The centrality of Pakistan was first revealed to me two summers ago. I was visiting Cornell friends in Islamabad and Lahore. During a dinner conversation I had with the Turkish ambassador — a diplomat who impressed me by his particularly refined vision of the global dynamics — the topic of Pakistan’s role in the world came up. The ambassador emphasized the strategic role of Pakistan, which sits at the juncture of the broader Middle-East and South Asia.

Is Pakistan not parted in two by the Indus River, on the banks of which Alexander the Great died, and which academics often define as the border between these two universes? This duality is not only geographic, but also cultural. Whether walking down the streets of Lahore, or crossing through villages in the Kashmiri mountains, I was struck by the contrast between the joyful women in their blue or pink Punjabi Shalwar Kamiz with a veil negligently passed over their heads, and the women in black Burkas, with only their mysterious eyes visible. The relaxed Islam of South Asia coexists with Saudi Wahhabism. Pakistan belongs to both worlds. Although Vice President Biden probably was not thinking about the Pakistani women when he visited the country a few weeks ago — I guess you have to be French and 20 for that — he certainly was signaling that in the crucial regions of the Middle East and South Asia, Pakistan is the key actor. For that reason alone, it is the center of the world.

Dryden Road. Jan. 28, 2009. 7:30 a.m. I peek out the window from under my covers, see a snow storm, and wonder why I am not studying in California.

I get to the Statler for a working breakfast organized by the Cornell International Affairs Review on nuclear weapons in Pakistan. Gaurav Kampani, a graduate student in the government department who works on the politics of nuclear proliferation gave us a pessimistic presentation. In the midst of such a “wave of hope,” this talk reminded us that President Obama’s magic may not be enough to solve all the problems of the world between now and Slope Day.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is considered as a nearly failing state, in particular under the current Zardari government. Pakistan has nuclear weapons. It has ambiguous relations with international terrorism. And it is at the center of the geopolitical challenges of the 21st century. Indeed, it is the key to the success of the war in Afghanistan and is at the heart of what we used to call, in a cowboy-ish way, the “war on terror.” Its neighbors have nuclear weapons (India) or may soon have them (Iran). And it controls Chinese access to the Arabian Sea.

Pakistan officially conducted its first nuclear tests in 1998, after a long cat and mouse game with the Western Intelligence Services. The objective was deterrence against India. This nuclear shield allowed Pakistan to conduct some low intensity warfare, such as the Kargil conflict (1999), or to allow terrorist groups to operate from its soil and spread instability in Kashmir, without fearing invasion. For India, the challenge is how to punish the Pakistani military without threatening the existence of Pakistan. It is a difficult balance, as low intensity fighting can quickly escalate: I remember driving from Lahore to the Wagah border in less than one hour, on a straight road, with no geographical obstacles that could slow down an army. Any Indian operation threatens the city and thus lead to nuclear war.

Pakistan’s proliferation policy is also problematic. There is evidence that sensitive documents, centrifuges and other nuclear infrastructures were supplied to Libya, Iran, and North Korea from the late 1980s until 2003. The US has pressured Pakistan to stop. But the civilian government does not have full control over the key players in its nuclear program.

On nuclear safety, the risks of an accidental explosion remain. The risk of terrorists stealing warheads also exists. Although the weapons are safe in peace time, they are vulnerable during crises especially when they are moved around.

The dangers of nuclear weapons in Pakistan are reinforced by the instability posed by its conflicted identity. The Pakistani identity is constantly reshaped in a complex intersubjective process, which reflects the tensions inherent to its diversity. How do you bring together a Baluch nationalist, a fiercely independent warlord of the North Western Frontier Province and a merchant of the Punjab? The reliance on Islam to forge a common national purpose may be insufficient. And the use of hatred of India and strong nationalism favor domestic and international tensions.

After this breakfast, as I crossed the Arts Quad, the last words of our speaker resonated in me: “Am I an optimist? No. Look at the history of Pakistan. It is a state in perpetual crisis which has been ruled by military dictatorships for half of its 60 years of existence. This instability is frightening.” This country is central. It is dangerous. The current administration must make it a priority.

Looking at what the most efficient system in the world has done with “financial weapons of mass destruction,” one can only wonder what can happen in a failing state with explosive ones.