Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Aunt Benazir's false promises

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 07:12 AM
Original message
Aunt Benazir's false promises
Aunt Benazir's false promises

Bhutto's return bodes poorly for Pakistan -- and for democracy there.
By Fatima Bhutto
November 14, 2007
KARACHI -- We Pakistanis live in uncertain times. Emergency rule has been imposed for the 13th time in our short 60-year history. Thousands of lawyers have been arrested, some charged with sedition and treason; the chief justice has been deposed; and a draconian media law -- shutting down all private news channels -- has been drafted.

Perhaps the most bizarre part of this circus has been the hijacking of the democratic cause by my aunt, the twice-disgraced former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto. While she was hashing out a deal to share power with Gen. Pervez Musharraf last month, she repeatedly insisted that without her, democracy in Pakistan would be a lost cause. Now that the situation has changed, she's saying that she wants Musharraf to step down and that she'd like to make a deal with his opponents -- but still, she says, she's the savior of democracy.

----

I have personal reasons to fear the danger that Ms. Bhutto's presence in Pakistan brings, but I am not alone. The Islamists are waiting at the gate. They have been waiting for confirmation that the reforms for which the Pakistani people have been struggling have been a farce, propped up by the White House. Since Musharraf seized power in 1999, there has been an earnest grass-roots movement for democratic reform. The last thing we need is to be tied to a neocon agenda through a puppet "democrat" like Ms. Bhutto.

By supporting Ms. Bhutto, who talks of democracy while asking to be brought to power by a military dictator, the only thing that will be accomplished is the death of the nascent secular democratic movement in my country. Democratization will forever be de-legitimized, and our progress in enacting true reforms will be quashed. We Pakistanis are certain of this.

-----

Fatima Bhutto is a Pakistani poet and writer. She is the daughter of Mir Murtaza Bhutto, who was killed in 1996 in Karachi when his sister, Benazir, was prime minister.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-bhutto14nov14,0,2482408.story?coll=la-opinion-center
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. As I said several posts ago
We are being played. Who would know more about auntie than her niece. Auntie Benazir has a lot of blood on her hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. The more important question is whether the people of Pakistan are buying it...
If they see this all as an elaborate charade, then I think an Islamic Revolution may be in the wings...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. More Here: "Benazir vs. Musharraf is Punch vs. Judy"
she is right on target, they are equally evil US puppets and our media is playing the game for them...

http://tonykaron.com/2007/11/13/benazir-vs-musharraf-is-punch-vs-judy/

Shlent was the marvelous onomatopoeic term we used in my student activist days, as verb or noun, to describe the stage managing of an event or process in a manner that allowed its appearance to camouflage a power play. (The sound shlent to me always evoked heavy pieces falling smoothly into place.) And I can think of no better term to describe the bogus “showdown” we’re being sold involving Pakistan’s General Pervez Musharraf and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. In fact, appearances aside (although they camouflage very little), it’s plain that Bhutto and Musharraf are still involved in an elaborate U.S.-brokered negotiation process to divide the spoils of power in what might be called Pakistan’s Team America. Musharraf’s police may periodically prevent her from leaving her house, but they’re largely doing her the favor of providing her an excuse for refraining from leading her supporters in confrontation with the regime — which she, and her backers in Washington, are very concerned to avoid. Bhutto has not suffered the fate of other opposition leaders, who have been hounded by the security forces and thrown in prison. And her own political awkwardness and hesitation in responding to Musharraf’s moves are a reminder that all is not quite what it seems in the media narrative of a brave and beleaguered civilian democrat confronting a military despot.

The U.S., in fact, pressed Musharraf to make a power-sharing deal with Bhutto, fearful of the fact that the general appeared to have no social base to continue his role as Washington’s gendarme in the region — as mischievously as he often plays it, every U.S. official who has spoken on the matter in recent weeks has affirmed Musharraf’s centrality to U.S. interests. It was not that the U.S. believed in restoring democratic civilian rule per se — the U.S. didn’t raise a peep of protest when the former prime minister overthrown by Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif, arrived home from exile, only to be unceremoniously bundled back onto a plane to Saudi Arabia — after first being sternly lectured about his impudence in showing up by two of Washington’s Mideast trusties, a Saudi prince and Lebanon’s Saad Hariri. No, Bhutto was Washington’s anointed civilian political leader, presumably after she managed to convince the Bush Administration that she was a more reliable ally in the “war on terror” than was Nawaz Sharif. And when pressed as to why she continues to talk to the dictator whose ouster she demands, her spokespeople say simply that the U.S. told them to.

Musharraf and Bhutto are both viewed as allies by Washington, the latter enlisted to broaden the base of stability of a U.S.-backed regime in Pakistan. But proxies always have their own agendas, and the precise balance of power between them remains very much in play — indeed, if anything, the current “showdown” is part of their contest over the balance of power in Pakistan’s Team USA.

