The United States made great strides to oust the Taliban and Al Qaeda and stand up the Afghan government after the invasion in October 2001, but the situation has deteriorated since 2005. The Taliban and Al Qaeda have regrouped and support the Afghan insurgency while strengthening their own capabilities. The Bush administration has portrayed Iraq as the central front of the central front of the "global war on terror," Afghanistan and the borderlands of Pakistan remain the central battlefield.
Language matters. We've done a disservice to the Muslim world and the intelligence of all Americans by oversimplifying all of these conflicts -- Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and others -- under the guise of one war. These conflicts are largely movements that are using Islam as a political tool to advance their political agendas, and confronting them requires a disaggregated approach that sees them for the distinct conflicts that they are.
On Day One, the next president should take advantage of the tremendous opportunity in Pakistan, whose public has largely turned against Al-Qaeda and suicide bombings. While the temptation will be to put too large an American footprint on events in Pakistan, the smart idea is to let Pakistanis realize they have a domestic problem to take care of and to keep any support of the U.S. to a minimum.
Before we support so called Democratic leaders being elected Pakistan, we need to look at who heads the parties that have "won". Asif Zardari has been convicted of embezzlement of government money while his wife was prime minister; he has cases pending against him in SWITZERLAND & millions of euros have been frozen; he has been implicated very clearly in the assasination of his brother in law and is known in Pakisatn as Mr.10%, for the amount of bribe he takes per deal
