Understanding Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

A thought-provoking collection of quotes. I'd say, it is better to read facts and quotations like these than to read an exaggerated and maimed version of history. Thank you.

Regards

Sana

Re: # 148

An engineered deal and Government sponsored massive welcome does not mean a thing. Without GOP support, not even one tenth people would be there. Bhutto was hanged, how many people came out then and yet they are apparently flocking to the airport today.

A sold out and corrupt woman who is not even one tenth of her illustrious father cannot deliver a progressive Pakistan.

A massive flood of people will welcome Benazir Bhutto in a few minutes.

To reduce the massive outpouring to the cult of Bhutto is a travesty of the truth.

This is the same group that had rallied around Fatima Jinnah in 1965 ... This is the same group that voted one bloc in 1946 ... Only a fraction of it supported Bhutto because of only one reason : Bhutto promised to deliver to the masses Jinnah's Pakistan, a Pakistan free of exploitation and a Pakistan truly representative of the wishes of Pakistani people. A promise that Bhutto never kept.


BB is coming to Pakistan on the same agenda: a progressive Pakistan of Jinnah's vision. She will re-affirm this at Jinnah's mausoleum.

To Understand Bhutto visit www.bhutto.org

#145 by Ras on December 11, 2006 10:23pm PT

---

taikonaut,

I think that the Pakistani people have a much more positive memory of ZAB
then what you portray here. M. Majid Ali has possibly written the best
description of this complex individual.

---

Dear Ras sahib,

Respectfully! I beg to differ.

As I mentioned in #142 “Bhutto ended up replacing free-market elite with the communist elite. That`s all. And that`s why commie elite would support Bhutto, while free-market folks would not.”

Mega-farmers lobby was too strong for Bhutto so the big farms narrowly escaped the communist wrath.

My request to the communists of Pakistan is simple. Be honest! If you are carrying Hugo Chavez`s little doll in your heart, then don’t hide it. Show it and be proud of it.

Pakistani communists cannot straddle both sides and have this so called “mixed economy”. Either you are for big government big spender or you are not. Either you want baboos to run your factories schools banks, or you are not.

So quit playing these games on commie economy. As a famous Urdu poet said so eloquently

Saaf chuptay bhi nahi
Saamnay aatay bhi nahi.
[trans: they are not open and honest. they just play hide and seek]
Bhutto and his cronies like Mubasshir Hasan and Mahboobul Haq conspired and sussessfully killed our Hyundais, Tatas, GEs, and IBMs with one big commie revolution. It was so unfortunate to see these Western trained elite gone wild on commies hashish.

Sadly, the anti-development hashish is still around, now taken the form of pan-Islamism. Look at our elite these days who are living good lives in the West. Still when they gather, their mouths are filled with Mullah garbage all in the name of Islam.

I agree that Pakistani commies sit and cry
Bhutto (or Stalin, Fidel, Nehru, and soon Hugo) tairy yaad aayee tairay jaanay kay baad.
[Bhutto we realized your value only after you were gone!]

Even when Pakistani commies clearly see the destructive impact of their misdeeds, they still want the commie days back. Well what they say:

Chut-ti nahin munh say yeh kaafir lagi huiee [Alas! I can`t put down the bottle].

Warm regards

taikonaut,

I think that the Pakistani people have a much more positive memory of ZAB
then what you portray here. M. Majid Ali has possibly written the best
description of this complex individual.
During the past 15 years I have been thinking a great deal about him and
have even attempted to write a few articles in his memory.
To call him a ``commie`` would be I believe a disservice to both commies and
his legacy.
His was the great Pakistani experiment that failed him, but not his country.
In a way he was as complex as the people he was trying to represent.
Humble he was not. But behind that ego was a brain that Pakistan could have
used to its benefit for years to come.
Bhutto was a proponent of the ``mixed economy`` model at best. His power base
was the poor and powerless. He spoke directly to them, a first by a leader of
Pakistan. It was certainly a sight to see. To this day he lives in the hearts of
millions, and his daughter Benazir still wins their votes.
I shudder to think what post 1971 Pakistan would have been like without him.
He opened the labor market of the Middle East for our poor and many were
able to jump into the middle class from there. He was certainly not perfect
in his economic vision but he gave Pakistan what it needed most, some hope.
His personal habits did a great deal to add to his demise. The Generals really
did not know what to do with him eventually except to remove him from the scene.
He drank proudly, loved women and the music of Pathanay Khan etc. He was rightfully
paranoid about a number of things, especially his own well being.