So Bhutto calls on Musharraf to quit, and Musharraf responds by contacting Nawaz Sharif for a chat. This is like “War of the Roses.”

Musharraf didn’t declare emergency rule because he feared Bhutto’s challenge; he declared emergency rule because the Supreme Court was about to rule that he was not, in fact, legitimately the president of Pakistan, because he violated the constitution by standing for the presidency while in command of the military. And the reason Bhutto appeared to hesitate when it happened was obvious: She has as much to fear from the independent judiciary in Pakistan as Musharraf does. The same judges threatening to strip Musharraf of the presidency had also warned that the amnesty extended by him to Bhutto — absolving her of numerous corruption charges — was also illegal. (And, for good measure, the same judges had also ruled that Nawaz Sharif’s expulsion was illegal.) The last thing Bhutto needs is the rule of law and an independent judiciary in Pakistan, for that would pull the rug out from her deal with Musharraf, put her back in court, and bring her fiercest political rival back into the picture at a moment when she is increasingly vulnerable, politically, by virtue of her alliance with the U.S.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Bingo n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Great find! The Pakistan Conflict 101 and how the US is once again up to its knees in it. k&r
Edited on Wed Nov-14-07 08:59 AM by blondeatlast
Edit: yikes, not the OP so can't recommend. Both articles are good background though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. I think it's curious how folks are insisting that her detention is a sham
Edited on Wed Nov-14-07 09:19 AM by bigtree
Was the arrest of the opposition politician Imran Khan, who Bhutto had just agreed to organize her opposition with, a sham as well? Are the arrests of her thousands of supporters, who have gone ahead with her planned protest without her, a sham as well?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/world/asia/14cnd-pakistan.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
5. Everything I have read and seen about Bhutto is amazing and very misrepresented in media.
Edited on Wed Nov-14-07 09:04 AM by cooolandrew
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
6. right now, she's generating and elevating a much needed opposition to Musharraf
She should be encouraged in her opposition.

This account by her relative is extremely biased. It contains no elaboration of the charges leveled against Bhutto, especially the insinuation that Bhutto had something to do with her father's killing.

It looks like Bhutto just can't win with some folks. I think the hyper focus on these old charges from her past is predictable and will be mostly irrelevant if Pakistanis rally behind her in her efforts to take down the Musharraf regime. If she manages to spark a democratic process in Pakistan which results in the removal of the military dictator then she will deserve credit.

Whether she then deserves Musharraf's office is for the Pakistanis to decide. And, I don't believe they will be allowed to make that decision in a free and fair election without the pressure that she, along with others in Pakistan are presently organizing and putting forth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Really?
A genuine 'untainted' opposition leader was arrested again this morning - Imran Khan

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7093932.stm
<snip>
Pakistani opposition politician Imran Khan has been arrested after making his first public appearance since emergency rule was declared, police have said.
The former cricketer was detained after going to the University of Punjab in Lahore to address a protest by students against President Pervez Musharraf.

Mr Khan was initially held for an hour by students from the Jamaat-e-Islami party after a confrontation on campus.

On Tuesday, Mr Khan said there should be no negotiations with Gen Musharraf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. yes
Edited on Wed Nov-14-07 02:53 PM by bigtree
Bhutto contacted Tehreek-e-Insaaf leader Imran Khan, who is in hiding in Lahore to evade arrest. Khan has been critical of her efforts to forge a power-sharing arrangement with President Pervez Musharraf.

Khan welcomed Bhutto's statement that the PPP would boycott polls held under emergency. Bhutto today also asked Musharraf to quit as both president and army chief.

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070032734&ch=11/13/2007%2011:17:00%20PM


ISLAMABAD: Former Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto has condemned the arrest of Imran Khan and PPP leaders Shah Mahmood Qureshi MNA, Raja Riaz MPA, Dr.Asad MPA, Hasan Murtaza Shirazi, Khawaja Rizwan Alam and others in Lahore and Faisalabad.

In a statement on Wednesday, she said that the arrests of PPP leaders and workers and baton charge of women activists would not discourage the Party from the freedom march.

She said that the march was aimed at ending the martial law, restoration of the Constitution, independence of the judiciary and prosperity of the people. The march is to end Martial Law and return Pakistan to its peoples.

She called for the immediate release of Imran Khan, Shah Mahmood Qureshi and all those detained by the police.

http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=120529


Untainted? Possibly. Unfortunately, the situation in Pakistan isn't as simple as the political rhetoric would suggest. Most of these charges and objections are products of long standing animosities between political rivals. Here's one of the detained in Pakistan and her view of Khan. Note that she's also able to speak to the media despite her house arrest.


