You know, when Christopher Hitchens and George Bush agree that something was a tragedy, it's probably at least one. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto is no more tragic in and of itself than any other murder...most of which are tragic. The implications for the world are a different story -- not the region, not the US effort against al Quieda, not Pakistani-Indian relations but the entire world. Bhutto represented an alternative to both the militants and the Musharraf approach. She would probably have been far more active than Musharraf in taking on the militants; she couldn't possibly be more corrupt. No one has the chops to provide that alternative. So, a country with nuclear weapons continues its slide toward Hobbsian anarchy. I had been wondering what the next disaster was going to be -- Christmas time is good for disasters and invasions -- so this one is an interesting one.
Comments