Even as the recently released tell-all Obama's Wars by Bob Woodward raises fresh doubts about the U.S.-Pakistan relationship and will likely stoke mistrust in the United States about Pakistan as a partner against the Afghan Taliban, a series of stories that paint the Pakistani army in a negative light will undoubtedly contribute to the tensions. These events occur against the backdrop of heightened U.S. drone activity inside Pakistan's border region and at least two reported NATO helicopter attacks on Pakistani soil. How the Pakistani army sees these events and addresses the ensuing challenges will have enormous impacts on the future trajectory of South Asia, as well as the direction of Pakistan's fragile democracy.

First, there was the reported kidnapping of The News journalist Umar Cheema and the standard operating procedures of Pakistani intelligence agencies used to humiliate and torture him, according to his detailed account of the incident. Other than denials, there does not appear to be a clear or detailed explanation from the government or the Inter Services Intelligence directorate, Pakistan's top spy agency, of who did this, nor any indication from the government that a rapid and credible public inquiry is underway. In the absence of such actions, rumors will fly and allegations will be made that will undermine the state and its agencies.

Second, there has been a new viral video released on the Internet purporting to be a record of extrajudicial killing of blindfolded Pashtun captives in civilian clothes by Urdu-speaking (that is, non-Pashtun) soldiers in army uniforms and carrying standard army weapons. The presence of a senior person identified in the soundtrack as "Tanveer Sahib" may implicate an officer in this incident. According to the New York Times, the Pakistani military initially dismissed the video as a forgery. The Times later reported that the army had investigated the incident, found it to be genuine, and promised to act against the perpetrators.

Fairly or not, this video and other negative stories about the army's operations and its behind-the-scenes role in Pakistani politics will likely be seen within Pakistan as coordinated and hostile actions from outside Pakistan to put pressure on the Pakistan army to bend to U.S. demands on a number of fronts. The army's readiness to move against the elements involved in these killings speaks to its new and informed leadership. Similar reports of extrajudicial killings in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, in 1971 were brushed aside by the army at that time. They lost the hearts and minds of the local population, fuelled an insurgency, and created a refugee stream into India that drew that country into invading East Pakistan to help create Bangladesh. By contrast, in June 1992, an incident in Sindh province earlier described by the army in Sindh as an "encounter" with local robbers was openly investigated by the army high command, following a BBC report of killings by an army major as a favor to a local landlord. The major was court-martialed and sentenced to death. Senior officers who failed to investigate the incident adequately and participated in covering it up were removed or dismissed to much public acclaim. The army's stock went up in the public eye.

The current army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, will need to confront this latest allegation head-on and quickly rather than let it simmer and adversely affect public support for the military as well as morale inside the institution. If a "rogue officer" was at work giving his troops an unlawful command to murder civilian prisoners, then the army needs to clear it up in a manner that will identify and bring to court the culprits and help educate the rest of its officers and troops against similar actions. At a time when the civilian government is under stress and economic and political problems have besieged it, it is important that the army is seen as a stable entity working with the government for the common good.

General Kayani also faces a challenge on the border from the U.S. and NATO. A first incursion into Pakistan seemed to have been handled quickly by him and Adm. Mike Mullen to reduce unhappiness on the Pakistan side. They spoke and decided not to add to the public rhetoric. But now an additional incident in Kurram involving a NATO helicopter attack that reportedly killed three soldiers of the Frontier Corps, the paramilitary force that patrols the tribal areas, has led to the closing of the border to NATO supplies for Afghanistan and a public rebuke from the government of Pakistan.

This situation could easily careen out of control. The Obama administration, which is unhappy with what it perceives as Pakistan's lack of action against anti-American militants, is seriously miscalculating if it is using such tactics to pressure Pakistan to launch operations against its will. Better to argue your case behind closed doors, as allies should -- or risk a public split. Similarly, Pakistan risks overestimating its leverage over the United States and NATO by shutting down the coalition's supply routes across the Durand Line. If anything, this embargo will accelerate the U.S. drive to diversify its logistics chain -- while taking money out of Pakistanis' pockets.

There is some positive news. On Thursday, Kayani announced a fresh list of newly promoted three-star generals, completing his team of senior officers who will outlast his own new three-year term at the helm of the army. By all accounts, he has chosen tried and tested professionals and superseded some Musharraf loyalists. As with the lieutenant generals promoted in April, he has by and large selected apolitical and professional soldiers with a broad, mature view of the world and of Pakistan's place in it. Many of them have topped their classes at the military academy, winning the Sword of Honour, or have attended advanced military courses abroad, as has Kayani. Here's hoping they get their chance to prove that Pakistani's military can be a force for stability in South Asia, and a voice for the rule of law at home.

