Great piece in the Post contrasting the treatment the U.N. gave Rafik Hariri's assassination with Benazir Bhutto's. In the former case, the U.S., the French and the U.K. saw an opportunity to pressure Syria, so the U.N. began a far-reaching probe that implicated Bashar Assad. But with the prospect existing that any such probe would implicate U.S. ally Pervez Musharraf, there's little desire to sniff around. Says the White House about Pakistan's Scotland Yard-assisted-but-circumscribed investigation:

Despite [Musharraf-imposed] limits, the Bush administration said British involvement gave the probe credibility. "We don't see the need for an investigation beyond that at this time," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Wednesday.

Bhutto was buried without an autopsy, so the likelihood of knowing, say, whether the bullet that (maybe) killed her came from an official-issue weapon, is minimal. But an international probe would be able to address whether the Musharraf government did all it could have to protect her; how the killers got so close to Bhutto; whether Bhutto asked for and received foreign protection, as her close friends say; and other unanswered questions. And that's exactly why it won't happen. If only Bhutto had been murdered by Ahmedinejad.