Home
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Benazir’s Assassination:ADVANTAGE MUSHARRAF?, by Sreedhar,28 December 2007 Print E-mail

PAKISTAN SPECIAL

New Delhi, 28 December 2007

Benazir’s Assassination

ADVANTAGE MUSHARRAF?

By Sreedhar

The tragic events on December 27 evening in Rawalpindi resulting in the death of the former Prime Minister of Pakistan Benazir Bhutto can be examined only after taking three factors into consideration.               

First, the group that needs to be blamed maximum is the Pakistani Armed Forces. One is not clear on which side the Armed Forces are, whether they are with the jihadis or part of the US grand strategy of the war on terrorism. The statements made by Gen. Musharraf (Retd), from time to time, indicate that he is fighting the jihadis.  But the ground realities show that the Armed Forces are doing nothing to fight the jihadis.

In fact there were reports that the Pakistani intelligence agencies like the ISI had alerted the jihadi leadership about the impending attacks and provided them the logistics to escape.

As of today, the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), Baluchistan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas have become safe havens for the jihadis and the writ of Islamabad does not run in these areas. Some of the Pakistani observers believe that that there is close collaboration between a large section of the Pakistani Armed Forces and the jihadis.

This becomes evident from the way the Pakistani Army officers spoke to this author on a number of occasions about the jihadis. Often I used to feel that the jihadis have become part and parcel of the Pakistani Establishment and an instrument of foreign policy.

The second factor is the US who conceptualized the idea of the jihadis way back in the 1980s to fight the Red Army in Afghanistan. The American policy makers and the Pakistani sympathizers in the US State Department were short-sighted and never anticipated the long term implications of such a policy. They even happily prodded countries like India to recognize the Taliban type of Government in the mid 1990s.

The US realized its folly after the incidents of 9/11. But still persisted with their ally, Pakistan, in fighting the war against terrorism, not realizing the intimate relationship between the Pakistani military rulers and the jihadis.

Once again, the extremely limited perceptions of the US State Department officials about the Indian sub-continent landed them in evolving a messy policy. When the jihadis were shouting from their roof tops that democracy was not acceptable to them, Washington worked out a plan to introduce a smooth transition to democracy with Gen. Musharraf and made Benazir to take the lead.

The Karachi blast of October 18 must have shown to what extent the jihadis plan was working and the changes that needed to be made in the entire plan. In the process, Benazir got identified with the US to such an extent that some of the jihadi groups had started calling her the American stooge.

Lastly, various political groups for their own reasons cultivated the jihadis. The world was shocked to know that Nawaz Sharief played host to Osama Bin Laden and sought his help to get back in to power.

Similarly Benazir's Interior Minister Naseerullah Babbar was the key person in creating the Taliban in the early 1990s. Benazir's last six month speeches stating that she would take action against the radical groups (read jihadis) sounds hollow to people who are familiar with Benazir's attitude in the past.

With three major players in Pakistani politics being associated with the jihadis in one form or the other, the immediate question that arises is who is going to get benefited by Benazir's assassination?

The obvious answer would be the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) in the forthcoming elections on January 8, 2008. The sympathy wave would enable the PPP to sweep the polls. In real political terms this would not be acceptable to Nawaz Sharief's Pakistan Muslim League (PML). Therefore, the PML people are bound to send signals to the powers-that-be to postpone the elections. Already, there are reports that Nawaz Sharief wants the people to boycott the elections.

The jihadis have already declared that they are against any democratic process being introduced in Pakistan. Their agenda seems to be to bring in the Shariat into the rule book and it should form the basis for the governance of Pakistan. Moreover, they have already declared that a woman’s place is at home and not for governing an Islamic country like Pakistan.

Against this backdrop, the jihadis taking extreme action against Benazir can be understood. By eliminating Benazir they have effectively eliminated any charismatic leader who could have a large following. It is ironical that there is no successor to Benazir in the Bhutto family and her husband is no match to her. Benazir’s children are too young to take up the mantle of leadership of the PPP. 

Gen. Musharraf does not want any political party to come to power with a huge majority which could alter the political equilibrium. On the pretext of the breakdown of the law and order situation, he can conveniently defer the election for the time being. And if he follows in the footsteps of his predecessor, the late Gen. Zia ul Haq, who postponed the elections more than half a dozen times, then Musharraf’s postponement of the elections is not going to be unusual.

Importantly, the US has very few choices, no matter what it may say publicly. President Musharraf is the only person who at least publicly supports it. There is no other alternative to him. This means Washington would have to fall in line with whatever course of action Musharraf sets in motion.

On balance it appears the situation after the death of Benazir Bhutto seems to have turned to Musharraf’s advantage. However, what needs to be watched in the coming days would be to what extend the public agitation is likely to continue in Pakistan.

The initial reports indicate that there was a public outburst in almost all the important towns in Pakistan. The media reports coming from various quarters also indicate mixed signals. Some observers expect the country to head for a period of prolonged unrest which might lead to a civil war like situation.

Some others feel that this is a temporary phenomenon and may at best last for a week or two. After which things would fall in to proper places. Significantly, other than the Pakistani Armed Forces there is no other institution today which commands support from the people. In other words, a lot would depend on the relationship between Gen. Musharraf and Gen. Ashifaq Kayani in the coming days.

The Indian concern to this new development in Pakistan is on predictable lines. At one level, the Government and various political parties have condemned this ghastly act and feel that Benazir’s assassination will be a major setback for the return of democracy in Pakistan. The Indo-Pak composing dialogue has already been derailed. New Delhi is anxious that it be restored at an early date. ---- INFA

(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)

Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT