The assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto marks a dark day in an increasingly darker Pakistani future. Her death comes 12 days before national parliamentary elections in what the Washington Post described as an environment "already marked by enormous political turmoil."
A few days earlier, Bhutto, leader of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), had accused the government of engineering terrorist acts to keep people from participating in the upcoming elections. "The government is manipulating all this in order to force people stay away from the election rallies. The ongoing wave of terrorist activities in the country is part of a conspiracy to terrorize people from attending political meetings."
Bhutto's death comes days after Pakistan's election commission rejected former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's appeal on his eligibility to stand for election. Of the lost appeal, a party spokesman for Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League party said, "This also shows that they are still afraid of his popularity and cannot face him . . . [and] that there is no level playing field in these elections."
As the BBC said of Bhutto's assassination and where it occurred, "Rawalpindi, a garrison city, is seen as one of the country's most secure cities, making the attack even more embarrassing for the military authorities."
But, then again, maybe not. That she was killed in Rawalpindi merely makes Musharraf seem to be the one likely responsible. Musharraf's actions, from his initial coup in 1999 to his manipulation of Pakistan's Supreme Court and the organs of governance since, have been designed (if clumsily) to retain power at any cost.
Now, Pakistan's future, already uncertain if not bleak, grows more so. The United States bears no small responsibility in this debacle. American funding of Pakistan's disordered tyranny, well beyond $10 billion thus far, has merely funded the Pakistani military which is Musharraf's key support structure in is bid to hold onto power.
So what now? While President Bush extended his "deepest condolences to the family of Benazir Bhutto, to her friends, to her supporters," those supporters need much more than condolences. They need, at the very least, the US to start linking any aid program with specific and concrete demands that Musharraf restore the civil institutions he has determinedly weakened. This includes the restoration of Pakistan's Supreme Court.
The 9/11 Commission in 2004 made the following recommendation regarding Pakistan:
If Musharraf stands for enlightened moderation in a fight for his life and for the life of his country, the United States should be willing to make hard choices too, and make the difficult long-term commitment to the future of Pakistan. Sustaining the current scale of aid to Pakistan, the United States should support Pakistan’s government in its struggle against extremists with a comprehensive effort that extends from military aid to support for better education, so long as Pakistan’s leaders remain willing to make difficult choices of their own."
Of course, that didn't happen. The US made no fundamental, long-term commitment to strengthen the educational and institutional foundations of Pakistan. We merely looked away, useless rhetoric aside, and let Musharraf run roughshod over a nuclear-armed nation numbering 160 million.
We're witnessing merely the beginning of what our policy has wrought.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interestingly enough, Nawaz Sharif's nomination papers were rejected on the ground that he had a 2000 conviction for terrorism and hijacking. However, the Election Commission did not reject his nomination in the 2002 elections when Sharif was in Saudi Arabia but it suddenly decides to in 2007.
I too think Musharraf unfortunately has a lot to gain from this situation. The assassination seemingly legitimizes his given reasons for imposing emergency last month, allows him to invoke it in the near future, to really crack down on civil society and crush all opposition to him. And the real tragic part is he will be able to get away with it as today's event will silence any international criticism of him. Whenever anybody urges him to move toward democracy, he will point to today's events and declare that he is better aware of the precarious law and order situation on the ground in Pakistan, and only he can handle it with a martial law regime.
That's a detail I'd forgotten (the 2002 elections) until you mentioned it.
I agree that Musharraf has much to gain even though others might claim responsibility. His clearly targeted efforts to undermine civil society demonstrates what he believes to be the greatest threat to his rule. Unfortunately, these deliberate strikes against Pakistan's institutions, already weak from years of corruption and unaccountability, might not survive this. I hope that's not the case but it is my fear.
Post a Comment