Shuja Nawaz is director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council and author of Crossed Swords: Pakistan, its Army, and the Wars Within and Pakistan in the Danger Zone: A Tenuous U.S.-Pakistan Relationship.

Karachi recently played host to Fashion Pakistan Week, a five-day event showcasing the work of 52 designers. But while the fashion weeks of the world -- like those in London, Paris, and New York -- are known for their cutting-edge designer collections, this latest show in Pakistan was associated with bravery -- specifically, defying the Taliban.

Although foreign media coverage of Fashion Pakistan Week has lent the event immense publicity -- organizers cite the numerous publications that covered the event as a sign of success -- the stories haven't been about the fashion. A slew of articles and captions published during the first major fashion week held in Pakistan in November 2009 set the tone for the fashion week held this April to be not about draping and design, but about daring and drones.

And though this type of "stereotypical" coverage of fashion being used as political tool has decreased this last year (as designers would say, "That's so last season!"), there was a notable shift in the messages being delivered at this month's fashion week in Pakistan. Designers, presumably tired of being branded in heroic terms, attempted to turn attention to their craft and their plans to make Pakistani fashion a recognizable brand abroad.

For the past few years, reportage on Pakistani culture abroad has been all about "defiance," whether it's a music school or a literary festival. Pakistan has been conducting military operations against the Taliban for years now, and drone attacks conducted by the United States have taken out some of the most notorious terrorists in the country, such as the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mehsud. Thousands of Pakistanis have died in attacks in the northwest and in other areas of the country, including large cities like Karachi, Lahore, and Quetta. The fact that life still goes on in other parts of the country despite the many suicide attacks seems to have become a wondrous fact for the world at large. And so the stereotype of "look at these brave Pakistanis, carrying on despite all the doom and gloom" has dictated reportage of any event in the country.

But does this cloud of stereotypes have a silver lining?

It does have its benefits. For example, despite being laden with clichés, several facets of Pakistani culture are now being promoted abroad. One of the country's most promising musical outfits, Zeb and Haniya, who originally hail from the northwest region of Pakistan but are currently based in Lahore, have been profiled in several publications.

In some ways, the coverage has helped translate into the attention that Pakistani designers, for example, really want. Buyers from the Dubai retail stores Soiree, Designer's Lounge, and Source and Indian retailers such as Carma and Ogaan have descended upon Lahore and Karachi, looking to pick up Pakistani designers they can stock at boutiques abroad. International fashion publications are planning to feature Pakistani fashion, and the focus is finally on the clothes.

Interestingly enough, the past few years have seen an evolution in the mainstream cultural events and projects being planned. While the Pakistani fashion scene was often criticized for being too focused on Western apparel, the designs now heavily feature homespun traditional fabric and ethnic jewelry. The music being played at fashion week includes not just the latest Lady Gaga single, but also Pakistani pop songs from the 1980s and indie music from 2008.

I spoke to American journalist Carla Power about what she thought about Pakistan's fashion week. "I wasn't at the first fashion week," she told me, but said she remembered that the "flak jacket" crowd (referring to war correspondents) "came down for the event." So in the short run it helped. "But," she continued, "if that continues to be the case it would be a pity."

I asked Power if there were any underlining benefits to news coverage of fashion weeks that paint designers as brave souls defying the Taliban without any focus on their work.

"Edward Said would be rolling in his grave if he saw an entire country being reduced to being either pro- or anti-Taliban," Power said. "But there is this sense that the only reason the international press was at fashion week to begin with was this so-called war on terror. The tragedy would be if all this creativity was boiled down to the polar opposite."

The cultural references being drawn from Pakistan were center stage on the runway this week as well. Syed Rizwanullah, a young Karachi-based designer, showed a collection called "Depression Chic." A model walked out on the runway in a patchwork burqa, which she threw off to display a modern take on harem pants and traditional tights (called churidar in Urdu). In a conversation after his show, Rizwanullah told me why he thought the burqas would be a hit were he to retail them. "I can imagine why people would want them … if you're having a bad day and don't want to be recognized, have a pimple or got too tanned." It was a unique take on a garment that is generally associated with religious convictions.  

