The problem is not Musharraf

Yesterday's New York Times had an editorial about Pakistan's current problem (registration required):

Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, insists his outrageous power grabs are aimed at stabilizing and protecting his country. His authoritarian maneuvers only weaken the country’s already feeble political institutions and fuel more political turmoil.
[...]
His friends in Washington need to tell the former general and the Pakistani military — no matter what the polls say about his unpopularity — that trying to rig this vote is unacceptable.

But this would only try bolting the barn door after the horse has already fled. Today, in an op-ed piece by lawyer Aitzaz Ahsan (registration required), he provides a summary of the current problem in Pakistan:

The parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 8 have already been rigged [...]. The election commission and the caretaker cabinet are overtly partisan. The judiciary is entirely hand-picked. State resources are being spent on preselected candidates. There is a deafening uproar even though the independent news media in Pakistan are completely gagged. Can there even be an election in this environment?

The vote, in other words, has already been rigged.

The problems with Pakistan go far beyond the current flouting of the rules by Pervez Musharraf. The NYT editorial above does mention "political institutions", which is on the right track. But most "analysis" in the U.S. press is simplistic ("He must do more to fight terrorism", "will the next army chief be pro-Western?", etc.)

Some root cause analysis is necessary. Plenty is at hand, but no one seems to be reading it. Here's one: a book called Military, Inc.: Inside Pakistan's Military Economy, by Ayesha Siddiqa.
In it, the author explains how the Pakistan military, primarily the Pakistan Army, gradually came to acquire power within Pakistan as an independent player.

The military in Pakistan has tremendous control over its own budget and has its own independent revenue-generating capabilities, formal and informal. Senior and retired army officers are assured of plum assignments in public-sector undertakings. The army continues to acquire public land and give it away to its own people and allies. It uses the state's resources and intelligence services to intimidate rivals and acquire money and power. Its budgets are largely un-audited, and starting in 2004, it has given an institutional role for itself in the highest level of decision making through the National Security Council. The Pakistan military is now a monster that is independent of the civilians who are supposed to control the military.

And over the years, it has been American tax dollars at work that have been feeding and continue to feed this monster. Bush's contribution stands at ten billion dollars, and counting. Congratulations!