Krugman, Indónesía og Írak

Paul Krugman skrifar pistil í New York Times, sem nefnist Still Living Dangerously

Þar bendir hann á nokkra mjög góða punkta varðandi árásina á Bali og þess hversu litlu stríð við Írak mun breyta í stríðinu gegn hryðjuverkum. Hann bendir á að árásin á Bali muni hafa gríðarleg áhrif á efnhag Indónesíu enda mun ferðamannaiðnaðurinn að öllum líkindum hrynja. Það er svo staðreynd að efnahagskreppur gera hryðjuverkamönnum mun auðveldara með að ná til sín nýju fólki.

Krugman segir svo um Írak og Pakistan

The bomb blast in Bali followed bad news from the world’s second-most-populous Muslim country. Hard-line Islamic parties did unexpectedly well in Pakistan’s election last week, and Pervez Musharraf’s hold on power may be slipping. Do I need to point out that Pakistan is a lot bigger than Iraq, and already has nuclear weapons?

og að lokum:

What’s clear is that the biggest terrorist threat we face is that one or more big Muslim countries will be radicalized. And yet that’s a threat hawks advising the administration don’t seem to take seriously. The administration adviser Richard Perle, quoted by Josh Marshall in The Washington Monthly, brushes off concerns that an invasion of Iraq might undermine the stability of Middle Eastern regimes: “Mubarak is no great shakes. Surely we can do better. . . .”

Meanwhile, plans to invade Iraq proceed. The administration has offered many different explanations, some of them mutually contradictory, for its determination to occupy Baghdad. I think it’s like the man who looks for his keys on the sidewalk, even though he dropped them in a nearby alley, because he can see better under the streetlight. These guys want to fight a conventional war; since Al Qaeda won’t oblige, they’ll attack someone else who will. And watching from the alley, the terrorists are pleased.