Security should come before democracy in Pakistan

Following the Oct. 18 suicide bombings in Karachi, Pakistan, a New York Times editorial endorsed U.S. support for former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the target of the attacks, in her attempt to reestablish democracy in the country. While the return of democracy to Pakistan is important, the United States should first aid the establishment of security in this polarized nation. Violence is suffocating political, economic and social progress as militant forces attempt to radicalize a moderate Islamic nation. Immediate restoration of democracy could lead to the election of these radicals in the January parliamentary elections.

As the U.S. should have learned from Hezbollah in Lebanon, legitimately elected reactionaries can worsen global safety and stability. Instead of blindly pushing for democracy, the United States should maneuver the country’s complicated political environment and provide Bhutto and other moderate allies the resources necessary to secure their country from terrorists and insurgents.

Bhutto is no saint, and a record of corruption will challenge her legitimacy as she attempts to return to Pakistani government. Nevertheless, her widespread popularity, especially among the poor, makes her a critical factor for security and stability in Pakistan. Bhutto and General Pervez Musharraf wield the influence to preserve moderate democracy, but the United States must oversee their progress closely. A political deal between the two leaders could quickly collapse, and enemies of Musharraf and Bhutto will pounce on any opportunity to destabilize Pakistan.

President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should move Pakistan higher on their list of national security priorities. With the threat of a nuclear Iran, a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan and continued challenges in Iraq, U.S. foreign policy may devote insufficient time to aiding Pakistani stability. This would be a mistake, and the repercussions could haunt our country for many more years. The War on Terror is futile if Pakistan is not safe.

The ills of Pakistan are threefold. First, as exemplified by the recent conflict between Musharraf and the Pakistani Supreme Court and by the arrest order for former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif during his return from exile, political disarray stifles progress in the country. The world must wait apprehensively until January’s parliamentary elections to see if Bhutto and Musharraf can establish order.

Secondly, Pakistani development needs have been placed on the backburner. Education expenditure rates are among the world’s lowest. And this year, the country’s world rank in ease of doing business dropped three places, from 73 to 76, according to the World Bank. Poor public education leads to the creation of radical madrassas, and continued lack of economic opportunity will only propagate the radicalization of Pakistan’s poor.

Thirdly, both politics and development are overshadowed by the ominous lack of security in the country. Al-Qaeda and Taliban insurgencies simmer near Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, and cities such as Karachi have become death-traps. Without security, economic development remains at a standstill. Few business owners will leave their shops open in violent environments, and continued unemployment breeds discontent. Furthermore, political progress could be quickly neutralized with the assassination of a single high-level leader.

If Pakistan is overtaken by radical Islamists, the threat of terror to the United States, Europe and India will escalate. The military, diplomatic, and financial means of establishing security in Pakistan should be determined in a joint collaboration between the United States, India, Pakistan and other interested parties such as the European Union. America cannot let one foreign policy disaster weaken its acuity in addressing other serious national security concerns, but it must also understand that overt engagement in Pakistan will inflame isolationists in the U.S. as well as radicals in the Middle East.

The New York Times editorial staff is correct in endorsing U.S. support of Pakistani moderates, but America cannot aid democracy in Pakistan without first assuring its security. The means for doing so merit significant deliberation from high-level officials in the U.S. government.

Apoorva Shah is a Sid Richardson College senior.

Back to top