We are told the war in Iraq is a necessary part of the "War on Terror" (WOT), and its goal is to bring democracy to the Middle East. Despite this rhetoric it is blatantly clear the US is pursuing its own interests at the cost of democracy in the region. This raises the level of anger in the Muslim world more than Americans can imagine.

Nowhere are the hypocrisy and contradictions in US policy more apparent than in

Pakistan, a long time US ally, whose citizens have consistently demonstrated their commitment to democracy, most recently in their February 18^th election. Despite this staunch democratic commitment, the US continues to act in ways that undermine democracy in this crucial country. The contradictions in America's Pakistan policy go back decades, at least to the late 1970s when the US worked with the Islam-touting dictator, General Zia ul-Haq and Pakistan's intelligence services to arm the groups that have naturally morphed into al-Qaeda and the Taliban. That story is well known.

Less publicized are the contradictions in current US policy. Since 9/11 we have given over $9.6 billion in aid to General Musharraf's regime (plus an additional $5.3 billion in reimbursements for Pakistan's assistance with the war in Afghanistan) – even though he unconstitutionally remained chief of the army while also serving as president, and despite the fact that in the 2002 election he whipped up Islamicist parties to generate a base of support for himself – a ploy the Pakistani people have now seen through and completely renounced in last month's election. But he is Bush's friend because he allows US planes to bomb inside Pakistan, and last November 3^rd he unconstitutionally imposed a state of emergency, suspended the constitution and dismissed all the judges who were not willing to swear a new loyalty oath to the emergency order. While the press widely reported he did this to prevent the court from ruling against him remaining army chief during a second term as president, he also did it to thwart the Supreme Court's demand that he account for hundreds of people who have been "disappeared." Many of these people have likely ended up in US interrogation cells in other countries.

For the first time Pakistan's government is "disappearing" its critics. It now dares such impunity because this has been normalized by the US's use of the practice within the country. It is one of the horrible contradictions of the WOT – we fight a war 'for democracy' by undermining the global commitment to habeus corpus and fair trial rights. The other contradiction is that in that move Musharraf killed the independence of the judiciary and the free media, two other democratic practices sacrificed to this war to bring democracy. What was the US response? Some noise but no serious demand to restore the constitution, nor to reinstate the court, nor to give an accounting of the disappeared.

On December 27^th former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated and Musharraf's government acted in ways that smacked of a cover-up. Again, the US's response was very muted, despite the fact that "BB" was the first democratically elected woman leader of a Muslim country, and she had a long and close association with the United States. Why the waffle? Because more than wanting democracy in the Muslim world, the US wants a free hand to run the WOT by any means it deems necessary, to serve the US interests du jour. In Pakistan's case this means not only complicity in disappearing people into the rat holes of the US's secret global interrogation system, but also the freedom to continue to conduct bombing raids on Pakistani territory – increasingly without even consulting the Pakistani government. This practice, which is to be stepped up – at least until the US election next November, will likely undercut Pakistan's newly elected government.

Muslims everywhere see through these contradictions and the hypocrisy in US policy. It fuels their anger, which in turn fuels militancy and less willingness to dialogue or compromise. Without that willingness there can be no movement in any peace process: not for Palestine/Israel; not for Iraq; not for Afghanistan.

Cris Toffolo, Ph.D, is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and in the Justice and Peace Studies Program at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.