Bhutto’s Judicial Murder Revisited

Finish It!

Final words of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto as narrated by Col Rafiuddin, the then Martial-Law Commandant of District Jail, Rawalpindi.

"Yahaan par ek Bhutto nahin, do hain. Ek main hun, ek tum ho"

Z.A. Bhutto addressing a public rally in Lahore.

Rest in Peace.

There can't exist any arguement on the brillance and eruditioin of Late Ali Bhutto, the great son of Pakistan. Thus, a wrong policy of Ali Bhutto caused so much damage to Pakistan too! Isn't it Bhutto's stubborness in NOT allowing Late Sheikh Mujib of the then east Pakistan to become the PM of Pakistan that had sown the seeds of sedition? Mind you, Mujib's Awami League won the majority in the parliament in the democratically held election of 1970-71. Ali Bhutto marshalled the Punjabi clique spearheaded by the omnipotent army of Pakistan to deprive the bengalis of their political rights; India merely acted as a catalyst to Bengali fervour! Till today, Ali Butto stands responsible and accused for the genocide in Bangladesh in 1971, for the ceasation of the then east Pakistan ( now Bangladesh) from Pakistan! In any truly democratic country, late Bhutto would have been viled at the very begining for his hatred of bengalis, for enumerating / fashioning wrong poilitics for a country!
Warning: current politicians of Pakistan need to free themselves from the feudal attitude characteristic of Punjabi-Sindhi elite the still rule Pakistan!

Regardless of what manto says (his usual BS), he was the greatest leader we had, possibly the greatest of the lot in that era of revolution sweeping the Third World, never have so many people come to an understanding of their worth as equal players in the national game straight from a feudal/colonized mindset than in the short period when they heard the ZAB speak (regardless of claims of insincerity which apart from being immaterial in this argument is Ad Hominem). That alone is achievement that towers high above the rest, like Everest above the sand castle that MAJ built.

In #3 "he was the greatest leader we had"

he refers to ZAB.

Zee writes ""Yahaan par ek Bhutto nahin, do hain. Ek main hun, ek tum ho"

Z.A. Bhutto addressing a public rally in Lahore.

Rest in Peace. "

In other words, by slaying Bhutto the Pakistan Army/US were actually slaying the people of Pakistan as a whole- which is quite factual.....they don't give a damn if the whole nation goes to hell as long as their narrow agendas are met...

gdb writes "Ali Bhutto marshalled the Punjabi clique spearheaded by the omnipotent army of Pakistan to deprive the bengalis of their political rights; India merely acted as a catalyst to Bengali fervour!"

This is total horse shit. The bengalis political rights were ensured by releasing Mujib whom the military and not ZAB had imprisoned. ZAB merely protected the political rights of his constituents in the West, who were not represented by mujib, in the all or none BS of mujib that was actually a ploy to break the nation down the road, not in two but in many parts...The blame for the breakup lies at the feet of the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Army alone, it was weakened after and not before the surrender to the Indian army. The Pakistan Army doesn't take directions from politicians in Pakistan...if you don't understand this basic premise then you understand zero about Pakistan, spare us the HS, horse shit.

KKG

Good article, Jeeay Bhutto.

Justice demands that we dig Zia's dentures from Islamabad and have them dispatched to the south pole or some place far away from Pakistan.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's judicial murder was one of the greatest tragedies in our country's history. There is much that Bhutto did that one cannot agree with but he was at the end of the day, an elected Prime Minister and a man who was a true patriot who believed in Pakistan and its raison d etre. It is about time that the nation recognized the great patriot that Bhutto was and accept him as a great leader warts and all.



Masadi mian,

I am not sure what your problem is? Did you parents no raise you right or something?

If you think ZAB was better than MAJ, you are entitled to your opinion - I am not sure why it bothers you that I cannot agree with you on this opinion?... besides we know Bhutto himself was Jinnah's greatest fan and remained one till his dying day (Bhutto also admired intensely Kemal Ataturk btw... so Jinnah and Ataturk as Bhutto's heroes - the worst sin I suppose for you). There is no doubt that Bhutto would have been one of the greatest men in history if he had the integrity and honesty and uprightness of Jinnah. Sadly though Bhutto could not rise above his own weaknesses and in the process undid the good that he had done.

My fear is that when history is written, Musharraf is not compared to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, because barring Bhutto, it is Musharraf who has made the most retreats in front of the clergy... just like Bhutto with his ban on alcohol, ahmaddiya legislation, friday as the weekly holiday, ban on pubs, clubs etc... and his reactionary little Islamic Summit Conference of worthless Kings and uniformed dictators from the "Ummah".

I hope Bhutto is remembered instead as the father of Pakistan's constitution and as a great albeit flawed leader.

I am surprised how blind people can be. Only a few days ago an ANP supporter declared that I was not neutral because I was a PPP Jiyala and Bhuttoist.

On the other hand we have this masadi fellow-completely obsessed with me and abusing me for pointing out Bhutto's obvious flaws.

The fault lies with me for being balanced in a world full of extremists.

Zeemax,

On a slightly irrelevant issue: the murder of Bhutto's great comrade Hayat Khan Sherpao... I found this very interesting blog on the issue:

http://fiverupees.blogspot.com/2008/03/hayat-khan-sherpao-some-conspir acy.html

What do you make of this? I find the allegations against Bhutto at the end to be hillarious. Do you think it is possible Sherpao and Benazir were in some sort of a relationship?

The court acquitted Asfandyar Wali Khan and other accused. I did not know this. Third part is as hillarious as it is sad.

Ofcourse fix the gap in that link.

For the info of the ones who have come late into this ZAB/MAJ discussion, all this was discussed over two or three almost entire threads and the High Priest (not to be mistaken with HP) of the Church of MAJ (Manto) put his tail between his legs and ran off defeated. Now he repeats the same redundant points of the Mullah retreat and other BS when the military/US wanted to undo the entire country using the Mullah as an easy escape to attack socialism as being unIslamic and ZAB understood their shenanigans, he understood their trap, manuvered around it and was therefore murdered because they lost their patience with a man of greater intelligence than they all could collectively muster- the Americans included....MAJ was nothing compared to ZAB- end of story, and I am not interested in discussing anything leave alone ZAB/MAJ with this charlatan and dishonest freak Manto.....and yes my parents raised me very well to think for myself and when they forced me to think their way, I similarly raised hell at home and got into a lot of trouble...but that goes with the turf, freedom and independence is not free neither is it a slogan like the goddamned US elite use it.....now go to hell

g'night

Dear Masadi,

Claiming something does not make it true. My posts and yours are there. Other than abuse and similar pathetic attacks you have had nothing to contribute. There is no ZAB/MAJ debate outside that head of yours. All of ZAB's true followers are also MAJ to the hilt, as ZAB was himself so.

Re: # 14

PS: For the record though it is always you who have run away from the discussion with your tail between your legs after being comprehensively shown to be the worthless idiot that you truly are.

Re#14,15- the common cheap sh** as rebuttal that we have come to expect of you...

"I similarly raised hell at home and got into a lot of trouble"

One can sympathize with your poor parents... must have been Karma for something they had done to deserve you as a son.

Re: # 16

Masadi mian,

Every single one of our discussion ended in you running away unable to answer direct questions.

All of your posts are pure crap like your website and your latest book- which I hear is not much to read. No real Bhutto-admirer or PPP Supporter would want to associate with unthinking and unintelligent fellow like you.

Like I said this fool is a charlatan, not only have I answered the solitary claim he raised in his post against ZAB, he has never addressed any of my points with reasons of his own, other than copy pastes of claims by some Western historians and ad hominem agianst me (and in this case my book which he hasn't read)

He writes " which I hear is not much to read"

You heard from whom? He wants to insinuate that he heard that the book is no good from HP of course. He couldn't stand the admiration that HP has had all through my chowk career for my writings so now he wants to create a rift between this friendship for social justice. I don't care what anyone thinks of my work but more than that I don't trust charlatans like you, third rate minds that cannot think worth sh** the sum total of whose life and thought is based on man worship and the authority of others....

First of all you haven't had any thing of any notable academic value as response except it is because you say so. Out of the known fallacies, you employ 99 percent and still fail to convince people of your third rate arguments.

But What is this with you and everything being about HP. Most of your books are crap and you know it. No one has insinuated anything about HP.

But even HP, who you declare as your greatest supporter, does not agree with many things you write. As for your great friendship for social justice blah blah - I am glad and no I am not "jealous" of your "special" relationship with HP.

Can we stop this bickering here Asadi and Yassar?

The reality is that there were more similarities than differences between the two leaders. They came from different backgrounds and from another era of political development. While Bhutto was no doubt a genius in terms of playing games, setting up the political situations and taking advantages of the situations. The problem was his political development took place when he was working with different dictatorial leaders. So he had a difficult time understanding the democratic processes and tolerances.

Jinnah emerged in extremely competitive environs and he had solid experience with different shades of politicians. While both clearly were good leaders, jinnah created a coalition of hugely diverse people and dealt with an opposition that was not only strong but was also led by some astute politicians such as Gandhi and Sardar Patel.

Both had amazing qualities of working against the status quo. Jinnah was able to create a space out of nowhere surprising many opponents. Bhutto too found an opening in working as a minority party.

Though Asadi's assessment in #6 is accurate and I agree with that completely.

HP,

That is precisely my view. You know I am an old Bhutto supporter ... it is in my blood.

Bhutto was widely admired because he promised to bring to fruition what Jinnah had promised.

However he failed despite all odds in his favor. Therein lies the great tragedy.

I don't agree with your assessment of Mujib though. I think Mujib was a great man of action. He did lose his mind in his very last year though. He like Jinnah and Bhutto became the expression of the will of their people.

Except for this: "ZAB merely protected the political rights of his constituents in the West," Asadi

Bhutto clearly saw an opening and worked with the army like many politicians still do. You don't protect the rights of people by supporting the army in destroying the majority party. If Majib or the Awami league had taken over, we might have had many democratic changes in Pakistan. Though I still believe that Mujib too was not interested in united Pakistan as he knew that army would not allow him to lead Pakistan for long.

Mujib would have given Pakistan a much better and more democratic constitution even though he was not really a fan of democracy himself.

Very well written both posts HP.

"Stop bickering asadi and yassar"

There is no bickering on my part. Masadi has the right to his own opinion but he feels only he has the right and everyone else must concur with him or face the vilest abuse
from him.

Well it will be a cold day in hell before that happens.

Re: # 23

THis is a correct thesis. The awami league rule would have meant end of feudalism in WP and end of army rule for good. As a matter of fact this thesis is the basis on which the corrupt ruling elite of WP and fouji junta decided that Pakistan need to be biforcated and hence the tragedy of East pakistan.

The Ba_tards that murdered ZAB

killed his sons and now his daughter too.

May they burn in hell!

#1 Zee(hadi)max,

While I sympathize with the Bhutto family for what happened to ZAB (and later, to the BeeB), the braggadocio that you post in #1 is somebody’s created account of fiction, perhaps (for all I know) with the motive of riling up people.

An eyewitness’ gripping (and moving) account of the actual ZAB hanging was published right here on this web-site and is still available. "The Last Moments of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
" by Mukhlis T, published on July 11, 2005. (www.chowk.com/articles/7373). According to that article, Mr. ZAB was (understandably) very perturbed at the moment of his hanging and the moments immediately preceding, and he did not say much and certainly nothing of the kind that you put up here.

Re: # 27; bjk;

I know I'd most probably be called a superficial dingo/murtid etc for saying this, problem is we are just sooo desperate for 'a god-like' hero amongst our mist; a saviour/messiah if you will. Jinnah/Bhutto are all a reflection of this mentality.

I strongly disagree with the aborrhent punishment he had to receive (dished out by none other than the "Kalifa-tul-muslimeen, Ameer-ul-momineen and Zill-e-subhani" General Mohammed Zia-ul-huq); but his 'democratic' period, when he could have achieved so much, was marred by the same sort of dirty political games (including severe persecution of opponents and in many occasions 'missings/deaths') that has been a hallmark of our country.

Just after this post, there will be a 'hue and cry' as we have seen before but that is the reality. He was no different (if anything worse in many ways) from his predecessors or successors for that matter.

I still say this in the strongest possible terms that if the democratic process hadn't been interrupted, it would have been much much better for the future to come; unfortunately that was a big turning point in our history and the opportunity was lost; the demage can be repaired still and that is why I watch this space intently but with caution.

Re: 28

kalifa should be Khalifa
demage should be damage

apologies..

Cheema sahib,

Many times “charismatic” leaders get carried away by their own charisma, they start thinking that they can do no wrong – that they can get away with virtually anything because they are strong in other areas!

The tragedy is that they realize little that their real loss is not whether they get elected during elections or not (which, in most cases they win – and would have won anyway), but what they fail to accomplish because they could not expand their own thinking horizons! They play petty politics, they plan strategies and maneuvers, and they miss out on what life is all about!

At the time of the Shimla pact, Bhutto was the undisputed Pakistani leader. The Pakistani khakis were a humbled lot – for a change, and he, a civilian leader had absolute power. Mrs. Gandhi wanted to come to some settlement of the Kashmir issue. That was one time that a workable solution could indeed have been worked out – had he the vision…

But, like the Jinnah, he lacked the vision! He made excuses. He talked wishy-washy. He gave little and he got little.

He only wanted time to rebuild the armed forces so that his khakis will live to fight the Indians another day!

He got his wish – anticipating little that HE was to be the rejuvenated khakis’ first victim!

#27 Posted by bjkumar,

Bhutto had been on hunger strike since 9 days, which is why he was carried on a stretcher. He was too feeble to walk. Col Rafiuddin stated in an interview on GEO that he clearly heard the word 'Finish' in a very faint voice, and he presumes the next word was 'it'.

Col Rafiuddin was the ISI Colonel assigned to keep 24/7 watch over Bhutto in jail till the edge of the gallows, and recorded each of his movements and utterances as he was required to do.

I don't know who this 'Mukhlis T' is. Probably one of the sort who killed ZAB and still rejoice over the judicial murder.

The actual link to the article by Mukhlis T (“The Last Moments of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto”) is the following:

www.chowk.com/articles/9370

(not the one I provided in #27)

And Zeemax, the guy Mukhlis T – whoever that be – merely translated a chapter of Col. Rafi ud Din’s Urdu book “Bhutto kay akhri 323 din”.

#27 Posted by bjkumar
He was no different (if anything worse in many ways)

#28 Posted by akcheema
I'd most probably be called a superficial dingo/murtid ... He gave little and he got little.

Well ... bjkumar can be forgiven for his ignorance, but not akcheema because he's supposed to be a Pakistani, even though a shallow/dingo/murtid one.

You call a person who taught Pakistanis to ask for their rights, retrieved 93,000 POWs plus thousands of km territory from Indian capture without conceding anything - not even war trials, rehabilitated the Army and restored their dignity after the 1971 humiliation, started the nuclear programme despite all odds, gave the 1973 Constitution which is still the ONLY thing holding the country together 'no different...gave little and got little'?

Always judge things on balance, never through a one-way mirror. But guess this quality cannot be taught to madrasis and dingos.

Re: # 33; Zeemax

sorry man; you are misquoting me. I didn't say that 'gave little/got little' bit; bjk did.

please read again, thanks.

for all his faults, I stand by the statement I made that what happened to ZAB was utterly wrong and that he should have been allowed to either re-form government (since he'd won the elections in 1977) or electioned re-called (as the Amir-ul-mimineen initially promised; the 90 days i think it was). And if ZAB had been re-elected and the process carried on, a lot of the mess we are in now could have been avoided.

#32 Posted by bjkumar,

I'm not quoting from Col Rafiuddin's book or it's translation by any Mukhlis T. I'm quoting from the televised hour-long interview of Col Rafiuddin which was repeat broadcast yesterday on the anniversary. He said many things which are not in the book, like he knows who actually killed Kasuri, who provided the arms and ammunition, who was the actual target but Kasuri got hit instead ... and so forth.

When he was asked how did he know all that, he replied "remember I was in ISI ...they even know if anyone is in bed with his own wife or someone else's."

The following is excerpted from an article in The New Yorker.

BHUTTO'S FATEFUL MOMENT
by Mary Anne Weaver
October 4, 1993

At 1:45 A.M. on April 4, 1979, four wardens entered the prison cell of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a waifishly thin man, nearly wasted away by malaria, dysentery, and hunger strikes. Two of them lifted him by the arms and two by the feet, and he was carried out. His back was so low that it sometimes brushed the floor. He had insisted on shaving and bathing earlier that night—and had done so, with some difficulty—and he had changed into fresh clothes. He had always been fastidious about his appearance. But now the tail of his blousy shirt, ensnarled in the cleats of one of the wardens’ boots, became tattered and soiled.

Outside, in the courtyard of the Rawalpindi District Jail, Zulfi Bhutto, the first popularly elected Prime Minister in the history of Pakistan, was deposited on a stretcher, and his wrists were manacled. There was no guard of honor, and no military salute. As he was carried two hundred yards or so to a wooden scaffold, he raised his head slightly, but he said nothing. Otherwise, he didn’t move. The wardens led him up the scaffold, onto a wooden plank, and there a hangman put a hood over Bhutto’s head, completely covering his face, and a rope around his neck

“Ye mujhai?” (“This to me?”) According to a book by the chief of his security detail, Colonel M. Rafiuddin, who stood two feet away, Bhutto said this in a faint voice, and the Colonel believes he also heard him say, “God help me, for I am innocent!”

At four minutes after two, three hours ahead of schedule, and contrary to the prison code, the hangman pulled a lever, releasing the wooden plank, and Bhutto’s body plunged into a well.

“The bastard’s dead!” General Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, Pakistan’s military ruler, gleefully told his generals when the news came.

The only family members who had been permitted to see Bhutto in the hours before he died were his daughter Benazir, his firstborn and favorite child, who was then in her twenties, and his wife, Nusrat. They had been taken under guard from a deserted police-training camp where they were imprisoned and driven the few miles to the jail. Unlike previous visits, they had not been permitted inside his cell, and Benazir had sat cross-legged on a concrete floor as they received his final instructions through a thick, barred door.

“I pleaded with the jailers, I begged them to open the cell door, so that I could embrace him, and say a proper goodbye,” Benazir told me this summer. “But they refused. When I left him, I couldn’t look back; I knew that I couldn’t control myself. I’m not even sure how I managed to walk down that corridor, past the soldiers and past the guards. All I could think of was my head. ‘Keep it high,’ I told myself. ‘They are all watching.’ ”

Some fourteen hours later, Benazir remembers, she awoke suddenly at precisely two o’clock in the morning and sat bolt upright in bed. “No! No!” she screamed. “Papa! Papa!”

Five years ago, in her autobiography, she went on:

I felt so cold, so cold, in spite of the heat, and couldn’t stop shaking. There was nothing my mother and I could say to console each other. Somehow the hours passed. . . . We were ready at dawn to accompany my father’s body to our ancestral graveyard.

“I am in Iddat [mourning] and can’t receive outsiders. You talk to him,” my mother said dully when the jailer arrived. . . .

I walked into the cracked cement-floored front room that was supposed to serve as our sitting room. It stank of mildew and rot.

“We are ready to leave with the prime minister,” I told the junior jailer standing nervously before me.

“They have already taken him to be buried,” he said.

I felt as if he had struck me. “Without his family?” I asked. . . .

“They have taken him,” he interrupted.

“Taken him where?” The jailer was silent.

“It was very peaceful,” he finally replied “I have brought you what was left.”

#34 Posted by akcheema

'no different...gave little and got little' was combined for both you and BJK.

#35 Zeemax

What I am referring to is the comprehensive written account. What you (claim to) refer to is...

...heresay!

Even that green-eared Manto of a lawyer will tell you that the latter is to be discounted!

(Especially when the memory is likely to be weak and failing - as in your time of life!)

And Zeemax,

Freeing 90,000 POWs is not really a big deal when the other side is just as eager to get rid of them!

#36 Posted by bjkumar

Read #35. End of discussion on the subject from my side.

Regards

Re: # 37; Zeemax

It is unfair of you to attribute something to me that I didn't say.

ZAB ruled like an absolute, omnipotent dictator, no question. All I am saying is if the process of elections and re-elections was carried on, that problem would have sorted itself out in due course.

It is also a valid argument that he WAS NOT the legitimate inheritor of govt from Yahya Khan; Mujib-ur-Rahman was. But that is another story. Some of the things on record also include the "udher tum idher hum" assertion by none other than ZAB himself; I am pretty certain you have an 'explanation' for that too as for everything else.

'is hamaam mein sab nangay hain'.

Let's not try to 'create' the version of history that suits us for the day.

I am off as I have better things to do with my time than talk about lost opportunities for reform in Pakistani history; we could be here forever....

#41 Posted by akcheema,

Look akcheema, any debate about Bhutto is quite useless. As they say history is the best (and perhaps only) judge, that is now done. History has already judged Z.A. Bhutto as a great leader, who was murdered by a military dictator. Period.

His own daughter despite two terms as P.M did not reopen the case. Zardari too will not. But it will be reopened someday. It will be then that his murderers will be exhumed and executed posthumously just as Oliver Cromwell.

Quote:

In 1661, Oliver Cromwell's body was exhumed from Westminster Abbey, and was subjected to the ritual of a posthumous execution, as were the remains of John Bradshaw and Henry Ireton. Symbolically, this took place on January 30; the same date that Charles I had been executed. His body was hanged in chains at Tyburn. Finally, his disinterred body was thrown into a pit, while his severed head was displayed on a pole outside Westminster Abbey until 1685. Afterwards the head changed hands several times, including the sale in 1814 to a man named Josiah Henry Wilkinson, before eventually being buried in the grounds of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, in 1960

HP writes "Bhutto clearly saw an opening and worked with the army like many politicians still do"

Firstly, the West, the more establishment/military oriented part would never have settled for East rule, so it would have been a setup for failure and not any democracy enhancement. Taking note of the reality of the power situation and the uniquely odd nature of the two part country matters more in enhancing democracy through manuverability than blanket application fo democracy theory. The new govt would have been removed shortly by the establishment and all gains to that date lost.

Second, Mujib had no representation in the West, the idhar hum udhar tum was the most democratic setup to keep the union intact with autonomy and democracy, proposed by ZAB, the Army didn't want that, it wanted its dictatorial rule all over the land. Just because ZAB understood their shenanigans and tried to work within the boundary set for politicians by the military does not mean that he was being an opportunist when he clearly carried the mandate of the people of the West. Carrying the mandate of the people of the West was a grander achievement than those of the east in changing the system, as the establishment was vested more in the West. Rather it was Mujib who didn't want democracy to work and gave the military the excuse it was looking for to complete the foregone conclusion of an independant Bangal...

Manto writes "HP,

That is precisely my view. You know I am an old Bhutto supporter ... it is in my blood."

Given the scathing attacks on ZAB by Manto in arguing with me and the fact that multiple times he has blamed the man for the massacres in Bangladesh by the Pakistani Army and for the capitulation of Bengal, this guy is a charlatan through and through....

#45 Posted by masadi,

masadi, I think it is cruel to debate the memory of a great man who was removed from the scene in such a callous manner, and which many zameer-frosh types still defend. As I said, history has already given its verdict, and the events in Pakistan have proven it. His grave still draws more votes than any living man or woman does.

I think more important to discuss is - is Zardari heading towards a 'great betrayal'?

Of-course I'm referring to the unanimous vote for PM, the PPP delagtions to MQM, the distancing from restoration of judiciary and removal of president - and most importantly Ch. Ahmed Mukhtar, the Defence Minister's statement that musharraf is an asset because he's a salable commodity for foreign assistance.

What do you think? HP and tahmed32's views too would be appreciated.

Re: # 42; Zeemax

point taken; say no more.

Cheers

Masadi,

To a fanatically closed and rigid mind that you have, indeed the world exists in black or white.

I have fighting for Bhutto -not just on this website but on many other forums- much longer than you could spell the word Bhutto. Try my previous handle "ylh" on this website.

However, I am not blind to his faults which are many. He was a human being and if you try to make him into a god, I have the right to point out his weaknesses and major flaws. Bhutto was a victim of his own feudal mentality and enormous contradictions- including at times careerist opportunism. The easy way he took on the Ahmadi issue, where even a lesser prime minister like Nazimuddin had preferred to give up his pmship and take stand against the Mullahs, was one such Bhutto flaw. His flirtation with Pan-islamism was another such issue though it could have worked.

But I will always admire Bhutto for his patriotism, his vision for the people, the courage with which he took on his opponents and the fact that he was the first high priest of the Church of MAJ - a post which I currently proudly occupy.

-ylh

#44 Posted by masadi
“Firstly, the West, the more establishment/military oriented part would never have settled for East rule, so it would have been a setup for failure and not any democracy enhancement.”

Set up for failure? Would that mean that the current govt. should give up now because sooner or later the army will strike against them? Bhutto represented only two provinces of Pakistan and certainly was not a representative of the west as there was no West Pakistan in 1971.
Basically by staying with this argument, you are negating the whole ideology that you are fighting for so vigorously. Political struggles don’t stop because of the expected failure. They go on despite many odds. I think you should reconsider this.

“the idhar hum udhar tum was the most democratic setup to keep the union intact with autonomy and democracy,”

The democratic process for Bhutto was to fight for Sindh and Punjab’s rights in the assembly. True that Mujib had no representation in the West but would you blame him for that instead of applying your post# 6 scenario to Mujib’s situation also. Mujib barely got time to establish his party in East Pakistan. I hope you know that he was in jail from 1958 to until 1966 on many fabricated cases including the agartala conspiracy case.

Actually Awami league existed in West Pakistan also. It had contesting elections in Sindh. Awami League also had a working relationship with NAP of Wali Khan. In 1971, NAP too was not only banned but many of NAP workers were arrested allover Pakistan. NAP was the only party in W. Pak that protested army action in E.Pak. The Baloch supported Awami League against the army.

What was Bhutto’s role then? He disappeared in Europe and then came back to become the Deputy PM under Yahya. I know that is one decision, he must have regretted when he was in adiala jail.

I got to sleep now but I sure will look up your response in the morning.

As for blaming Bhutto for massacres in Bangladesh, I was always very clear that Bhutto is to be blamed if we use Masada complex logic.

HP,

What was NAP's strength. Why wasn't there any attempt to bring PPP and Awami League together in a coalition that was successful?

The six points are very reasonable given the Lahore resolution framework as Pakistan's basic document.

#47 Posted by akcheema,

Thank you.

You see, one needs to separate Bhutto's controversial personality and politics from the circumstances of his death. In case of the former, history has judged him to be a great albeit flawed Genius. As for the latter, it has been established that no court would convict a person - let alone grant a death penalty - and then actually carry it out on a 3-3 split verdict made 4-3 only by the CJ himself, based on the evidence presented in the case. That case is barred from being used as a precedent in any future case by the international judicial community itself.

HP, do comment on #46 when you wake up.

How the honorable defence minister came to that conclusion ie "musharraf is a saleable commodity" at this point is beyond me.

Musharraf is a spent force. PPP should not stick out its neck for him.

The transformation of Mr. Sharif is the greatest thing that has happened to Pakistan recently. Zardari must not save Musharraf's skin or he will risk making sharif the strongest leader in Pakistan.

#54 Posted by MantoLives,

It appears PPP workers are not happy with the direction things are taking. Arbab Ghulam Raheem was manhandled just now outside Sindh assembly oath taking session, prevented from taking oath, and his pictures alongwith Ch Shujaat etc pulled off the Assembly walls, torn up and thrown in the street by PPP workers.

That puts paid to Ijaz Gul's (albeit very plausible) theory re PPP+all the others minus PML-N hypothesis. That's not what the people want - all of them - regardless of PPP or PML-N. They want musharraf OUT and Judiciary restored. No ifs and buts.

Saw the entire session. Amazing ... looked like it was a scene from ROME.

HP writes "Set up for failure? Would that mean that the current govt. should give up now because sooner or later the army will strike against them?"

You miss a basic point that I put forward which is a fact, the West (whether or not it existed on the map as a seperate entity or not, it was seperate for all intents and purposes) determined the affairs of the East and not the other way around. Given that context, unlike that of the current politicians, giving the reign to the East would result in immediate roll back to military dictatorship (which you don't disagree with)- as well as disenfranchisement of the people of the West, and how they (the army) reacted to the stalemate vindicates my point.

The idhar hum udhar tum was the most "democratic" outcome which only someone wanting to create trouble would seek to avoid. I also mentioned that given the setup of Mujib rule, the foregone conclusion of Bangladesh breaking apart as well as the West breaking apart as well would have ensued- how would a military defeated and battered faced by civil unrest in the West as well have avoided Indian intervention and seperatist movements- the nation would have burned and warped into nothingness- which is also vindicated by what you write.

Further the achievements towards even getting the army to an elections and the stepping down of Ayub is moreso a consequence of the work and rabble rousing of ZAB than anything Mujib did, or anything that occurred in the East...GIven these facts a coming together and sharing of power on equal terms (idhar hum udhar tum) quite similar to what is taking place today would have weakened Army power and worked for restoration of democratic roots in which the contribution of ZAB is second to none East or West. The union would have been mainatined on equal terms had mujid been willing to work with the ZAB in the West. You cannot blame the man for either seeking a compromise for the people of the West, nor can you blame him for standing down when he had little power compared to the military to achieve anything other than becomming an unnecessary casualty- a casualty which with Bangladesh going down would result in the West going down as well, as I have mentioned earlier- which he did not because when you understand how the game is played you don't commit national suicide...He did strike when the military was at its weakest and that strike achieved a constitution for Pakistan and saved the nation, and for the first time brought the people into the power equation of this country be it for a little time....

Now snakes like Salim Chauhan who does not have the balls to argue with me here writes in the unplugged section like a damn fool that by these points, which I had made earlier I was being "racist" towards the Bengalis, this is absolute horse shit.

When the colonials have carved out nation states in a most messy manner ensuring that democracy based on uniformity of opinion and equal opportunity never arises in our nations, due to most artificial divisions, trying to place the Western model of cheerful robots (that think uniformly like morons or default to elite positions in all but the most distractive issues of "values" because it took an entire history to convert them into such uniformity) unto our nation will ensure that it reverts shortly to military rule- and history has proven me right, that is what they seek, play one against the other, reward one and punish the other in successive turns so that corruption and lack of democracy becomes endemic in our lands; so in order to enfranchise the people you have to compromise, maneuver and come together as representatives of the people (similar to the spirit we find today at least on the face of it among the major winners), and similar to what ZAB sought with Mujib, to block out the military and the externals who want the all or none setup like Mujib was desiring, as a willing participant to the foregone conclusion of a seperate Bangladesh- because they (the colonials) know in our setup that will never work and they will by default never let the voices of the people emerge. That is simply what I am stating given our context, regarding the Mujib/ZAB issue, it has nothing to do with ethnicity of anyone (though ass wipe leeches among the Mohajirs (the few vocal ones and their followers)who cry foul for no reason, will deliberately try to convert it into a battle of ethnicities. A-hole, SC, when you develop the kind of human consciousness that I possess then we can talk about who is being racist.....

Something for Manto to chew on that I found while reading an article:

“In an interval of less than a year,” writes Stanley Wolpert, “Zulfi had roused most of West Pakistan, bringing its young men from a state of apathy or despair to the brink of righteous revolt against the military dictator (Ayub) and his major pillars of support. He had set Sindh on fire, stirred the Frontier, and taken Pindi by storm....(Addressing a mammoth meeting in Lahore, ‘the heartbeat’ of Punjab, Bhutto) took the jacket from his back and threw it into the cheering, almost worshipful crowd of frenzied young men, who looked to him as more than a political leader. He was the stuff true martyrs and mahdis were made of. There was fire not only in his speech but in his bloodshot bulbous eyes that rarely closed, hardly ever rested any more - sleep had abandoned Zulfi by now.” (Stanley Wolpert, Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan: His Life and Times, New York, Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 126)

Masadi,

I am not sure what you want to convince me of. I was supporting Bhutto before you even knew he existed.

Good that you have finally discovered some fine scholarship. I do hope you read Stanley Wolpert's book "Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan" very closely. Wolpert's view of the great man is much more critical than my view of him.

I do hope this excerpt will finally make you go read the book.

PS I don't get this masadi guy.


He is now quoting something to prove some point to me which exists in his head.

Meanwhile if I were to quote the same book on Bhutto's role in Bangladesh, on his manipulation, on his treatment of J A Rahim, his abuse of authority and his nepotism he would denounce it as US elite propaganda and call me all sorts of names.

Bhutto was - as zeemax wrote- a flawed genius. People should admire him for what he did and point out the obvious mistakes and issues.

Manto writes " I was supporting Bhutto before you even knew he existed."

Mian I am older than you are, I knew he existed when you were still in your diapers....

Regarding your views on ZAB, our resident bot Arjun should do us all a service and produce your scathing attacks on ZAB- which you made just because I was talking positively of him.

Regarding the quote that is about busting Ayub and the quote- any quote- makes it amply clear when the author is narrating his own pov as against documenting what is in history. I never read quotes as "authority" unlike you, I read them and present them for their content value...

What I was getting at in #58 was that the ZAB wanted compromise of the kind that the politicians of the current election-on the face of it- have achieved, to counter the military and its President for life while enfranchising the people who had caused the change in the power equation- their representatives sitting as a no concern opposition would be neither fair nor "democratic"- while Mujib was acting as democracy buster (as fact given the context and reality of the situation)- to undo not only Bengal from Pakistan but to undo the Western parts as well- his act was much like the BB when she returned to strenghten Musharraf and the military (before the people and their reality- made quite clear by the current reports that show that over 50% of the population faces food insecurity- on how the military's a-hole (Musharraf and his goons) have made the people of this country suffer, etc changed her)...

Re: # 62 & 63

Children, please stop going about something as stupid as this. In case you didn't know, Bhutto is dead. That is what this article is about.

It doesn't matter to Bhutto now that he is dead so why does it matter so much to you two idiots?

Oh bhai, I stand by everything I said about Bhutto. He was a flawed leader, a patriot who promised a lot delivered very little but whose death was tragic in the way it was carried out in complete and utter disregard of all established norms of law.

He was, as HP and others have said, a brilliant politician who could otherwise be ruthless. But that does not take away from the fact that he believed in his country and its people.

In many ways, he played the role Nehru played in post independence India except that his role was cut short, tragically for Pakistan.

But no one can deny him the role of being the father of Pakistan's unanimous constitution and as the founding leader of the PPP, Pakistan's truly nationalist party.

Re: # 65

manto or whatever you are read interact 64.

i thought manto was dead too!

pakistan3 "It doesn't matter to Bhutto now that he is dead so why does it matter so much to you two idiots? "

To understand how you got to the present structure you are well advised not to forget history, dead person or not, you do so at your own peril and ignorance....

Pakistan3

Surely that "dead" dictum applies equally to Prophets and one's own ancesters.

#56 Posted by MantoLives

Saw the entire session. Amazing ... looked like it was a scene from ROME.

Rome of hamidm2? Looks like we've finally arrived where hamidm2 wants us to be.

pakistan3,

Another murtid. There seem to be a lot crawling out from under rocks.

Please refrain from posting on Connect. You're not welcome.

Re: # 68
mantolives
If you go by my name(Pakistan3), my ancestory includes India. I am only 1/3 of what I could have been. I am sure if I went on and on about that you won't be pleased!

#46 Zeemax,
I had posted this on another thread for Ijaz.
This Pak3 is another nic for some Indian so just ignore him.

#527 Posted by HP on April 3, 2008 8:27:21 pm
#516 Posted by ijaz_gul

There are two sides of this story. The first is what you are saying but the second and the correct one is that PPP and NS need 2/3 majority to get approval of the constitution amendments. AZ and NS still need votes in the Senate and they need support from MQM. In fact, they can’t remove the President w/o the 2/3 support in the both houses. With that in mind, I would suggest people need to slow down and wait for all cards to be played out. The conspiracy theories that are flying everywhere are really not worth the time to speculate about. AZ can’t do anything w/o NS consent and no constitutional amendment can pass the assembly w/o NS. So, I don’t see any issues there.

Though I haven’t spoken to anyone in Pakistan yet, but I read pretty much all Sindhi papers and AZ’s 90 visit appears to have lots of resentment in Sindh.

Let me remind you one thing here. The original agreement that Benazir agreed with Mush was really to have PPP-MQM and Q league, if needed. That did not work out as the situation changed. Once Benazir saw the situation on the ground, she insisted that NS take part in elections knowing full well that if NS is not in the assembly, she would just end up being a puppet PM. Perhaps that was one reason she had to be eliminated. The second time around, Zardari insisted that NS take part in elections after he had announced to boycott them a day after Benazir was murdered.

The tradition in the PPP is that workers usually don’t go against the party leadership in public but inside, strong debates take place and I am sure, Zardari must have heard from many of his workers and Sindhi PPP leaders already about the MQM.

If anyone thinks that removing Mush would be easy or bringing the CJ back would be piece of cake then they live in fools’ paradise. 90% of the PPP MNAs and 70% of the PMLN MNAs are approachable by the army and its agencies. So there is no need to underestimate the situation in Pakistan. Both NS and AZ know that they can’t move w/o getting the okay from the army or at least the army would look the other way when they move against Mush.

There are lots of variable and I think Punjabis are showing their usual haste and Jadli karo na bhai habit again and they would probably end up destroying the whole game and would put politicians in confrontation before they are ready.

I was disappointed to hear Aitazaz Ahsan talking about the constitutional amended sponsored by the President House. This is just plain ridiculous. Any constitutional amendment would require 2/3 and no one has 2/3 w/o NS’s support.

#524 Posted by ijaz_gul
"Even then I had commented that this Zardari may have his hands soiled. Now I have no doubts."

Chill out! This is emotional, childish and not worthy of repeating in public.

Zeemax,
This post is relevant too.

#528 Posted by HP on April 3, 2008 8:38:00 pm
#516 Posted by ijaz_gul

The CJ's reinstatement has a symbolic value and perhaps would play well in public but the reality is that reforming the judicial system is even more important. If the PPP has some proposals that would help the judicial system, then all need to wait for that. There are still plenty of days for thirty days limit to pass. We need to realize that worthwhile judicial reforms ace the CJ's reinstatement any time.

If Chowdry bows out in exchange for comprehensive reforms in the Judicial system, then he should be ready to do that and the lawyers should also accept that!

He has done his part and he will remain a threat to all politicians. His ego and his No should be tamed for a substantially changed system for future!

HP #73 if the CJ is restored, this will be a message to all Pakistanis that one man can take a stand and make a difference. If he is not, the message will be that only fools take a stand, while "smart people" play dirty tricks.

That is the real significance.

As for this musharraf - his name is already mud and his dirty tricks merely add to it. if the CJ is restored, he will of course declare mush "re-election" illegal and mush will then be faced with the prospect of being charged with multiple crimes. That is why he is refusing to step down, so at least one can see some logic behind his dirty tricks.
The real question is: What is compelling Zardari to step down from the high ground he had initially acquired with his calls for national unity?

Tahmed,
There have been many people before him that have taken a stand and that includes ZAB himself. So, his services can be recognized by full SC bench or a NA reference. However, I agree with you that his reinstatement would be a great symbolic act in the present situation. But we really have to look beyond the symbols now.

As I said as long as the army is supporting Mush, it would be hard to remove him. Please read my post #72. So the first effort should be to create broad alliance that has solid 2/3 majority in both houses.

I think that is what Zardari is trying to achieve. And I also think he is playing this game possibly with NS consent.


Anyway, the story emerging from Sindh is that Sindh PPP is pretty much in revolt against Zardari's agreement with MQM. So lets wait and see what happens next.

A senoir Uncle of mine remembers the young, charismatic Zulficar Ali Bhutto as his classmate from the pre-partition days. My curious questions about what kind of a person Bhutto was in his young days does not result in any conversation except a slow and sad nod.

I do not feel like pushing for a response. It must be painful to think of that handsome, energetic, enigmatic personality of those young days, the meteoric public career that followed, and then not to think of the painfully sad way that it all ended. It is better to respect my Uncle's silence.

As you stroll from the Churchgate metro station towards Nariman Point in Mumbai, there stands the solid, white colored building that used to be the elegant Ritz hotel, once owned by the Bhuttos. That solid edifice may be one of the several lasting memories of ZAB for the surviving seniors of Mumbai, who perhaps still cannot but think of him with affection mixed with a generous sprinkling of awe and exasperation.

As to myself, my memories of him are from what I read in the newspapers, and watched in newsreels and TV broadcasts. I remember him most for my consternation at his strong stands against giving in to the mandate won by Sheikh Mujib. Somehow my impression is also that he was as key to the tragic events of 1971 as the military regime in Pakistan.

But the strongest visual memories are of his firebrand, emotional outburst followed by a walk out at the United Nations when he debated with India's Foreign Minister Swaran Singh, whose quiet demeanor looked insipid in comparison. It was quite a spectacle - and against the decorum traditionally expected on the floor of that august body, it was probably precedent-setting. What was it that was said in those debates, what the points and counter points were, I just do not remember. It was the phenonmenon of process overriding content at its best.

We who come from the subcontinent are sentimental and emotional people - I suppose content will always play second fiddle to emotions when we look at personalities and issues.

And Bhutto will always be remembered with strong emotions by his supporters, opponents, as well as neutrals who knew him. And there will always be admiration and affection for him, however grudging.

May his family - whatever remains of it, find some peace. Amen!

HP,

Thanks for both posts. Much obliged. Very incisive opinion.

If Chowdry bows out in exchange for comprehensive reforms in the Judicial system, then he should be ready to do that and the lawyers should also accept that!

I don't know about that. Chowdhry is a symbol. Minus-one will be a huge compromise which will be countermanded.

#75 Posted by HP

Anyway, the story emerging from Sindh is that Sindh PPP is pretty much in revolt against Zardari's agreement with MQM. So lets wait and see what happens next.

I think it was pretty evident today when PPP workers beat up Arbab Raheem and prevented him from taking oath in the Sindh Assembly.

#74 Posted by tahmed32,

I'm sorry my friend. Hamidm2 was right. CJ will not be restored. I'll add though 'without a revolution'. I think the bombs will start again ... soon ... a week at most.

#73 Essensaur

[But the strongest visual memories are of his firebrand, emotional outburst followed by a walk out at the United Nations when he debated with India's Foreign Minister Swaran Singh, whose quiet demeanor looked insipid in comparison. It was quite a spectacle - and against the decorum traditionally expected on the floor of that august body, it was probably precedent-setting. What was it that was said in those debates, what the points and counter points were, I just do not remember. It was the phenonmenon of process overriding content at its best.]

Sir, I do not wish to trample all over your obviously tender feeling for the ZAB of yore, but let’s be realistic – that U.N. speech was very symbolic of a whole bunch of “Pakistani” antics from those times!

And it was absolutely meaningless - it was not directed at the UN, but at his domestic constituency!

The realities were:

1. ZAB brought the whole Bangladesh independence event about by refusing to share power with the “dark skinned” Bengalis.

2. ZAB got off scot-free THAT time. He in fact benefited by being handed over the power on a platter.

It is a great testimony to the “brains” of the population in that part of the world that the main cause of a catastrophic event goes to the UN and cries dog-shitt in front of that bunch of jokers and expects anything to happen beyond a bit of tamasha. The funny thing is that it was Pakistan which had attacked India in early December 1971.

Perhaps it is something basic in that mindset – these folks expect that if they do enough “hai mere baap, hai meri amma!” then the world will see things their way – no matter how dumb a way it be!

It will be a long wait before that happens!

Essensaur
A bigDa hua shehzada or much indulged prince, to pander to whose calculated tantrums and moods(or personality disorders, depending on degree), tens or hundreds of thousands have to die. This is the most dangerous type of personality to leave any public policymaking up to.

Re: # 74

tahmed32

{What is compelling Zardari to step down from the high ground he had initially acquired with his calls for national unity?}

Dear Ahmed sahib, have you heard of self-preservation?

Chaudhry Iftikhar is the same CJ who rescinded the NRO and guess who filed the case in Supreme Court, none other than Shahbaz Sharif. As per PPP, CH Iftikhar is unacceptable because he is politicized and appears to be in cahoots with the Sharifs, more importantly its also a matter of establishing credit for restoration of democracy. Lawyers movement would like to push their agenda and that suits the Sharifs whereas PPP would like to emphasize BB policy of transitioning democracy.

Much is at stake here sir, I have said this before to you, do not romantacize this judiciary, they too will throw in the towel provided the booty and threat is large enough.

#81 Sadna

[A bigDa hua shehzada or much indulged prince, to pander to whose calculated tantrums and moods(or personality disorders, depending on degree), tens or hundreds of thousands have to die. This is the most dangerous type of personality to leave any public policymaking up to.]

Change that to "millions" and you are talking of that Jinnah creep!

Mian "pakistan-3",

You can go on and on about anything you wish. Certainly India does not displease me nor can the realities of history be changed.

As for what you could be, that is for you to imagine. I only know what I am and I am pleased to be what I am.

Re: # 84

[I only know what I am and I am pleased to be what I am.]

Yes, miaN PopEye!

Re: # 83

bjkumar

Dear sir, MAJ has been dead for a good sixty years, yet you harbor so much hatred, that is neither healthy nor is it constructive.

Re: # 54

Yasser:

"...The transformation of Mr. Sharif is the greatest thing that has happened to Pakistan recently. ....or he will risk making sharif the strongest leader in Pakistan..."

Can you write more about this transformation of Sharif?

Why Sharif becoming the strongest leader in Pakistan will be bad for Pakistan?

It seems to me that grass root democracy is very strong in Pakistan, and hence there is an automatic check and balance, albeit, it has taken longer for its voice to be heard. This delay had been mainly due to postponement of elections that leaders were able to cause.

If supremacy of constitution cannot be violated, even by the army, then this check and balance from the grass root democracy will trump. However defective democracy may be, it prevails. Pakistanis proved it now, Indians proved it earlier when they threw Indira Gandhi out of power.

Faith and belief in democracy needs to as strong as Pakistani's faith in their religion. This to me is the critical crossing point that Pakistan must make. Once done, even if Talibans come in power, Iran is an example of religious right coming in power, they too will behave as inclusionary force and not be defensive of being attacked from within Pakistan.

Pakistan's reality is far more to the religious right. Liberals there need to accept this reality.

Opportunism to get or maintain in power is not corruption. It is inherent in all people. The system needs to be respected by all, even by the opportunist. It seems, Musharraff has showed that respect in Pakistan.

Now, I am going back to start supporting Hamidm Sahib. Sorry Hamidm Sahib that I abandoned your ship, but I am not a rat. I like that you and Zeemax Sahib are having great debate. Such a dialog is necessary inside Pakistan too.

This emergence is the best for Pakistan that is what I would say.

#87 Posted by anil,

Your post contains many wise things.

Why Sharif becoming the strongest leader in Pakistan will be bad for Pakistan?

For Manto Saheb it is ... even though Sharif is just mildly to the religious right. There're great forces against anything to do with Islam.

Pakistan's reality is far more to the religious right. Liberals there need to accept this reality.

No they won't. It still hasn't knocked any sense in their heads. I don't know when it will?

Now, I am going back to start supporting Hamidm Sahib

Actually, hamidm2 Saheb has great wisdom about things political. I of-course regard him as murtid, that he is indeed, he knows nothing about religion, but he usually knows what he's talking about regarding contemporary politics in Pakistan.

I see bjkumar and other Indian chutiyas going wild as usual.

Whatever Bhutto was he was a hundred times better than that half naked piece of shit racist casteist Hindu fascist bigot Gandhi who was solely responsible for violence at partition.

"Bigda hu shahzada"

Atleast Bhutto is remembered by his people as the Quaid-e-Awam (the leader of the People) and as a heroic figure (even if he is flawed).

What would we make of that mediocre drudge of an unimaginative woman (Bhutto's words mostly) who was ultimately ass-raped by her own body guards (in the position of Indira to use Kama Sutra vocabulary) for waging a genocidal war against a religious community?

Re: # 87

Sorry Anil, I think you don't have any locus standi in this discussion untill you prevail upon your compatriots who are so utterly obsessed with Pakistan and Pakistan-related issues... because they belong to a shit-hole they call "my-Injia".

I am not going to accept this good-cop bad-cop style that you Indians have going on chowk. Either all you decide to be human or all you act as dogs and are treated as such.

bjkumar, Mantolives,

There were two leaders in Pakistan before. First was Jinnah, then was Z.A. Bhutto. Now there's a third one. Nawaz Sharif.

Like it or not.

I.e. not counting Baitullah mehsud, Mullah Fazlullah, and the only true Shaheed (no one else was Shaheed in Pakistan except him ... never mind the press calling people Shaheed who died in accidents) Maulana (though he denied he was a maulana) Abdul-Rasheed ghazi Shaheed.

Did I see this gushti sadna around? Can't stand the smell of monkeys let alone she-monkeys.

I wonder if bhutto's head came off when he was hung...like saddam's did...

A challenge:

Name a single Muslim leader who has done a hunger strike to save Muslim lives? (forget about non-Muslims)

Ghandi ji personified the real beauty of Sanatan Dharma(the eternal religion).