Zeemax is right. His image was tarnished both during his trial and after his
judicial assasination.

But as with everything else, what good does it do to accuse him now? He has been gone
over 25 years and some here on CHOWK still blame him for Pakistan`s current situation.
Let us remember him as someone who has made an immense contribution to the
survival of today`s Pakistan. He was not a saint but he was not an evil sinner either.
He was just someone who mattered when his country needed him.

On Bangladesh, we were all responsible. Our attitudes needed much improvement.
It is very easy to make Bhutto Sahib the fall guy. East and West Pakistan started off
on the wrong foot. The rest is now history and a movement led by someone named Mozumdar who WAS a commie lead to the impression Bengalis were all going the Naxalite way. Enter Kissinger and company ``tilt`` and all.

But getting back to the current reality, some of us still wish for a secular,
democratic Pakistan and the Bhutto legacy is I believe, important to the
country today. I could be wrong but unfortunately don`t see anything else
out there that can sustain ``enlightened moderation.``

With Respect

Ras

#142/143 by taikonaut

... We should try our level best to figure out what we can offer to the rest of the world..

Too late for that now. Ras reproduced a very relevant extract in ``Should the smaller nations ... exchanging their independence for material gains and promises of economic prosperity? The answer is an emphatic `No``.

It could be done `then` when ZAB had identified it accurately. It can`t be done now. Globalisation, in effect, is no more than a division of labour amongst nations in line with the value addition capacity of each. Capital will be distributed accordingly and the resulting prosperity or lack of it. Name of the game is `value addition`. Those who have it, will remain ahead. Those who don`t, will remain behind and keep doing the low-end jobs for the high-end nations.

Cheers!

Re: # 141 by Ras on December 11, 2006 8:31am PT

---

The question before the smaller nations of today is how they should conduct their affairs in such a manner as to safeguard their basic interests; to retain their territorial integrity and to continue to exercise independence in their relationship

---

Dear Ras, your essay is based on ``world is in a conflict`` point of view.

An alternative point of view is that every nation, big or small brings some unique set of capabilities to the table. These capabilities (or core competencies) are then traded or bartered among each other. Quality of these capabilities is usually combined with market forces and political clout to determine how many widgets would pass between the nations.

That is why it is utmost important for Pakistan or other nations to focus on the positive aspects of global relations instead of talking conflict. We should try our level best to figure out what we can offer to the rest of the world.

peace.

Re: # 136 by zeemax on December 10, 2006 10:01pm PT

---

#135 by taikonaut

What he did to all of the above was to prevent an elite from hogging

---

Dunno where you live my dear zee! Your statements about the elite are really misleading. Please try to understand that there are good elites and then not-so-good elites.

However the society needs elites just like it needs workers. In free market, elites take the form of CEOs, inventors, academics, and journalists.

In communist societies, the elite usually are the party comrades.

Bhutto ended up replacing free-market elite with the communist elite. That`s all.
And that`s why commies elite would support Bhutto, while free-market folks would not.

---

There is a clear elitist dictatorship and the education system ensures the poor can never get ahead. They can`t even go to english medium schools.

---

Bhuttos commie nationalization was an ``equal-opportunity-destroyer`` of every aspect of our society.

If you want to talk about schools. Then go back and compare the standard of government schools before commie-qazi attack, and after.

Government run schools suffered more than any other institution. So ultimately the communist dadagiri and budmashi (corruption) hit the poor the hardest. You cry about English medium schools while totally ignoring the utter destruction of urdu medium schools, colleges, and universities.

Sad indeed!

Z.A. Bhutto in The Myth of Independence (below)...

`` The question before the smaller nations of today is how they should conduct their affairs in such a manner as to safeguard their basic interests; to retain their territorial integrity and to continue to exercise independence in their relationship with the Global Powers as well as with the smaller nations. The relationship between the Global Powers and the smaller countries is on un unequal footing, whereby the former can exact a multitude on concessions without responding in sufficient, let alone equal, measure. No small nations can possibly bring a Global Power under its influence on the plea of Justice or because of the righteousness of its cause. In the ultimate analysis, it is not the virtue of the cause that becomes the determining factor, but the cold self-interest of the Global powers which shapes their policy, and this self-interest has better chances of prevailing in an endless and unequal confrontation between a Global Power and smaller nations.