Couture designer Umar Sayeed paid homage to the brilliant Pakistani artist Sadequain, whose work was translated by Sayeed onto every inch of fabric and even the shoes worn by his models. It is ironic that just across the street from the venue for fashion week, a mural Sadequain painted lies neglected. The reason? It is located on the ceiling of Frere Hall, a venue that has become off limits for the public because the neighborhood also features the U.S. Consulate.

But whether fashion week can ever escape the baggage of stereotypes really does depend how Pakistan's security situation goes -- and whether it will still be necessary to thank the interior minister (as the fashion week emcee did) every night for his support and help for the event to go ahead.

Saba Imtiaz works for the Express Tribune, a newly launched English-language newspaper in Pakistan.

In today's New America Foundation/Foreign Policy launch event for the AfPak Channel (which you can watch live here at 12:15 p.m., though registration is now closed), Peter Bergen, Steve Coll, and Rajiv Chandrasekaran will be talking about what it's like to report from the region that U.S. President Barack Obama has made the focal point of his foreign policy agenda: Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Obama's focus contrasts starkly with his predecessor's, who concentrated mostly on the war in Iraq. I wondered, in light of the difference, what has really changed in the way the media covers these two wars since Obama took office on January 20.

Fortunately, my Foreign Policy colleague Michael Wilkerson has already picked up on this, and was kind enough to send me the latest batch of raw data from the good people at the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, who track how much coverage various topics get weekly as a percentage of the total, which they call the "newshole."

The short answer as to how much has changed is: a little, as Michael observed last month. Afghanistan is slowly gaining ground on Iraq: since the first week of August, Afghanistan has gotten about four times the total coverage as Iraq has, and the percentage of the newshole devoted to Afghanistan peaked during the week of the August 20 presidential election at 10.2 percent. And coverage also bumped up a little during the week of Obama's March 27 Afghanistan/Pakistan strategy speech.

From the beginning of June 2008 until last week, Afghanistan averaged 1.97 percent of the newshole, compared to Iraq's 2.51 percent. But if you only look at the time period that Obama's been in office, Afghanistan jumps up to 2.93 percent, versus Iraq's 2.06 percent. Obama's foreign policy focus has accordingly apparently dictated a slight uptick in the amount of U.S. media coverage devoted to Afghanistan -- though the total still remains under three percent. A larger version of the chart is available here.

The American Journalism Review has an excellent survey of how Obama's focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan has led many big news outlets to ramp up their correspondents' reporting on and from the region, which I highly recommend. I also recommend tuning in to our event today; Peter Bergen and Rajiv Chandrasekaran are both recently back from big reporting trips to the region, with Rajiv breaking the news that the NATO airstrike in Kunduz that killed as many as 125 including several dozen civilians was based largely on a single Afghan intelligence source, and Peter corresponding for CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 from Helmand province.

In an FP piece Monday, Morton Abramowitz argued that the U.S. media have been too soft in covering the shift in policy toward the war in Afghanistan, and that the war in general has received too little scrutiny. 

The article made me wonder if there had been an increase in coverage of Afghanistan since the presidential inauguration of Barack Obama, given his professed focus not to lose there and his changes in policy.

Fortunately, the Pew Research Center's Project on Excellence in Journalism [PEJ] keeps weekly tallies of which topics are covered in the U.S. media, or as they call it, the "newshole." In one interesting graph, they show how much less coverage of Iraq there is now than two years ago.

At my request, the wonderful people at PEJ provided their raw data on how much coverage Iraq and Afghanistan were getting as a percentage of the "newshole" over the last year. Using my extraordinarily rudimentary Excel chart skills, I decided to examine if much had changed since President Obama was inaugurated and started implementing changes in policy.

The short answer is: not a lot. Although there are occasional spikes, the total coverage of Afghanistan jumps over 5 percent only once, in July, corresponding with a major offensive in Helmand under the newly appointed command of Gen. Stanley McChrystal. And the average is low. From January through July, Afghanistan received an average of 1.92 percent of coverage, while Iraq got 2.01 percent.

That Afghanistan and Iraq are now nearly equal in coverage is a change. From June-December 2008, Iraq averaged 3.26 percent and Afghanistan 1.17 precent. Still, with the amount of U.S. taxpayer money going into both places, and the amount of reconstruction funds wasted, one has to wonder about the low percentage devoted to both wars. The sad part is, even if average media consumers were more interested, which they are not, only a few huge media outlets could afford to cover the wars constantly, and most of them are already losing money anyway.

A bigger version of the chart is viewable here.

Michael Wilkerson is a researcher at FP. This item has been cross-posted on Passport and the AfPak Channel blog.