Clever by half
A.B. Shahid
23-10-07
Beginning the early hours of
October 19, the media has shown viewers and readers the bits and pieces of
evidence about the mid-night assassination attempt during Ms. Benazir's journey
to the Quaid's mausoleum. A newspaper editorial went as far as stating definitively
that the crime was committed by Al-Qaeda.
Pending police investigation, wild guesses have been made about the crime's
perpetrators by PPP's leadership. Using the incident wherein hundreds of innocent
supporters of the party died for settling personal enmities was hardly called
for. Only in Pakistan is this possible because party workers rarely hold their
leaders accountable. In stead, they appoint them life Chairpersons of their
parties.
While such allegations are exploited for political advantage, results of inquests
into the incidents are held back. For instance, those into the assassination
of Hakim Saeed, Murtiza Bhutto, the Sindh High Court judge (and his son) who
was trying Asif Zardari, and many other crimes. This is a sad reflection on
the professionalism and integrity of our investigative agencies.
Virtually within minutes of the bombing incident Ms. Benazir and her worthy
lieutenants began pointing fingers at specific persons including the Chief
Ministers of Sindh and Punjab, Federal Ministers Ejaz-ul-Haq and Awais Leghari,
and Director General of the Intelligence Bureau, and asked Gen. Musharraf
to sack them. Aside from the fact whether or not they were involved in the
crime, the list is important for a crucial reason; those named could limit
PPP's election prospects and deny it a strong base in the two populous provinces
that form the majority of NA seats diluting the strength PPP needs to amend
the constitution that its 'deal' with Gen. Musharraf didn't.
The other interesting part is that the Federal government and the provincial
governments of Sindh and Punjab had forewarned Ms. Benazir about the likelihood
of an attempt on her life and asked her to postpone her return or refrain
from organizing processions and public meetings because such gatherings (and
the chaos they create) ideally suits the purposes of the terrorists. Although
it is questionable whether the government could control terrorism in the time
it sought from Ms. Benazir, the advice reminding her that the chaos processions
and public meetings cause suits the terrorists' aims made sense. If the highly
trained British and US Police forces couldn't avert such tragedies, Pakistani
police could do much less.
The government didn't obstruct her return to Pakistan just as it didn't ask
Ms. Benazir to leave. She is a Pakistani and leads one of the country's largest
political parties. Being controversial is not peculiar to her; all politicians
carry this burden. Yet, in sharp contrast to the treatment meted out to Nawaz
Sharif, the government welcomed her; what it advised her was for her own good.
Ms. Benazir, twice Pakistan's Prime Minister during a decade of intense political
turmoil, must have known that. Why didn't she take this advice seriously or,
at least, refrained from asking her party members all over the country to
come to receive her at the airport when this implied gathering thousands supporters
and the formation of a massive procession.
One may ask whether Ms. Benazir's supporters in Karachi, a mega city of 17
million, weren't enough to receive her? What caused her to call party workers
from across the country? The answer lies in the reprisal threats dished out
by PPP stalwarts against those who they believed would obstruct her return.
These threats kept the Karachiites away. Did her supporters from far and wide
who came to receive her, do so of their own free will, or were they 'asked'
by their village landlords to do so? Press reports suggest that all sitting
MPs of the PPP were asked to ensure the presence of a certain number of individuals
from their constituencies. If that is true and, perhaps it is, should the
world (the target audience) believe that these crowds consisted of real 'jannisars'?
Despite her declared belief to the contrary, she knew what could happen but
she used this occasion to convincingly reverse the popularity fall she suffered
following her 'deal' with Gen. Musharraf, PPP's refusal to resign from a parliament
that is perceived to have lost its mandate, promulgation of National Reconciliation
Ordinance that principally absolves her and PPP stalwarts of alleged crimes,
her promise to the US to let its forces enter Pakistan to attack alleged Al-Qaeda
hideouts, and to expose Dr. Qadeer Khan to questioning by IAEA.
The frequent outbursts of US senators and Presidential candidates in support
of Ms. Benazir have done her grave damage. The promise of Iraq-like intervention
in Pakistan on the pretext of preventing Pakistan's nuclear facilities and
missiles from falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda, by one of the Presidential
hopefuls with close contacts with Ms. Benazir, won't befriend her to the Pakistani
electorate, with or without sponsored demonstrations of public support.
Her call for investigation of the bombing incident by foreign intelligence
agencies, in effect, echoing an earlier US offer, will do her more damage
because the perception it will reinforce is that she is being backed to the
hilt by the US. With this profile, she and her American backers are the only
ones who know how acceptable she will be to the electorate. It is also a reflection
on how 'intelligent' are the foreign intelligence agencies that she would
like to depend on for an impartial investigation of the bombing incident.
Yet, Ms. Benazir's complaint about streetlights being off needs investigation
to fix responsibility for this lapse. But her accusations about security lapses
are implausible because, reportedly, she insisted that PPP will take the primary
responsibility for her security and the inner cordon of her guards was from
the PPP. Thus the security focus cantered on her and the party high command,
not on thousands of party supporters who accompanied her on foot unaware of
what was about to hit them; tragically, they also knew nothing about Karachi's
road network.
The strong explosion-proof make of her carriage proved that, fortunately for
all of us, she was prepared for the worst. But the fact that 140 Pakistanis
had to die and hundreds of others had to suffer partial or total disability
for her to prove her popularity in spite of her criticism by opposition parties
is regrettable. After agreeing to the government's subsequent restrictions
on public gatherings, one wonders whether she did prove what she wanted to.
As we pick up the pieces, we realize how ill timed and ill organized was this
show of strength for which hundreds of innocent people had to pay with their
lives. Had it not been better if this crowd-based show of strength been delayed
till the onset of the election campaign? Hasn't this tragedy given Gen. Musharraf
a valid reason to ban processions and public meetings? Whose interests will
this ban serve, PPP's, opposition parties', or those of the clique in power?
A saner approach was to start negotiations with other parties over the profile
of the caretaker set-up and streamlining of arrangements for fair elections.
Thereafter Ms. Benazir could have begun her election campaign by drafting
a manifesto in consultation not just with party stalwarts, but also with members
of all walks of life, especially business community that will hold the key
to the success or failure of a regime in an era of rampant capitalism.
In spite of its criticism, PPP had the clout to muster public support and
give PML-Q a tough time but, despite her experience, her clever move - show
of strength - fell flat on its face since the perception now is that it sought
image re-building at people's expense. That amounts to being 'clever by half'.
The Choudhuris of Gujrat feel overjoyed, and the Americans unsure of their
favoured Musharraf-Benazir combine to deliver the desired result - Taliban
bashing.