Should the smaller nations therefore obediently follow the dictates of Global Powers and exchanging their independence for material gains and promises of economic prosperity? The answer is an emphatic `No``. Caught in the nutcracker of the global conflict the underdeveloped nations might in despair conclude that they can only marginally influence the status quo, that in reality they have no independent choice but to trim their policies to the requirements of one Global Power or another. This is an unnecessary pessimistic view, a negation of the struggle of man, expressed through the nation-state, to be free. The force of freedom must triumph because it is stronger than any other force for which man will lay down his life. It is still possible for the smaller nations, with adroit handling of their affairs, to maintain their independence and retain flexibility of action in their relationship with Global Powers.``

#139 by majumdar

...who would bear the remaining Rs. 8,000 p.m. for all families. Would the state be able to bear the entire cost. I think not....

And why not? The secondary level education in all civilized countries is FREE ... not even that Rs. 1,000 per family as per your estimate. And not only education, the cost of books, lunch etc as well are borne by the state. The higher education is however very expensive while it is the other way around in Pak. Higher education is cheap (and hence the quality) while secondary education is beyond reach for most people.

It is just a question of allocation of resources.

Zeemax sahib,

If the average cost of good education per child is Rs. 3000 p.m. and there are thre children per family, the total cost of good education works out to Rs. 9,000 p.m. whereas the per family education budget would work out to around Rs. 1,000 p.m. by way of your estimate. So who would bear the remaining Rs. 8,000 p.m. for all families. Would the state be able to bear the entire cost. I think not.

The goal of providing quality eduction to each and every child is laudable but it would take at least 2 generations in any country to achieve such a goal, ZAB or no ZAB.

The principle of equal opportunity that ZAB (or what any third world socliast kleptocrat like Indira Gandhi and many others) were nothing but a cloak for misgovernance, nepotism, corruption and economic waste.

Regards

#137 by majumdar

Majumdar Saheb, let`s examine this principle without the semantics of socialism etc. The principle is `equal opportunity`, which ZAB attempted. If it went wrong, that is not the issue. The issue is whether the rpinciple he fought for and died for was robust. In my opinion that principle was not only robust but the only answer for countries like us.

You ask, ``had ZAB been around, the poor would have been going to English medium schools``, the answer is a resounding YES.

As it is, the fee for an english speaking school in Pak at the primary level is Rs. 3,000 plus per month, when the average wage is about Rs.7,000 per month according to latest surveys. And that fee is for one child. The average family in Pak has three children.

That`s the future we`re talking about. How can Pak prevent children sent to Madrassahs in Quranic education alone (not that there`s anything wrong with it ... but should be only by choice) if modern education is way beyond reach?

The nationalisation of the large schools for the elite was precisely for this purpose.

Taiko sahib,

The 5-point approach that you have mentioned are not the only response to secessionism or regioanlism in the country. Besides you have still not explained why Mujib with a clear majority in the Pak Parliament was not allowed to form the govt.

Zeemax,

Nationalism of industry, banks and educational institutions does not prevent elitism, it only promotes crony capitalism, loot by netas and babus. If it is of any satsifaction to you, India`s experience with ``socialism`` is as bad probably worse than Pak`s.

(They can`t even go to english medium schools. )

Are you saying that had ZAB been around, the poor would have been going to English medium schools.

Face it ZAB was a murderer and was hanged for a crime he had actually instigated, even though the method was all wrong. He is a good example of a thrid world politican being tried and sentenced for a crime that he had actually committed. Hope a similar experience is repeated in India. Shibu Soren`s life imprisonment is a step in the right direction.

Regards

#135 by taikonaut

we can never forget what ZAB did to our industry, banks, educational institutions, and our intellectuals.

What he did to all of the above was to prevent an elite from hogging not only all the resources, but also the future through the educational system. Look what is happening now. There is a clear elitist dictatorship and the education system ensures the poor can never get ahead. They can`t even go to english medium schools.

Every crime of ZAB including murders, assassinations, torture camps, corruption, loot, bribes, private militia FSF etc. can be forgiven.

However we can never forget what ZAB did to our industry, banks, educational institutions, and our intellectuals.

This commies draped in green Islamic cloth was the biggest curse on Pakistan. May all protect us from commies. Amin.