Although I would rate the article as good overall I will post some passages that I find stupid or objectionable:
The first sign of stupidity in a lot of American "sensible articles is shown by these two quotes:
An elected civilian government is back in power, after a long stint of military rule. But as has happened so many times before, the civilian government has turned out to be corrupt and inefficient. President Asif Ali Zadari, the widower of the slain Benazir Bhutto, is unpardonably weak, and his prime minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani, is hardly any better.
The most powerful man in Pakistan is General Ashfaq Kayani, army chief of staff.
If Kayani is the most powerful man and he heads the army how the fung can you say Zardari is "unpardonably weak". That is the Paki army talking through the authors mouth. If Kayani is the boss how can Zardari have power? Is the author stupid or is he stupid?
The second thing I find very irritating is this
The state has been hardening its Islamic grip with tolerance falling by the wayside. The Shia minority is often set upon and murdered. The tiny Christian minority has been persecuted and burned alive by mobs. The unrelenting Wahhabi version of Islam, imported from Saudi Arabia and practiced by Al Qaeda, is at war with the softer, more tolerant Sufi tradition of the Indus.
Note how the Hindu and Sikh minorities in Pakistan are totally and completely ignored by all these gora Amriki firangis. They don't give a flying fuk.
The last words of utter stupidty are here:
Pakistan is not a failed state, but it is increasingly in danger of becoming one.