In Pakistan, the consequences of her assassination are going to be far-reaching
Benazir Bhutto has become the foremost martyr for democracy in Pakistan. She was aware of the risks she was taking while embarking on her election rallies. She braved those risks and sacrificed her life for the cause of democracy.
Through her martyrdom, she has wiped off the stain of collaborationism with Musharraf and the Army. In her death she has united the people of Pakistan against jihadi extremism and given them a banner to fight it. Some people have compared her assassination to that of Rajiv Gandhi during the election campaign. That is not apt. Democracy makes politics bullet-proof. In India, Rajiv’s assassination interrupted the election process by a few weeks. In Pakistan the consequences of Benazir assassination are going to be destabilising and far-reaching.
Questions have been raised whether Benazir’s assassination is to be attributed to elements in the Army-ISI combine as she had feared or to the policies pursued by the Pakistani Administration of being permissive to extremism. She was shot by two snipers who then blew themselves up, killing dozens of bystanders and wounding many more.
Were they employed by jihadi organisations committed to the Talibanisation of Pakistan and to the triumph of Wahabi Islam or used by sections of the ISI or Pakistani establishment as an instrument? An answer may take time. But there is no doubt that the assassination was part of a wider attempt to stop the scheduled elections. At about the same time when Benazir was gunned down, at another part of Rawalpindi Nawaz Sharif’s election rally was disrupted by an explosion killing four and injuring more.
The elections in Pakistan may have to be postponed and perhaps martial law will have to be proclaimed. A national unity government has been suggested but some, including Nawaz Sharif, want to exclude the Army. That would be unrealistic. If the present developments are to be interpreted - and there can be no alternative interpretation - as a war declared by jihadi extremists on civil society, then that threat cannot be dealt with without the involvement of the Army. The crucial issue is whether the Army will be prepared to join this war against jihadi extremists, since it has been using them for its own purposes since the days of General Zia ul Haq.
The world is with the Pakistani civil society in its struggle to steer Paksitan towards a moderate Islamic state. Ostensibly that is also the policy of US, though they have been looking away as Musharraf, the Army and ISI have nurtured the Al Qaeda, Taliban in Afghanistan and neo-Taliban in Pakistani tribal areas. Now, there will be enormous pressure from US, rest of international community and the population of Pakistan on Musharraf and the Army to crack down on jihadi extremists and cleanse the Army and ISI of pro-jihadi elements. The new Army chief may have to consider whether Musharraf is baggage or worthwhile.
It is now up to the civilian and Army leadership to utilise this moment. The fight will not be either easy or short. Nor will its consequences be confined to the Pakistan-Afghanistan area. If the Pakistani parties are to unite, then they will have to find a new approach. The records of both US leadership and Musharraf show that they are not equal to the task. They have messed up, indeed aggravated, the war against terrorism in the last six years. US arrogance and unilateralism have been crucial ingredients in the development of policies in Pakistan since Zia and they have resulted in the present explosive situation.
The North West Frontier Province is being Talibanised. Baluchistan is in turmoil. Karachi has seen sectarian violence. There is a call for the increased engagement of India with Pakistan, US, Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia in order to stabilise the situation in Pakistan. It also calls for increased vigil in our own country.
(The writer is a commentator on strategic affair)
