March 11, 2008--While We Were Distracted . . .

While the media have been monomaniacally focused on how Florida and Michigan might reschedule their primaries, a few other things have been going on in the world.

In Iraq, where we have been told that the purpose of The Surge is not so much military as it is to give the Iraqis the time and protection they need to provide for their own security and work out political solutions, the centerpiece of that political agenda, to cobble together a deal for power sharing among Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds, has quietly fallen apart.

Less than a month ago, the Bush administration and John McCain heralded a new law passed by the Iraqi legislation as a breakthrough for ethnic reconciliation. “You see,” they said, “here is evidence that the surge is working. Just as we promised, by increasing the number of U.S. troops there, the Iraqi people are working out solutions to their own problems.”

But just as the law was to take effect it was vetoed by the three-member Presidential Council because the Shiite-dominated Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council saw it as taking too much power away from them. The passage of the legislation and all the posturing about it was front-page news, but its collapse was buried well below the fold on newspapers’ inner pages. And hardly mentioned on any of the cable so-called news channels. (See linked NY Times article linked below as an example.)

Meanwhile, over in Afghanistan . . . Hardly mentioned in the press is the news that they are about to harvest a bumper crop of opium and that the billions of dollars that will be generated from its illegal sale will continue to fund the resurgent Taliban and the al-Qaeda terrorists who they support and shelter. Is it any wonder that NATO, which has from the beginning been a legitimate partner of the United States in the liberation of Afghanistan, see its member countries, one-by-one, withdrawing their forces.

We did of course hear much about Prince Harry’s service there and his reluctant withdrawal from combat. (There must have been nothing about Britney Spears for MSNBC and Fox to report and OJ’s trial in Las Vegas is still months away.) But we heard almost nothing about President Hamid Karzai’s slipping fortunes and the dire consequences of the gathering chaos. It was Prince Harry 24/7.

And then there is our “ally” Pakistan. Lots been happening over there. To be truthful, we did hear a good deal about Benazir Bhutto’s murder. How could we not since there was all that great video which could be played over and over again in slower and slower motion.

But why haven’t we been paying more attention to the recent parliamentary elections? The one in which our $10-billion-a year partner, President Pervez Musharraf got trounced. In that Islamic country that George Bush couldn’t locate on the map but that has nukes and missiles.

We didn’t hear much about how, in spite of this election results, Bush and Condi Rice (McCain’s potential vice president) have been pressuring the Afghani Parliament to nonetheless stand by our man. As you might imagine, this is not endearing us to opposition party leaders (most of whom are moderates) who are now calling into question Pakistan’s close, special relationship with the U.S.

But I do understand why the media prefer to cover the tempest over Michigan and Florida. Their ratings go up when they do and no one wants to be bummed out by being reminded of all the bad things going on on the other side of the world. The Dow Jones numbers are enough of a downer.