It is clear from the writings of former US Colonel Gardiner that USA not only dislikes “some” policies of dislikes “some” countries in the world but also dislikes “some” regimes.
WMD was only a chosen “cause” and Saddam’s “regime” was the “target”. Some months earlier the cause was Al Qaeda and the regime was Taliban in Afghanistan. Thirty odd years ago the cause was Communism (sponsored by China) and the regime was in North Vietnam. Somewhere along the line a parallel was drawn to find Communism again as the cause and the regime was and is what’s prevalent in North Korea.
There are more policies and more regimes in the list at the US Foreign Office – for example, Venezuela, Iran, Syria, Libya, etc.
Strange as it may sound that North Korea is in the radar of the foreign office to impose “sanctions” but certainly not Pakistan, which supplies the uranium enrichment facilities to NK. NoDong missiles was the target – even under a democratic government in Pakistan – and Benazir Bhutto agreed to AQ Khan’s “suggestion” to “barter” nuclear technology for NoDong. Perhaps Pakistan can be used to support Taliban at one stage to thwart occupation of Afghanistan by erstwhile USSR. Evidently US Foreign Office has `condoning’ clauses – to be “applied” for convenience, of course.
One gets a nauseating feeling that Pakistan is “used” or “allowed” to spread “proliferation” to unwanted regimes and the “cause” is found “later” to be used to remove the targeted regimes.
The US Foreign Office shows a remarkable resilience vis-à-vis Pakistan – which has never had a stable democracy – whereas “some” countries are found to be "deserving" to get democracy “imposed” on them.
When nuclear technology is “allowed” to leak out the blame “attaches” to AQ Khan and not to Pakistan. When infiltration, terrorism and militancy surfaces the blame shifts to Inter Services Intelligence and not to the government of Pakistan. General Musharraf must be in line for a Nobel Prize for “dodging” – since Americans love basketball.