured from Syria.

LEAHY: Attorney General... (derisive chuckle) ... I'm sorry. I don't mean to treat this lightly. We knew damn well, if he went to Canada, he wouldn't be tortured. He'd be held. He'd be investigated.

We also knew damn well, if he went to Syria, he'd be tortured. And it's beneath the dignity of this country, a country that has always been a beacon of human rights, to send somebody to another country to be tortured.

You know, and I know, that has happened a number of times, in the past five years, by this country. It is a black mark on us. It has brought about the condemnation of some of our closest and best allies. They have made those comments both publicly and privately to the president of the United States and others.

And it is easy for us to sit here comfortably in this room knowing that we're not going to be sent off to another country to be tortured, to treat it as though, well, Attorney General Ashcroft says we've got assurances.

Assurances from a country that we also say, now, we can't talk to them because we can't take their word for anything?

GONZALES: Well, Senator, I...

LEAHY: I'm somewhat upset.

GONZALES: Yes, sir, I can tell. But before you get more upset, perhaps you should wait to receive the briefing...

LEAHY: How long?

GONZALES: I'm hoping that we can get you the information next week.

LEAHY: Well, Attorney General, I'll tell you what I'll do: I'll meet you halfway on this. I'll wait next week for that briefing. If we don't get it, I guarantee you there will be another hearing on this issue.

Canadians have been our closest allies -- longest unguarded frontier in the world. They're justifiably upset. They're wondering what's happened to us. They're wondering what's happened to us.

Now, you know and I know, we're a country with a great, great tradition of protecting people's individual liberties and rights. You take an oath of office to do that; I take an oath of office to do that.

I believe, in my basic core nature, in that. My grandparents, when they immigrated to this country, believed that. Let us not create more terrorism around the world by telling the world that we cannot keep up to our basic standards and beliefs.

So I'll wait a week. I'll wait a week, but I won't wait more than a week for that briefing.

Britain, our bestest friends in the world...

... don't really seem to trust our supreme leader.

"The United States is seen as a threat to world peace by its closest neighbors and allies, with Britons saying President George W. Bush poses a greater danger than North Korea's Kim Jong-il, a survey found on Friday."