Bhutto Assassination:
Pakistan's TragedyBy G. Asgar Mitha
29 December, 2007
Countercurrents.orgIt is doubtful that Pakistan and the world will ever know for a long time who assassinated Benazir Bhutto but we may come to know, not today but certainly some time in the future, that there was a conspiracy. Ms. Bhutto came to Pakistan to participate in the elections because it was in the US interests. She is dead, just like her killer, so we will never know what those interests were. It is without doubt that the US was exerting pressure on Musharraf for Bhutto’s participation in the governance of Pakistan. We may only be able to guess why Benazir Bhutto was killed and by who but not with any surety. Certainly it was not the bogey of Al-Qaeda or by the parties participating in the elections but by a more sinister hand or hands—a clique--- that had a vested interest to ensure that Bhutto would not succeed in the elections and form the next government. Ms. Bhutto’s death is a personal tragedy for the Bhutto dynasty, not for democracy as she never was democratic. She, like her father Zulfiqar Bhutto, was from a tribal and jagirdari (landowner) clan.
There were four things that India accomplished necessary for a democracy to work. I’ve taken India as a comparison because they both obtained independence at the same time and their cultures are similar even though religions are different. But then religion is a tool of the politicians. In spite of the advice given to Mohamed Ali Jinnah to institute those foundations of democracy for a nation to prosper, Pakistan’s successive leaders failed to accomplish the basic framework for the democracy. It was a tragedy that only one year after independence, the founding father could not live to realise the national dream but it, however, proved to be a boon for those with selfish motives. Those same assassinated Liaquat Ali Khan in October 1951. Tragically, Mr. Khan the first Prime Minister of Pakistan who shared Jinnah’s dream for Pakistan was killed close to where Ms. Bhutto met her demise.
The four critical requirements of a democracy for which India reaps the fruits but which Pakistan has failed to even sow the seed are 1) A Constitution 2) Abolishing the landlord system 3) Land reform and 4) A strong education foundation. Much has been debated by journalists, politicians, bureaucrats, technocrats and individuals why Pakistan has been a pseudo failed state but it is my opinion that the underlying causes have been those four. Let me discuss these in order.
Firstly a constitution is a framework of laws to govern a nation. Without laws, nothing can succeed. Even the universe is governed by laws of science. Whereas Pakistan should have formulated a constitution within 12-18 months of independence, it failed to do so until 1973. But even then successive military leaders have been fiddling with the constitution to benefit themselves and those that keep them in power. The question is who or what group has given these military leaders the empowerment to amend the constitution? Obviously there has been a clique who feels they’re above the law and that the law has to be structured to favour them rather than the people. But even before Pakistan had a constitution, this elite clique wanted power and felt that only the military clout and the threat of the martial laws would guarantee them the power. Within 10 years of independence, the clique ensured that Pakistan would be governed by martial law. It was the clique that created the conditions of national disorder before the first military takeover under Ayub Khan in 1957. One of the elements in the group were the bureaucrats but I’ll discuss the others in the next few paragraphs.
The pitfalls of Jagirdari system. India abolished the princely states and rid itself of the rajas, maharajas, nizams and the princes---collectively the jagirdars or landlords--- because the founding and successive leaders who possessed national vision understood that for the governance of a republic, centralization is essential. There would have been no consensus for a constitution and republican governance had India not abolished this system at the outset. The bureaucracy is essential but not the landlords. Pakistan’s rich landlords, however, recognized that for them to have a grip on the nation and their wealth, they needed the support of the bureaucrats that immigrated from India. The latter were bought out by the former. It is this clique that rules Pakistan with the assistance of the military. It is wrongly thought that Pakistan’s system of military rule is based on a Turkish model. Turkey’s military ensures that the nation remains democratic in sharp contrast to Pakistan’s military that ensures that it and the clique govern Pakistan in their own larger interest--not by a Constitution to benefit the people but by their own selfish motives.
Third, any economist will agree that a large parcel of agricultural land will be less productive in the hands of one landowner but that smaller parcels of the same land in the hands of several landowners will be more productive. Pakistan’s agricultural productivity has been controlled by several powerful and wealthy landowners who employ labourers to till their lands. These peasant farmers and their families are held in bondage. These same landowners whose children, educated in the west, return to Pakistan to become bureaucrats, industrialists and politicians, some in shadow and others visible. So here is a mafia whose interests are not Pakistan but in solidifying their power base and becoming even wealthier.
And finally, for a democracy to flourish, a strong educated technocratic population is essential. The mafia has never provided that foundation. And where they’ve built institutions of learning, it’s only for economic gains. They’ve strived to ensure that the educated elite take their wares to the west which opens its arms to them. The mafia ensures the educated class either get the boot or become submissive servants. As an example, Dr. Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme, has been humiliated by the same mafia. In several cases, doctors, engineers, scientists and industrialists who have tried to establish hospitals and essential industries for Pakistan’s prosperity have been turned away through a process of bureaucratic measures meant to frustrate the investors. It is this class of landowner-bureaucratic-industrialist-politician mafia that is also responsible for the high level of national corruption.
Benazir Bhutto came to Pakistan with the intention to ensure that the military role for Pakistan needed to be ended because this was the same establishment that had hanged her father, laid corruption charges against her, exiled her and was playing an increasingly strong role in Pakistan’s politics. Maybe she felt that there was a need to open up her country for foreign investments which had largely been restricted under Musharraf whose government was relying more on foreign aid than foreign investments. But Ms. Bhutto had forgotten that this dynasty had once supported the military regimes. She needed to be reminded in death that the military institution has always been and continues to be propped up the alliance---the mafia.
Pakistan continues to be internally manipulated and if by some process it is not ended, it may end up as more than one nation.
Leave A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
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.
Syndicate CC Headlines On Your Blog
