PAKISTAN'S UNFOLDING DISASTER The magnitude of Pakistan's current tragedy is almost more than the mind can take in: A fifth of the country flooded by torrential monsoon rains. Fifteen million to 20 million people driven from their homes or otherwise affected. Six million in need of emergency assistance, such as food and clean water. Millions of acres of the country's best cropland underwater. Livestock drowned. Medical clinics destroyed. Cholera threatening the survivors. This is a disaster on many levels. It is a tragedy for millions of people. It also is a strategic threat -- to the stability of Pakistan's nuclear-armed government and to U.S. efforts to suppress al-Qaida and other extremists wreaking havoc on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. These groups are eager to use the crisis to sow more resentment toward Islamabad and Washington and win new adherents for their nihilistic cause. The world, especially the United States, must not blow this one. We worry it already could be doing that. The United Nations has called for $460 million in donations for immediate relief. So far, less than half of that has been committed. The United Nations says that the money is urgently needed to supply food, clean water, tents or shelter materials, basic household goods, emergency health care and livestock feed. More delay means even more devastation. Washington is doing better than other donors, providing much needed helicopters for rescue and supply missions, prefabricated bridges and more than $70 million in relief and resettlement funds. It should be rallying other countries, as well as private organizations and individuals, to do their fair share. But surely this country, as the richest donor with the greatest strategic interest in Pakistan, could do a lot more right now. The world has been slow to grasp the enormity of this crisis, perhaps because it unfolded slowly, not in a sudden jolt like an earthquake or tsunami. Or, perhaps, the floods were overshadowed by the out-of-control fires in Russia or were neglected because many donors were already fatigued from the challenge of rebuilding Haiti. The relatively low death toll (about 1,500), the summer vacation doldrums and negative views of Pakistan as corrupt and war-ridden also may have dampened enthusiasm for helping. The devastation in Pakistan is likely to worsen as the monsoon rains continue. But even an end to the rains will not end the emergency. Plans need to be made right now to ensure that next year's crops are planted. Ahead is the enormous challenge of rebuilding Pakistan's shattered bridges, roads, structures and agricultural and economic base. For now, the humanitarian needs are paramount. In some areas, radical Islamic charities provided shelter and hot meals well before the beleaguered authorities could bring in supplies. This is a battle for hearts and minds. It is one Pakistan's government, and the United States, must not lose. A TRADE DEAL TO HELP REBUILD One the best long-term ways to help Pakistan -- and improve America's image there -- is to help Pakistanis help themselves. That is why President George W. Bush and now President Barack Obama have pushed for slashing protective tariffs on the textiles and apparel products that are Pakistan's biggest exports to the United States. Congress has instead chosen partisanship and protectionism over such good sense. We hope this tragedy will finally get lawmakers to do what is needed. Reducing or eliminating tariffs would cost the American taxpayer nothing and lower consumer prices here, and the benefits would flow directly into the Pakistani civilian economy, where it is desperately needed. The trade legislation that finally emerged from the House last year was so hemmed in with protectionist limits that it was almost worthless. It covers only exports from mountainous border provinces where the terrain and security conditions are inhospitable to industry and from which transport costs to Pakistan's main port of Karachi are prohibitive. It reduces tariffs mainly on textile products, rather than the apparel items where Pakistan is most competitive -- cotton shirts, bluejeans, trousers, socks and underwear. The Senate has failed to pass any tariff reductions largely because Republicans have objected to sound language in the House bill endorsing basic international labor standards for Pakistani export workers. These are especially important in a country rife with child labor abuses and a justice system that winks at the crimes of the well connected. Obama needs to go back to Capitol Hill and press both houses to pass a far bolder trade liberalization bill. Any legislation must knock down tariff barriers on all Pakistani textile and apparel exports -- wherever they are produced. That includes the restive border area, the flood-ravaged heartland and the more industrialized coastal region. Despite what the dwindling number of American producers say, reducing or eliminating those tariffs would mainly cut into the sales of other Asian-made jeans and T-shirts. Until now, textiles and apparel accounted for 60 percent of Pakistan's total exports and 40 percent of its manufacturing jobs. The industry is sure to be staggered by the floods, which washed away 20 percent of the annual cotton crop and destroyed major power stations that supply electricity to factories. Reviving this industry is crucial to Pakistan's hopes for future stability and prosperity. American companies, and their congressional supporters will scream at easing tariffs. They should not be allowed to trump America's national security interest. IMMIGRATION BAIT AND SWITCH Secure Communities, an immigration enforcement program created under President George W. Bush and now being greatly expanded by President Barack Obama, is billed as an effort to catch and deport 'the worst of the worst,' the violent criminals, drug and gun smugglers, gang members and other dangerous aliens. That would be excellent, if true. It doesn't seem to be. The Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, the Center for Constitutional Rights, a public-interest legal organization, and the National Day Laborer Organizing Network analyzed arrest and deportation statistics and other data on Secure Communities they obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. The records, covering the program from its inception in October 2008 through June 2010, lend disturbing credence to fears voiced by immigrant advocates and some law-enforcement officials. The program requires agencies to automatically run fingerprints through federal immigration databases for anyone they arrest. Critics warned that it would be an indiscriminate dragnet -- ensnaring illegal immigrants without criminal records, and encouraging racial profiling. Sheriff Michael Hennessey of San Francisco objected to Secure Communities, saying it targeted too many noncriminals and would have a dangerous 'chilling effect' on the willingness of communities to work with local law enforcement. It turns out the critics were right. The Immigration and Custom Enforcement records show that a vast majority, 79 percent, of people deported under Secure Communities had no criminal records or had been picked up for low-level offenses, like traffic violations and juvenile mischief. Of the approximately 47,000 people deported in that period only about 20 percent had been charged with or convicted of serious 'Level 1' crimes, like assault and drug dealing. The national average of Secure Communities deportees with no criminal records was about 26 percent, but that figure also varied wildly around the country. It was 54 percent in Maricopa County, Ariz., whose sheriff is notorious for staging indiscriminate immigration raids. In Travis, Texas, it was 82 percent. The Obama administration has deployed Secure Communities in 544 jurisdictions in 27 states, including every county along the southern border. It plans to have the entire country participating by 2013. Secure Communities 'focuses our resources on identifying and removing the most serious criminal offenders first and foremost,' said John Morton, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The program now appears to be quite different from that: an effort to yoke local police into a broad campaign of civil immigration enforcement, maximizing the detention and deportation of the people whom Obama says he wants to give a chance to pay their debt to society and earn their right to become Americans. Secure Communities won't make the country more secure, not the way it is working. Police departments that don't want to participate should be able to opt out. The Obama administration needs to fix it or jettison it. ANGLERS AND THE DIATOM As a rule, invasive species do not invade on their own. They do so with human help. A good example is Didymosphenia geminata, a diatom that reproduces quickly and can grow in massive blooms and mats. In the past few years, it has spread widely from its native habit -- cool mountain lakes and streams in North America and Europe -- to waters where it was previously unknown or had only limited growth. It can alter stream ecology, affecting insect life and spawning habitat. No one knows why this kind of algae -- better known as didymo or rock snot -- is suddenly able to grow profusely outside its relatively constricted native habitat. We do know one of the ways it travels -- underfoot, on felt-soled wading boots favored by anglers because they give good traction on slippery rocks. It takes only a single cell to start a new colony, and felt soles are hard to dry thoroughly -- one way of killing didymo -- or disinfect. That's why the makers of fishing gear are phasing them out and why Alaska and Vermont have banned them, to the misplaced dismay of some anglers. Like the invasive, and hugely destructive zebra mussel, it will take incredible vigilance to keep Didymosphenia geminata from spreading. Boaters have grown used to the signs warning against spreading zebra mussels -- and to the precaution of keeping their boats clean and even disinfecting them with a mild bleach solution. Fly fishermen have it much easier. They can simply give up their felt soles in favor of rubber or studded soles. To each body of water we come as an alien, and it is our responsibility to come clean. 