Pakistan = Nuclear + Unstable

It struck me recently that Pakistan is perilously close to being a Muslim theocracy, and that Musharaf (who seems to be keeping it from happening) will almost inevitably be removed soon — one way or another.

I’m aware of the dangers of fear-mongering, but at the same time I can’t help but fret over the notion of a nuclear-enabled country in the hands of Holy warriors. My problem isn’t so much with Pakistan doing something themselves, but what happens when some hard-line Muslim faction takes over the country and then gets approached by Al Quaeda?

What force will restrain them — hardliners who share many similar views — from accepting millions of dollars in exchange for a couple of nuclear devices? I just don’t see any reason why they wouldn’t help Al Quaeda. Of course they could fear retribution and that good stuff, but if there was insufficient evidence to lead back to Pakistan the U.S. would have nothing to go on in trying to respond.

This is especially true given how much proliferation has taken place. There are just so many potential sources (mostly former Soviet) that without solid proof it’d be impossible to do a full strike without major evidence. The world wouldn’t stand for another major attack on a country based on shoddy evidence (see Iraq).

The Islamists in charge of Pakistan could essentially get the benefit of attacking the U.S., but not have to do the work themselves. And Al Quaeda could get the blame (which they want) while not having to work too hard to get the ultimate weapon.

So, what I’m looking for is why this isn’t a problem given Musharaf’s tenuous hold on his country.