In our deciding our foreign security agenda, shouldn't we be most worried about a country where militant Islamic fundamentalism is rife, most of the remaining Al-Q leaders are hiding and which already has weapons of mass destruction? Obviously I'm not talking about Iraq. Or Iran. I'm talking about Pakistan.
Pakistan has only a fragile representation and tradition of democracy. President Musharraf siezed power in a coup d'etat in 1999 (making him the third President of Pakistan to assume the role through those means), though he transferred some power to the office of Prime Minister following parliamentary elections in 2002. To be fair, Musharraf has backed the introduction of bills in parliament to enshrine some basic human rights, though critics say he only adopts this stance to bolster support for his dictatorship in the West.
An recent example, however, is his support for the reform of Pakistan's medieval rape laws. Under the Hudood ordinance, a woman who has been raped has to produce four male witnesses to confirm that rape took place, otherwise she is guilty of adultery, for which the traditional punishment is death by stoning. And this is in the 21st century, not the 11th.
Proposed reforms to the Hudood ordinance have been vehemently opposed by some members of Pakistan's parliament, however. Sixty-eight members of the 344-strong assembly have threatened to vacate their seats if the reforms are approved. The leader of the Islamic Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal party has denounced the reforms as "deviating from the Holy Quran". The reforms include setting the female age of consent at 16, rather than just requiring a girl to have reached puberty but with no set age under Hudood.
Although Musharraf has a majority of support in parliament (and still keeps much power to himself), the number of Islamic fundamentalists in parliament could easily swell at the next election. The MMA won elections in the NW province in 2004. Since then Western foreign policy in the region has further antagonised many citizens. Support for the Taliban in western provinces bordering Afghanistan is now stronger than ever. If this faction were to gain a parliamentary majority and/or take power by other means, they would instantly become the world's first nuclear-capable fundamentalist Islamic state. Iran, in contrast, is probably at least ten years from that goal.
Historically, of course, Pakistan's main beef has been with India over Kashmir, but that issue might not be a high priority for such a new regime. Ok, their other neighbour China might attempt to curb them, given its concerns over Islamic nationalism within the PRC. But a militant fundamentalist administration in Pakistan could turn its agenda solely West rather than East, seeking to rally other Islamic states against Western Imperialism and consolidate fundamentalism among their citizens. The ultimate goal of many fundamentalists is the creation of a single Caliphate governed by Sharia law.
So while we've been spending billions in Iraq, I hope we've also been keeping a very close eye on what happens in Pakistan as the 2007 elections draw near. Because the situation there could turn very bad very quickly and make Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran look like sideshows.
