Adil Najam
On the first death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto we had carried a post asking “What if she had not been killed?” Today, on the 22nd death anniversary of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) it may be a good time to ask the same question about him.
On previous anniversaries of ZAB’s death we have asked you to comment on Mr. Bhutto and his legacy and about the rationale and reasoning given for his death by his nemesis, Gen. Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. This time let us think a little about what his death meant for Pakistan – and, thereby, for all the rest of us.
Of course, one expects a lot of naara baazi from both his supporters and his detractors. That is merely to be expected. But beyond the black and white slogans there was the man and the legacy of the man that has clearly impacted much of what has happened since his death, especially because of the nature of his removal.
Indeed, one could suggest that there are at least two separate questions here: What might have happened had Zia Ul Haq’s coup not happened and if Bhutto had lived on? And, what might have happened if Bhutto had not been hung after the trial?
How might have the PPP evolved in either of those cases? What would these have meant for Pakistan’s politics as a whole? And Pakistan’s economy and foreign relations? Pakistani institutions?
I am not presupposing any answer, nor am I suggesting that these are questions that can be logically answered precisely. But they may be questions worth thinking about today; not just to speculate about how might have happened, but much more important to think about how our acts of political expediency today can have long and deep shadows – nearly always unintended, quite often consequential, and sometimes historically disastrous even for those who orchestrate them.
He would have been my hero if he would send every single Pakistani child to the school, but I doubt it.
Jerks and some women are egomaniacs!
And Pakistan got its hands full of them.
In my mind there is no question about it that Pakistan would have been far better off today had ZAB lived through the time after 1979 then it is now.
It is not that ZAB was such a genius. It is what followed him: A proto-Taliban President General Zia ul Haq who ruled Pakistan for a full 1/4th of Pakistan’s history since the Independence and had turned a Sufi-oriented society to some kind of Wahabbi or some other Middle Eastern kind of ‘Islamic’ State.
Now, I know, there are the usual charges against ZAB of using ‘political Islam’: Banning gambling and public alcohol consumption. Showing cowardice and declaring Ahmadis as Non-Muslims. However, all those were a few unfortunate bones thrown to the religious Right to blunt their attacks against him. No where ZAB tried to change the Pakistani society radically to use Islam as a political tool. Sure, when it suited Pakistan’s interest, he warmed up to the Arab states, only to promote mass-sending of Pakistan’s workers to them to generate revenue for Pakistan.
In short, I am amazed that so many people accuse ZAB of introducing too much Islam in Pakistan. We need to study the extent/depth of ZAB’s so-called ‘Islamization’ to understand that ZAB was a mere demagogue who only superficially, often cowardly, introduced Islam in Pakistan. And that is precisely why those who rose against him in 1976/77 used Islam against him and that is precisely because ZAB–even in his final words before being hanged–went after the religious parties like Jamaat e Islami.
ZAB was a mortal enemy to the religious Right then. And even today, despite all the watering down of the original PPP, it is the PPP leaders who are mostly targeted by the religious Right: Benazir Bhutto, Salman Taseer, and Shehbaz Bhatti. Hopefully not poor Sherri Rehman.
As to the failure of his ‘nationalization’, let’s not forget that the PPP was voted into power based on a certain ‘Leftist’ platform with its origin in the turbulent 60’s. Why do we then only blame Zulfi as person then? Were those not some acts of Parliament then? However ‘wrong’ they may have turned out to be but they were not some the whims of one person.
I am convinced that it would have been a better Pakistan had ZAB lived. He was not perfect, no one is. But of all the leaders we have had he was the only real ‘leader’. Democracy and institutions were both better in his time and he changed Pakistan for the good. Most importantly by giving ‘voice’ to ordinary Pakistanis. Today’s PPP has abandoned those Pakistanis beyond slogans but Bhutto’s real contribution was that he made the ‘awam’ feel like this was really their country. That has never happened either before him or after him. THAT is why he was great.
FSF would have killed all opposition leaders. If any one was left alive, the person would be in jail, exiled in a boat, or “voluntarily” left the country. Bhutto did not hesitate to beak Pakistan to become a “civilian martial law administrator.” He would have proven to be the worst dictator in the histroy. Economy? Every thing would have been nationalized. No one will have been allowed to say anthing, even suggesting any thing againt the will of Quaid-e-Awam. When I hear “Zinda ha Bhutto,” I see his disciples doing the same to the nation what he would have done in a much better way.
It’s ZAB’s 32nd death anniversary, not 22nd. He died in 1979.