Or so says Hitchens. The most telling part of this column is the tacit endorsement that Obama has it right with regard to the need to leave on the table NATO's right to impinge on Pakistan's territory if need be. Also of note is the explanation of the name "Pakistan" itself, which is quite interesting.
I'm not sure that the U.S. is in the best position to argue for the need/right to impinge on Pakistan's turf, but if you accept that the war in Afghanistan is good, just, neccessary, or what have you - I think you would have to recognize that a primary reason the problems are escalating has to do with the Pakistani tribal areas. Of course, another issue in our protracted war in Afghanistan is highlighted in this month's Atlantic by Johnson and Mason. They point out that the counterinsurgency is thriving due to the NATO/American forces failure to properly address the local groups/clans as the primary arbiter of control in Afghanistan. They may just be on to something here.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment