Please back off, Benazir!

Bhutto's continuing tragedy was lack of scruples ... instead of trying to be some sort of a Napoleon meets Gemal Abdel Nasser holding a Pakistani flag... had he followed the man (Mahomed Ali Jinnah) he admired but did not have the integrity or character to emulate and who he defended more vociferously than I ever have (heck had he been around you would be calling him the "high priest of Church of MAJ" as well) ...

But somewhere along the way... Bhutto decided Jinnah's law abiding constitutional ways were too cumbersome for him to fulfill his ambition of becoming a third world Napoleon ... that having scruples and being honest like Jinnah was uncool... that Pakistan was Bhutto's personal fiefdom... that he could fool the people and play with the ignorance and foolishness... that instead of solving the basic issues and fulfilling the many promises he made to the people... he would do better by holding the Islamic Summit Conference and giving false hopes to an already demoralised people.... that if nothing else worked, it would be great to ditch the Ahmadis in the name of Islam.... that if that didn't appease the Mullahs... there would always be something more he could do to appease the Mullahs.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was basically an insecure people. As per Rafi Raza... Bhutto's "phenomenal election victory" in 1970 was engineered by the Pakistan Army to offset the Awami League-National Awami Party alliance...

On this website we have often done the exercise of what would happened if Nehru had not vetoed the Cabinet Mission Plan in 1946... it is about time we consider what would have happened if Bhutto-Yahya coterie had accepted Mujib's 6 points...

My guess is that Pakistan would still be united... albeit as a confederation ... and military rule would have ended with Yahya Khan. This is precisely why the Army had to let East Pakistan go.

Manto mian,

Masadi sahib wrote:

"Fact: If ZAB was not butchered, Pakistan would be well ahead of South Korea in development and its people would be happier and healthier, poverty would be lower"

I suppose Masadi sahib is just cracking a harmless joke.

Regards

The High Priestess of the Church of MAJ, Manto, responds with the same old bs, he throws a name out but does not show how that "name" disputes even a single one of the indusputed facts that I presented. Those facts aren't in the ancient history, they are well known from PRIMARY documents, from newspapers and papers that are widely available. They are no secret and he repeats his bs about Fatima Jinnah. She LOST, people wanted to capitalize on the entire industry of legitimization of the Jinnah that the creation of Pakistan produced, as monarchial succession, they failed, that is all and that was it...

Manto writes "Just then, the driver stopped the car as one of the traffic lights on Murree Road turned red. Having heard me seconds before, he (Bhutto) told the driver, ‘Drive on, no one can stop me!’ This was the difference"

Pakistani scholarship at its best, Ad Hominem and he said she said and "look at his morals" while claiming to be "better than thou". Is that all you can muster fool?
One causes the death of over a million and relegates hundreds of millions to reactionary discrimination and misery, the other goes directly to the people, listens to them and tries to consolidate the resources of this nation for its people. The difference is crystal clear, ZAB any day!

Masadi mian,

"Not disputed by a single historian"

Read "Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan" by Stanley Wolpert. Let us just say your "facts" are not even considered facts. Since you've not quoted any historian per se... I think your claim- as with most of your "scholarship" is sham.

You still haven't explained why was it that people like Wali Khan - son of Ghaffar Khan- put their faith in Fatima Jinnah despite being Jinnah's doughtiest opponents? So much for your monarchial succession theory. It was because they realised that only Fatima Jinnah had the popular appeal (because she was the sister of Quaid-e-Azam) and integrity required for the job...

Ironic that of all the politicians you blame the one man - Jinnah- who did not create a political dynasty for "monarchial succession" ... just because a wide range of political leaders chose his sister.

Meanwhile Raja Dahir of Larkana... the avid law breaker Mr. Bhutto... self styled Napoleon Bonaparte of Pakistan is some sort of a "democrat" and a "populist". The only thing Zulfikar Ali Bhutto tried to be was Machiavelli's prince... and failed miserably at that because Zia-ul-Haq proved to be even more unscrupulous and dishonest than ZAB.

Fact: Fatima Jinnah was chosen because of MAJ (monarchial succession)- you don't disagree

Fact: The people rejected Fatima Jinnah, you claim Bhutto rigged the elections but provide zero proof, and you have none.

Fact: There were no direct elections so who would have won or not one cannot be debated as fact

In the 1970 election Bhutto for the first time ever in Pakistan carried the mandate of the people of the West, winning an overwhelming majority. For the reasons I have suggested which I recently (after I suggested them) discovered in his own words from his letter to his daughter (once again thanks for pointing me to the site bhutto.org which has the pdf of much of his work):

(quote, ZAB's words)"After years of suppression, once the flood gates were opened,
there was nobody capable of closing them without a catastrophe.
Mujib-ur-Rehman felt that “enough was enough”. He campaigned on
the manifesto of his famous Six-points which meant autonomy of
confederal character. On this battle cry he swept the polls in East
Pakistan. Our party obtained an overwhelming majority in Sindh and
Punjab to become the majority party in West Pakistan. We made it
plain to Mujib-ur-Rehman that we would not only be happy but
honoured to sit in the Opposition but in a federal structure. If it were
to be a confederation, both wings of the confederation would have to
participate in Government. It was a very simple and unassailable
proposition. If Mujib-ur-Rehman compromised his Six-points to the
extent of having a federal structure, he was welcome to form the
Federal Government. If he did not budge an inch and was determined
to create a confederation, he could not govern the confederation to
the exclusion of the majority party from the other wing. Mujib-ur-
Rehman would not budge an inch of Six-points. He adopted a “take it
or leave it” attitude. There was a genuine deadlock. General Yahya
Khan thought that the deadlock came to him as the opportunity of a
life time for self-perpetuation. He sought to break the deadlock by
military action. His military action unaccompanied by any sensible
political cover, created a pretext for India to march into East Pakistan
in November 1971. By 16th December 1971, Dacca fell to the Indian
Army, along with ninety thousand prisoners of war from West
Pakistan.
I was at the United Nations at the time making a desperate
attempt to save the impossible situation. When General Yahya Khan
surveyed the wreckage and was convinced that all was lost, that the
likelihood was that nothing could be regained, that the probability was
My Dearest Daughter Copyright © www.bhutto.org 41
that what little was left stood endangered, he sent a special
aeroplane for me to return to Pakistan. With blood-shot eyes and with
brandy beside him. Yahya Khan told me at 10:30 a.m. on the morning
of 20th December, 1971, that he had failed miserably and that I
should assume charge of an assundered Pakistan as I alone was
capable of saving what was left of the country. In those ominous
circumstances I was sworn in as the President of Pakistan
"(end quote)

Fact: Bhutto did not lay the foundation of what Zia built upon later, in fact the conspiracy in the name of Islam was hatched by the US and its occupation force long before. Bhutto tried adjustments to counter that for the sake of the people.

Fact: The Gibralter incursion was long after the Indian incursion at the Rann of Kutch, the incursion that Bhutto supported might have led to war across the International Border due to Indian belligerance but in his arguments that narrators say convince Ayub- the decision was his- ZAB told him that it would remain isolated in the Kashmir area. That he was brave and unafraid of the cutting off of US army aid to Pakistan says quite a bit against your "Islamic insurgency for the Americans".

Fact: Bhutto made peace with the neighbours and unaligned from the US. Your history of the Daoud and the Afghanistan situation is completely skewed. Pakistan/Afghanistan relations were at a sore point due to the Pustunistan issue, which was single handedly resolved with the proposed recognition of the Durand Line and peace in 1976, now before this when the so called "Islamic Insurgency" was pushed out by Daouds forces they sought refuge in Pakistan and being the enemies of the enemy who has set up camps to train Baluchi insurgents in Kandahar, Bhutto naturally welcomed them, but there was no training and arming and indoctrination of the Zia kind, backed by the Americans. In fact America was not interested in Daoud because he had gone to them with a begging bowl again and again and they had turned him away which forced him to go to the Russians.

Let me copy paste his own words

"In those ominous
circumstances I was sworn in as the President of Pakistan
I got moving energetically on all fronts. Among the first tasks I
turned to was Constitution-making with a democratic consenus on the
vexation question of autonomy. I revamped the economy. I
introduced fundamental social and economic reforms. I settled the
Bangladesh problem by recognition. I concluded the Simla
Agreement with India without any secret clause or understanding and
got over five thousand square miles territory in Sindh and the Punjab
back to Pakistan. I got the release of ninety thousand prisoners of
war in honour and without the threatened war trials. I held the Islamic
Summit Conference in Lahore. I got America to lift the arms embargo.
I modernized the armed forces. I put the country back on the track.
The recovery was spectacular. My greatest satisfaction lay in giving
the country an all-party constitution by democratic means. The
Constitution of 1973 was the first unanimously-approved constitution
by a democratic assembly to bless Pakistan with a fundamental
framework based on Islam, democracy and autonomy. It was the
voice of the people of the four provinces of Pakistan articulated in a
constitutional document by their chosen leaders. Autonomy, which
had defied solution for over a generation and which had been the
bane of the politics of the Sub-continent from time immemorial, was
at long last settled to the satisfaction of the people and their chosen
representatives. I experienced the kind of joy, the thrill of happiness
which brings tears to the eyes."

Fact: You cannot base your "facts" on the claims of his political opponents without a single shread of evidence. The guy might have made mistakes but those mistakes are pea size compared to what he was able to achieve both nationally and internationally. You have achieved nothing and so can copy-paste and "talk big" like the MAJ who was single handedly responsible for over a million deaths due to his shenanigans.

By the way, don't run away like a damn coward, what I had posted before were REAL facts, not disputed by a single historian, and you evaded EVERY single one, unlike me, who has addressed and has been addressing every one of your lying claims that are not based on historical facts but are your skewed interpretations that don't bear any relationship with the facts. You do it because you are the high priest (priestess) of the now routed Church of the MAJ.

Yawn... Masadi you know so little about Bhutto. Forget anyone else.

Now the real facts:

FACT: Fatima Jinnah was the consensus candidate of COP. COP included people like Wali Khan, Bhashani and Maududi who had no love for Quaid-e-Azam but knew it was Jinnah alone who resonated with the people.

FACT: ZAB was the architect of the election fraud of 1965. He was election manager of Ayub Khan- the imperialist Military dictator. He chose to be the B-Team of the dictator in order to fool the people.

FACT: Fatima Jinnah secured support in both East and West. Despite massive rigging by Ayub and Zulfi Bhutto... she managed to carry 30 000 Basic Democrats out of 80 000. According to most historians she would have won a direct election.

FACT: Bhutto refused to accept the mandate of the people in 1970 election. Bhutto, instead of siding with the democratic forces, hobbed knobbed with military in 1971 and was Army's frontman in the West.

FACT: Right or wrong Bhutto laid the foundation for what Zia-ul-Haq later built. His 1973 constitution played on Islamic sensibilities. He also played politics with the Ahmadi community and its status. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto carried out a series of "Islamic" reforms in order to protect his government - the result of rigged elections of 1977- before falling prey to his own doing.

FACT: ZAB was the genius behind Operation Gibralter which led to a full fledge war between Pakistan and India in 1965. ZAB had no small role in the events of 1971. He did not want peace with Pakistan's neighbors. He also started the Islamist insurgency in Afghanistan at America's behest.

FACT: ZAB's government presided over one of the worst military operations in Balochistan which was as bad if not worse than Musharraf's military operation today.

FACT: That Don Bhutto got his political opponents tortured, jailed and even murdered is one thing. He even got people like J A Rahim abducted in the middle of the night, beaten, abused and humiliated.

FACT: ZAB created the FSF which was a lot like the Gestapo. Bhutto was probably a fascist at heart.

FACT: Bhutto the genius also re-organised the intelligence services and created a politically-oriented ISI which to this day continues to haunt Pakistan's politics...


I could go on... but I'll leave it here for now.

Fact: Fatima Jinnah was pushed up to run because she was MAJ's sister (monarchial succession not people power)

Fact: ZAB had nothing to do with the "alleged" rigging of either the Fatima Jinnah or the 1977 elections.

Fact: Fatima Jinnah didn't have popular public support. Even the MAJ connection couldn't make her win, and she didn't know how to run a campaign

Fact: Bhutto was the very first populist leader of West Pakistan

Fact: The people love ZAB, the standard of living of the poor is on the rise, Pakistan is unaligned from the major powers under him, land reform after much power play by the thugs is finally under way in a very meaningful way. The Third world looks upto ZAB as leader. The West shudders when he speaks

Fact: ZAB is butchered by a military dictator who then completely makes Pakistan a whore of the West and brings his so called "Islamism" and drugs and terrorism to Pakistan by fighting a proxy cold war with the Soviets on America's behalf

Fact: ZAB made peace with neighbours, and started alliances with Iran, Turkey and the greater ME. This made the West pee in their pants.

Fact: If ZAB was not butchered, Pakistan would be well ahead of South Korea in development and its people would be happier and healthier, poverty would be lower

Of course Manto is High Priest (or Priestess) of the Church of MAJ and so will turn facts upside down to extract stupendous conclusions from his "you know where". Best to ignore his BS and claims of grand scholarship which would neatly fit in the "penny compartment" of any 28 inch waist jeans- you know the pocket on top of the pocket for your change? Yeah that penny compartment....

PS: READ THIS CAREFULY: Just because you say something doesn't make it true. You are certifiably insane. God save us from idiots like you.

Masadi,

That is a novel argument.

Fatima Jinnah leads a popular broad based people's movement and almost brings the dictator down.... she unites East and West Pakistan on one platform. That is "monarchial" succession according to you.

Then you have Zulfikar Ali Bhutto- a toady feudal from rural larkana... who bends over backwards to rig the elections of Ayub Khan... helps the dictator "win"... and later Mr. Bhutto refuses to accept the decision of Pakistan's majority in 1970.... and he is some sort of a democrat.

Brilliant logic.

In addition note this very very carefully: The other political parties that chose Fatima Jinnah as leader hoping that because of the MAJ (monarchial succession) she would evoke mass popular appeal, thought erroneously just like the Manto that MAJ had the mandate of the people of Pakistan (and by extension the Muslims of India). The results of that election showed that they were dead wrong. MAJ (or his monarchial successors) never had the mandate of the people of Pakistan let alone the Muslims of India. More evidence for what I had stated earlier. Unlike these shenanigans of using family ties ZAB had the real mandate of the people, he was the only populist, mass-appeal, people's leader that Pakistan has seen and which no historian worth the name disputes in this short history of Pakistan. Not ONE.

That was the last shovel of dirt on the now dead and buried Church of MAJ


Lot of facts there for you to chew on as you speed away on your motorbike, Manto....like the Mullah Omar

Manto writes "I also understand you were fired from your job from being an incompetent nincumpoop .... "

It is very easy to dismiss your opponents well know (indisputed) facts of history which he has joined together with fresh reason as "incompetence" when your only "competence" is copy-pasting from the internet and finding obscure narratives that don't amount to sh** in the real world of events that occurred. Your other "competence" is that you recognize the crimes of the MAJ, and acknowledge them as crimes but somehow you manage to turn the direct link to the MAJ on its head and say that he was against those crimes, that he was against division when he was the major catalyst that caused it to occur, that he was against the British when in fact he was totally pro-West in the institutions that he wanted in Pakistan and in popular rhetoric- details of one arrogant claim here or there means nothing...and then you are "competent" in taking your opponents and inventing lies about them like me getting fired, or being a CIA spy, for example or about Bhutto being " anti democracy" and "pro US" and other such BS. Your only competence therefore is that you are a damn liar and not an ordinary liar, a miserable damn liar who thinks that because he can copy-paste, people will think he is learned and a "new historian" who is debunking the old- ha ha very funny, your a miserable third rate liar who cries like a baby when confronted with the facts, and just like all dogmatists you worship an image of the MAJ that mythology has created. That image has been busted right here on chowk, your church has been routed.

Like all worshippers of people, and those people who have managed to kill millions and usurp their rights, Manto pulls another trick out of you know where, translating the use of "monarchial succession" of the Fatima Jinnah whose only strenght was that she was the MAJ's sister, and the sob has the audacity to blame Bhutto for her failure in the elections! I challenge him to produce one verifiable source that has any evidence that Bhutto was responsible for rigging those elections. Just one that can be verified. He cannot do it.

Now compare this to the people power that Bhutto managed to bring to the masses, not only repairing the damage done to their image, thanks to the colonials and the MAJ, whose own image was their very antithesis both in style of life and value placed on their culture, as well as in governmental decisions. Not one historian worth his name Western or otherwise will dispute with this, not one, other than this third rate lawyer who is actually high priest of the routed church of MAJ...

Re: # 178

Dear HP,

I agree with most of your analysis of these two politicians- who were very important and continue to remain etched in the memory of their followers.

However unlike Bhutto, Jinnah was never in the government camp. He did not make a u-turn. Even his evolution from an Indian nationalist to a Muslim nationalist was along the same trajectory.

When Jinnah entered politics in 1906, Congress Party was split into two broad camps i.e. Gokhalites aka Moderates and Tilakites aka extremists.

Jinnah obviously fell in with Gokhale, Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta etc ... gentlemen who stood for responsible self rule for India. On the other end of the spectrum was Tilak who was out and out rebel. Jinnah represented Tilak in the famous sedition case which was in many ways the CJP case of its time... and this case won Jinnah the wrath of the entire British establishment. According to Ian Byrant Wells' book "Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity", the British administration tried twice to deport Jinnah (and Gandhi together) to Burma in 1918 and 1919... but were frustrated that Jinnah never proceeded illegally. Jinnah's first public disagreement with Gandhi came over Gandhi's recruitment efforts. Gandhi wanted Jinnah to join him in recruiting efforts... while Jinnah was consistently arguing for officer status for indians.

Jinnah was a constitutional politician who formed oppositon to the government and who wanted India to win Self rule through constitutional means. He was also- contrary to perception- willing to adopt civil disobedience provided the plank was acceptable to all parties concerned. He was a constitutional mediator and a legislator and a staunch critic of the British government. His championing of Bhagat Singh's cause and the protests he organised against the Simon Commission show how he remained anti-establishment through out even after leaving the Congress. In the 1940s.. while he refused to join Congress' quit India movement because it would amount to blackmail and would puncture the anti-Nazi war effort... he also expelled several of his party members for joining the government's war council...

As Dr. Ambedkar said (and virtually everyone who knew him agreed) ... Jinnah was too incorruptible a politician to be accused of any venal motives. Whatever his perceptions, they were his own genuinely and not the result of some opportunism.

Could the same be said about Zulfikar Ali Bhutto?

Re: # 183

Well said - about Gandhi the racist casteist hindu fascist bigot.

Re: # 183

Well said - about Gandhi the racist casteist hindu fascist bigot.

PS: And even when ZAB managed to hijack the anti-Ayub movement started by Fatima Jinnah ... he did so only to divide it into a million pieces.

What a democrat indeed.