Was
Bhutto Just A Tragic Victim?
By
Chris Gelken
28 December,
2007
Countercurrents.org
Canadian
writer Mark Steyn wrote on his blog today, “She was beautiful
and charming and sophisticated and smart and modern, and everything
we in the West would like a Muslim leader to be - though in practice,
as Pakistan's Prime Minister, she was just another grubby wardheeler
from one of the world's most corrupt political classes.”
Speaking
on PressTV, Jeff Steinberg, Senior Editor of Executive Intelligence
Review, was rather more forgiving. “I think she’ll be remembered
generally in a very positive light. Although, I must say that while
some of the characterizations are obviously a bit harsh considering
she was murdered earlier today, they also carry some truth.”
Steinberg
sees her neither as simply a politician who may have engaged in some
creative accounting practices while in office, nor simply as a martyr
for the cause of democracy in Pakistan. Rather, he characterizes Bhutto
as a victim, a tragic victim of the policies hatched up by international
power brokers in Washington and London.
“I
know from speaking to some people who were very close friends of Mrs.
Bhutto, that they urged her not to return to Pakistan, fearing it was
a kind of death wish on her part,” Steinberg told PressTV during
a television interview.
“But
other people have said look, this was a moment of crisis for her country
and clearly there was a strong push from both the U.S. and British governments
to encourage her to go back and forge a political deal with President
Musharraf,” Steinberg said.
They hoped,
he continued, that such a deal would bring stability to a situation
that was inherently unstable.
Other analysts
have suggested that Musharraf, the general/president, had lost the edge
in the war on terror, and that a military option alone would not get
the job done. What was needed was a political force behind the military
to fight the terrorists. And that, they say, is where Bhutto came in.
“I
think we’re dealing yet again with a strong element of delusion
and misjudgment from world powers who have been putting pressure on
and imposing their will on the Pakistani government for some time,”
Steinberg said.
“I
think, in a sense, she was a tragic victim of a larger policy that was
doomed to fail because it was based on an unreal assessment of the situation
on the ground in Pakistan and in neighboring Afghanistan.”
Steinberg
explained that in his opinion Washington and London had come up with
an idea that they could create a solution to a complex and difficult
problem – namely creating a governing combination in Pakistan
that could also deal with the intense instability in neighboring Afghanistan.
“The
fact that the frontier provinces of Pakistan are now safe havens for
Taliban and al-Qaeda, all of these things make for a very difficult
situation, and the idea that the U.S. could impose a package deal between
a now civilian President Musharraf, a Prime Minister Bhutto, and a new
American vetted general in charge of the army, was a dangerously unrealistic
fantasy,” Steinberg said, “and one I think that was finally
played out in the streets of Rawalpindi and Bhutto’s tragic death
today.
Al-Qaeda has already claimed responsibility for the attack that claimed
Bhutto’s life, but it’s President Musharraf who is finding
himself the target of criticism for not providing sufficient security
for the campaigning politician.
“There’s a lot of questions that will be asked over the
coming days about the security logistics on the scene,” Steinberg
said, “Its rather stunning to me that in a situation where there
had been previous assassination attempts the security people would have
allowed her to be standing up in the car. I saw some BBC footage of
her completely exposed to a crowd of what looked like thousands of people.”
There is little doubt that Bhutto was a target for al-Qaeda. She was
considered a strong Washington ally over her recent public promises
to fight the terrorist group.
“There is going to be an enormous amount of blame going on,”
Steinberg said, “Pakistan is also a country where when a crisis
occurs the military invariably steps in as one of the anchors of stability.”
But will the U.S. and British governments accept the re-imposition of
emergency law? Analysts say they will have no choice; a Pakistan in
chaos would be a disaster. There is no other political force in Pakistan
other than Musharraf, and if he decides to re-impose emergency law and
cancel the January election, then its unlikely that Washington or London
will do anything more than make mild recommendations for an early return
to democracy.
“Stability,” Steinberg said, “is at a premium. I think
the United States has no choice whatsoever but to support Musharraf
in the sense that he is the only horse left for Washington to ride in
this situation.”
It is a situation of their own creation; he said, after they, “dropped
the ball after 9/11 and diverted resources and attention away from helping
to bring stability to a post Taliban Afghanistan.”
Steinberg said Washington and its allies diverted massive resources
into an invasion of Iraq that had nothing to do whatsoever with the
events of 9/11 leaving a hopelessly inadequate force to deal with the
remnants of the Taliban and the hunt for al-Qaeda.
“There are ten thousand U.S. combat troops in Afghanistan out
of a total of about 30,000 NATO forces doing a job that requires a minimum
of 100,000 troops. You have 90 percent of the world’s opium production
coming out of Afghanistan under a joint U.S.-NATO occupation. So clearly
things are going horribly wrong in that area of the world and we continue
to pursue a policy based on fantasy and delusion.”
Steinberg said he isn’t optimistic for the aftermath of the assassination.
“What we may find increasingly is that the Pakistan situation
devolves into chaos,” he said, “I am afraid of that, I hope
it won’t happen.
“I see great danger in instability ahead and I don’t see
any clear definition of anyone coming out the winner in this,”
Steinberg said.
“I think Washington and London bear an enormous amount of responsibility
for Mrs. Bhutto’s death and the disaster that I’m afraid
is going to follow.”
This article is based on interviews conducted by the author and first
broadcast on PressTV on Friday, December 28, 2007
www.gelken.com
chrisgelken.blogspot.com
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.