FAROOQ NAEEM/AFP/Getty Images

The U.S. foreign-policy establishment has always been a little queasy about Pervez Musharraf. The question of whether the now-former Pakistani president could be trusted -- and if so, how much -- has dominated conversations around Washington since the war on terror began. Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid summed it up today when he told the NYT that since 9/11 Musharraf "continued to provide cover to the Taliban, but still managed to convince the Americans for many years that it was not a double game." Neat trick.

For all the uncertainty over the years about Musharraf's true colors, his country's future today is even more unclear. His successor might not put U.S. priorities at the top of the to-do list, and moveover, the machinations going on in Islamabad right now are opaque. And with the next Pakistani president having to contend with a growing insurgency in the tribal regions, a powerful intelligence service run amok, and a wary (and entrenched) military, the one thing we know is that he (or she, if you believe ruling coalition leader Asif Zardari) can count on a lot of headaches in his or her future.

So, does establishment Washington have a good handle on what the United States can or should do in Pakistan if everything goes to hell?

In a word, no. In the latest FP/Center for American Progress Terrorism Index, released today, the only consensus about Pakistan, according to more than 100 of America's top foreign-policy experts, is that the country is going to pose a problem going forward. More than half now consider Pakistan the next al Qaeda stronghold:

But while they agree that Pakistan is now a main front in the war on terror, they have little idea what to do about it. Asked whether the U.S. military should go into Pakistan without permission to arrest top al Qaeda leaders, a whopping 65 percent of the experts -- who have served as national security advisor, director of the CIA, and in top-leve posts at the Pentagon -- said they were unsure what the United States should do. With so much at stake, that level of uncertainty is alarming.