A more sinister implication is that the administration is riding the civilian authority and undermining it, and looking to the Pakistani military to take matters in hand at some point, if Pakistan's president is not sufficiently accommodating.
It's probably an empire reflex of firing a shot across the bow. You may have noticed the "the islamic kooks with their fingers on nukes" fearmonger language that's been scaring the peanut gallery on cable news. A military coup would certainly change the equation; but it's hard to see how a democratic government can hang on to power in Pakistan, if it's compelled to serve two masters: the people of their country and the United States.
Posted by Copeland at May 10, 2009 08:41 PMEri, General Petraeus seems to feel AQ has left Afghanistan for Pakistan. If that's the case, it's all Pakistan all the time. It would seem the closest thing to a fix would be to garner peace or non-aggression between India and Pakistan to free their troops for the internal fight going on there.
Posted by peter at May 10, 2009 09:01 PMCopeland,
You are correct that the preservation of a democratic government in Pakistan would be difficult if it is seen as a puppet of the US.
Peter,
I agree that a lasting peace agreement between India and Pakistan on Kashmir would be a huge plus. But I just don't see that happening anytime soon, at least not in a manner that is acceptable to all parties that have interests in Kashmir. Jammu & Kashmir is a fairly complex state - for example, imagine Northern Ireland before the peace agreement and add much more complexity to it.
Posted by eriposte at May 10, 2009 09:19 PM