Via The Crack Den, I see that American news coverage of the assasination of Benazir Bhutto is alredy centered on how it impacts our presidential race; specifically, pundits are speculating which of our candidates will benefit from Bhutto's death. Yeah, I'm having a bit of trouble wrapping my head around that, too.
A colleague of mine was working in France when the 9/11 attacks occurred; he told me that by the next morning every shop, bistro and hotel on the Champs Elysees was flying an American flag. I bring that up only because the coverage of Bhutto's assasination reminds me of the coverage of the Madrid terror bombings - all anyone over here seemed concerned about was how that attack was going to affect Bush's bid for re-election. That's right - we're more self-absorbed than the French. Scary.
If you're having trouble thinking of a reason why you should care about the situation in Pakistan beyond how it affects our presidential election - or, for that matter, our half-assed attempts at reconstruction in Afghanistan - then consider this: Pakistan is a nuclear-armed nation on the brink of civil war. To the best of my knowledge, that's never happened before. (The war in Chechnya was technically a civil war in a nuclear-armed nation, but Russia never came as close to disintegration as Pakistan is now.) That's got me worrying about all kinds of stuff that scares me even more than the thought of Rudolph Giuliani becoming president - and that's saying something.