Good times.

In the FATA and NWFP areas of Pakistan: tribes are awakening to the threat the Taliban pose to their way of life. Moderate Muslim clerics have backed the Pakistani Army offensive, and many tribes are forming militias to help fight the Taliban. Even once vocal supporters have turned against them following the bombing of a mosque.





In Lebanon: the March 14th Coalition appears to have won a decisive victory in the Lebanese elections. Analysts had been suggesting, and polls indicating, that a Hezbollah-Christian coalition was posied to sweep into power. But it now appears that the pro-western March 14th Coalition has won enough seats to remain in power.




We now have to work with the Pakistani military and intelligence services to capitalize on the recent turn in events and surging momentum against the Taliban. And the Lebanese now face the struggle of putting together a working government, hopefully with fewer assassinations and car bombings than last time . . .

Combined with the Congress Party's enormous success in India in recent elections there, things have been going pretty well for moderates throughout the world. (Aside from in Europe, but who cares about that socially stagnant place?)

Pakistan on the Brink . . .

How would the US respond if an armed extremist organization only nominally supportive of certain parts of the government were inching closer to Washington D.C. and had just passed Fredricksburg, VA?

Probably not as lackadaisically as the Pakistani government seems to be acting. While they have taken the fight to the enemy in recent days, it was only after intense international and domestic pressure to do so. It's enough to make even the most ardent believer in democracy long for the days of Musharraf. You need a country to have a democracy. How can the government possibly be so relaxed about an armed challenger only 60 miles away from the capital?

First, the weak government in Pakistan offers little in the way of constraint or control over the nations military, unlike the previous regime. In a country where political power has been defined by the relationship between the military and the leader for so long, we now have Asif Ali Zadari. Enough said.

But foremost, the military is a potential challenger to the civilian government. Every inch of ground the Taliban gain weakens the civilian government, and helps to enable a greater role for the military and intelligence services in the political process. So by not fighting the Taliban, the military makes its own political position stronger. This is a dangerous game of chicken to play. If the Taliban gain too much, they might just trigger a fracturing of the country itself.

The Pakistani military is tipping its hand quite a bit if you know where to look:

• Requesting the handover of US military drones to their control.
• General Kayani has developed quite the working relationship with Adm Mullen, who in turn, has been talking him up before Congress.
  
• Getting the OSD to call for increased spending, not in police or other COIN-related fields, but in direct military aid.

The Pakistani military, having now waited long enough to clearly demonstrate the civilian government's ineptitude (despite their own complacency in the matter) is now striking back against the Taliban with its full force. A successful, continuous campaign has the potential to gain even more political capital which it can then use to further undermine the civilian government. Whether it is Gen Kayani himself, or the leader of ISI, or some broader consensus reached among the large military establishment, it is clear that the apparent ineptitude of the Pakistani military is not incompetence, but rather a careful game of brinksmanship with a dangerous foe.