World Report

With the first Presidential debate scheduled to focus on foreign policy, an area where knowledge is limited and bullshit spreads wide, let's take a brief look at what's going on in the world and what might be discussed in that debate, so that you're better informed:

• First we have the Marriott bombing in Islamabad, Pakistan, the second big suicide attack in the Muslim world in the space of the week (along with the bombing of the US embassy in Sanaa, Yemen). The Marriott is typically home to international businessmen and Western dignitaries, so those similarities exist as well. This was a signal from the Taliban in response to the recent spate of US forays into the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) region.

Clearly we have a real problem with Pakistan. We've launched something approaching a shadow war in the FATA region, without any partnership and in fact increasing resistance from elements in the Pakistani government. It threatens a split between the Army and the leadership of Prime Minister Zardari, and that has potentially disastrous results. Brandon Friedman has more on this, and he believes that John McCain will end up altering his position on Pakistan with one more broadly in line with Barack Obama. But the question is how to best articulate that policy - maintaining a stance that respects Pakistan's national sovereignty but understands that a safe harbor for those who wish to do Americans harm is not advisable. This is best accomplished by the locals, not yet another occupying force.

• Across the border, Afghanistan is falling apart because the central government is weak and the Taliban has figured out how to fill in the cracks.

The new Taliban movement has created a parallel government structure that includes defense and finance councils and appoints judges and officials in some areas. It offers cash to recruits and presents letters of introduction to local leaders. It operates Web sites and a 24-hour propaganda apparatus that spins every military incident faster than Afghan and Western officials can manage.

"This is not the Taliban of Emirate times. It is a new, updated generation," said Waheed Mojda, a former foreign ministry aide under the Taliban Islamic Emirate, which ruled most of the country from 1996 to 2001. "They are more educated, and they don't punish people for having CDs or cassettes," he said. "The old Taliban wanted to bring sharia, security and unity to Afghanistan. The new Taliban has much broader goals -- to drive foreign forces out of the country and the Muslim world."

That's just distressing. From a humanitarian standpoint alone we have a responsibility to keep the Taliban on the run. But if they've become the de facto government in much of the country, military force against them will take on the look of an invasion, and it will have trouble succeeding.

• Ehud Olmert has been forced to resign as Israeli Prime Minister resulting from a bribery scandal, and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni is set to take over as head of Kadima and the favorite to be the next leader. Needless to say, any turmoil in Israel impacts the greater Middle East. Livni has been the chief negotiator with the Palestinians, but if she can't form a government, there will be early elections, and a return to Likudnik power would be a disaster for any hopes for peace. Yet polls are showing that Bibi Netanyahu would be the victor if elections were held today. That's genuinely scary.

• The Zimbabwean unity government has begun with Morgan Tsvangirai ruling out prosecution for the criminal activities of Robert Mugabe. And in the same breath he name-checks "the rule of law." Nice. Meanwhile, Thabo Mbeki, who spent much of the past several months brokering the Zimbabwean deal, was toppled as the head of his own country of South Africa amid allegations of corruption. There is instability in southern Africa that could metastasize and grow violent.

• The headline here is that North Korea is backing away from the nuclear deal with the United States, but the reality is more complex. The US was dragging their feet in removing North Korea from a list of state sponsors of terrorism, and with the instability surrounding the possible illness of Kim Jong Il, there could also be a jockeying for power among competing forces in Pyongyang. We have bought ourselves two years, but it seems like both sides are stalling and failing to live up to their commitments under the agreement.

• We now have a fair bit of proof that the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad is what led to the drop in violence, not the surge. There's more to Iraq than Baghdad, of course, but there are also more explanations for the security gains in those outlying areas (the Sunni Awakening in Anbar, for example). Meanwhile the political situation remains stalemated, as legislation for the provincial elections has failed for the fifth time. As long as the debate here is played out over whether the surge was a success, we won't be having a real argument about the future of Iraq. It's dishonest.

• Meanwhile, the lax standards in Chinese manufacturing are still killing people, and the chemicals that are put into our foods, our supplies and most everything we buy (at a cheap price) are toxic. Can we have a serious argument about trade without recognizing this?