Things are getting ugly in Pakistan, which would have really alarmed me a couple of months ago. But then I looked into a story on what would come after Musharraf, and the prospects appeared far less scary than I'd expected. It sounds like the answer is either Pervez lite (another pro-US general) or a secular civilian leader, like Benazir Bhutto, also likely to lean towards the West. The militant Islamists, though growing, are very few in number and aren't at all likely to sieze power. ("The odds of that are a little bit higher than Bernie Sanders becoming president of the United States," one think-tanker told me.) I was also told that the Pakistani military guards its nukes very jealously and the risk of, say, al Qaeda commandeering one doesn't overly worry people (although I think I'll continue to worry about that anyway, if nobody minds terribly). Everyone agreed on one thing: Musharraf has played up fears of a radical Islamist power grab to freak out American policymakers and ensure their support for his regime. I'm no expert here, so anyone with greater expertise is welcome to differ in comments. (Although what I learned jibes with this NY Times assessment.) P.S. Maybe the truly interesting question--regardless of who's in power--is whether and when the U.S. reconsiders massive foreign aid to a government that tolerates al Qaeda camps operating within its borders right now. Will any '08 candidates take on that question? --Michael Crowley