With the revelation that the London bombings were carried out, primarily, by British citizens of Pakistani descent some of whom had travelled recently to Pakistan and possibly been recruited there many questions have been raised about Pakistani President Musharraf's reliability as an ally against Islamic extremism. Musharraf has responded by announcing that "Al-Qaeda does not exist in Pakistan any more" and with a massive crackdown (which shouldn't be necessary if al-Qaeda doesn't exist...)

Meanwhile, Egyptian authorities have let it be known that they are looking for a group of missing Pakistani men in the Sinai, although they also granted that there is no evidence that they are connected to the attacks. Of course anything is possible - but Egypt has plenty of terrorism of its own (there were bombings less than a year ago in nearby Taba.) But Mubarak probably senses that Musharraf is down and is happy to kick him a few times. No doubt, Musharraf would love to do the same to Mubarak, but geography favors Egypt's counter-terror efforts. With 95% of Egypt's population packed into the band of green along the Nile Egypt is - as al-Qaeda #2 Ayman Zawahiri observed - an awful place to fight an insurgency. So the Egyptian radicals fled to Pakistan, where they could hide in deep mountains and sprawling cities and became the backbone of al-Qaeda.

Musharraf and Mubarak are actually similar figures. They are both autocrats riding the tiger and surviving not on their merits, but because they are better than the likely Islamist alternatives. In fairness to Musharraf he has not been in power as long as Mubarak and still could have some potential as a reformer. But, in fairness to Mubarak, his country has not been responsible for a massive international nuclear proliferation ring.