The cycle of violence in recent years is as follows:

1. Musharraf's Military government in Pakistan is in political trouble domestically.

2. Terrorist attack in India follows.

3. Moronic editors in the West urge West to prop up Musharraf - e.g.

Times of London

essentially saying that the blowing up of Indians in their capital is a threat to Musharraf; Musharraf is our bulwark against Islamic Fundamentalism in Pakistan, we need to do more to prop him up.

4. Infusion of foreign aid or arms or political support to Pakistan. Temporary increase in foreign reserves, signs of progress.

5. The military cannot rule effectively. They know nothing of economics or schools or sewers. Investors continue voting with millions of dollars a day legally or illegally leaving the country.

6. Back to step 1.

What people who peddle nonsense like the Times of London above don't realize is that the fundamental problem with Pakistan is Musharraf; he is no more against Islamic extremism than Osama bin Laden; it is a vital instrument of state policy.

Why should anyone not in South Asia care? Because the Lashkar-e-Taiba that Musharraf supposedly banned at the behest of the US, still operates with impunity. This supposedly banned organization was purchasing a helicopter for earthquake relief in Pakistan. How does a banned organization get to do that?

LeT operatives have been arrested, in Europe and in Australia, for planning terrorist attacks there, and they should be considered to be an ally of al Qaeda.

Backgrounder on the LeT

Until the world wakes up to the fact that the Pakistani regime is more dangerous than Iran or Syria, and deals with it accordingly, there will be no end to terrorism.