AMY GOODMAN: We're talking to Asma Jahangir from her home. She’s the chair of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. She is under house arrest. She’s also the UN special rapporteur on the freedom of religion.

ASMA JAHANGIR: Yes, I only have secondhand information through media here and through my own daughter, who keeps coming in and out of the house. But apparently he did want to lead a student demonstration, where he was not really welcomed very much.

Imran Khan is a critic of General Musharraf. He has very little following in his own party, and sometimes he appears to, you know, not understand that religious extremism can be very destructive for this country. So he is a bit confused there. He is also a bit confused whether extremism and democracy can go together or not.

more: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/14/1437241
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
9. Well in this clip they seem very happy she's back...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
12. There doesn't seem to a white knight in this battle...
But Bhutto at least SEEMS to be trying to be elected democratically, and she doesn't wear a uniform - both are pluses in my book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. She's just looted the national treasury twice...
Edited on Wed Nov-14-07 03:26 PM by ellisonz
I think to some extent Musharraf may actually be preferable to the unknown in this case. I mean really, isn't one of the big lies we tell ourselves is that democracy is always the solution to the problem of governence (See Hamas)? What happens if the Islamists win the election? Bhutto's house arrest is actually a good thing since she was almost killed in an bombing. At least Musharraf has held together Pakistan in the face of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, which has probably got to be the most challenging political job in the world right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. She was charged with that
I don't have enough inside knowledge to know how much of the charges were true and how much were politically motivated.

But in general, I would prefer a democratically-elected civilian leader over a military strongman.

I'm not saying Bhutto is clean. But given the information I have right now, I prefer her to Musharraf.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. They seem to be true...
In July 2003 a Swiss court convicted Benazir Bhutto and her husband Asif Zardari of Money Laundering - the charge of corruption was not included as the funds had been placed in Geneva banks prior to the recent enactment of Swiss anti-corruption legislation. The Court sentenced them to a six-month suspended jail term, fined them $50,000 each and ordered they pay more than $2m to the Pakistani Government.

Having appealed this decision Pakistan’s ‘illustrious’ political couple were then confronted, in 2005, with a enhanced charge of Aggravated Money Laundering as subsequent legal investigations had revealed that the money in question now involved a sum of 12 million dollars. Conviction under this charge meant a maximum sentence of five years in jail as well as a fine of about one million Swiss francs.

In September 2005 Benazir Bhutto appeared before a judge in Geneva’s Palais de Justice and underwent intensive questioning - during an eight hour period of hearing - about various deposits of millions of dollars, as well as that well-known necklace worth of £120,000 which was found in a Swiss deposit box.

http://politicalpakistan.blogspot.com/2007/08/analysing-benazirs-motives.html

Wikipedia (I know) has a better overview of all the charges: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto#Charges_of_corruption


I think at this point the choice really is between Musharraf and anarchy.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. the choice is between Musharraf and anarchy?
if there is to be anarchy, it will be Musharraf who's responsible with his brutal disruption of Pakistan's political process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Pakistan's political process has always been disrupted.
Political background

Pakistan has been ruled by both democratic and military governments.<1> The first decade was marred with political unrest and instability resulting in frequent collapses of civilian democratic governments. From 1947 to 1958 as many as seven Prime Ministers of Pakistan either resigned or were ousted. This political instability paved the way for Pakistan’s first military take over. On October 7th 1958 Pakistan’s civilian and first President Iskander Mirza in collaboration with General Mohammad Ayub Khan abrogated Pakistan’s constitution and declared Martial Law.

General Ayub Khan was the president from 1958 to 1969, and General Yahya Khan from 1969 to 1971, with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as the first civilian martial law administrator. Civilian, yet autocratic, rule continued from 1972 to 1977 under Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, but he was deposed by General Zia-Ul-Haq. General Zia was killed in a plane crash in 1988, after which Benazir Bhutto, daughter of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was elected as the Prime Minister of Pakistan. She was the youngest woman ever to be elected the Head of Government and the first woman to be elected as the Head of Government of a Muslim country. Her government was followed by that of Nawaz Sharif, and the two leaders alternated until the military coup by General Pervez Musharraf in 1999. Since the resignation of President Rafiq Tarar in 2001, Musharraf has been the President of Pakistan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Pakistan#Political_background

It could be said that Pakistan itself is a disruption...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. it'll take more than a blog post to convince me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. "What happens if the Islamists win the election?"
Well, basically, radical Islamists would be in control of a nuclear arsenal -- exactly the fate we're so desperate to avoid in Iran. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-14-07 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. The beauty of the rhetorical question in debate...
Forget Iran, it's Pakistan that keeps me up at night. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC