The assassination of Benazir Bhutto

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto But, unfortunately, all too often assassins have in fact done just that. The assassinations of Egyptian President Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Rabin played a significant role in derailing the efforts to establish a formal reconciliation between Israel and its neighbors. The assassinations of Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy, as well as those of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, dramatically changed American destiny a century apart. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo was the catalyst for the First World War and all that has followed in this region. Only dictatorships, which brutally suppress individual liberties, are willing or able to take the sort of sweeping preventative measures, which greatly reduce the threat of assassination. Democracies are particularly vulnerable in this regard, as politicians must maintain a connection with ordinary people to win elections. Thus, Benazir Bhutto chose the vulnerability of standing in the sunroof, halfway out of her armored personnel carrier rather than riding in it as she made her way out of a political rally. She did so despite the bombing of her motorcade upon return to Pakistan two months earlier and many serious threats after that. She also disregarded both Pakistan's violent history and that of her own immediate family. She had two brothers separately murdered and her father was overthrown in a military coup and subsequently hung. President Zia, who led that coup, was later murdered when his aircraft crashed under mysterious circumstances. The second Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, was gunned down in the same park as Benazir Bhutto in 1951. We may never know who was behind the assassination, as there are so many likely or possible candidates, including President Musharraf; rogue elements of his intelligence services (known for their violent covert operations and links to extremist groups); Al-Qaeda or related terrorist groups like the Taliban; or rival tribal groups opposed to the Bhutto clan and their ethnic Sindhi supporters. All the indications thus far are that the investigation was botched, forensic evidence washed away, and conflicting accounts issued over the actual cause of death. What is certain, however, is that her assassination was a major blow against Western efforts to mediate some sort of peaceful transition/joint rule with President Musharraf. Under these scenarios, the Western hope was that Pakistan would be able to stabilize itself on a democratic path and maintain or increase the effort made against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. There is a saying that "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions." This may well apply to this situation, as it was the Western powers which pressed Bhutto to return and pressed Musharraf to permit it to happen. The end result is that Pakistan with its nuclear arsenal and key role in the Afghanistan war has lurched even further and more dramatically towards anarchy and violence. It is important, however, to put the turmoil in Pakistan in its global context. The reality is that there is a worldwide struggle underway in which radical Islamic extremists are trying to impose their own fundamentalist view of Islam to the exclusion of all others. While we are naturally focused on the threat of terrorism from these extremists, we need to keep well in mind that it is only a means to an end. In fighting our "war on terror," we often actually play into the hands of the radical Islamic extremists. While President Musharraf has many faults, it is very clear that our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan and requests to him for assistance in those efforts and in suppressing terrorist groups in Pakistan has greatly increased the level of political instability in that country. It would take a book to describe the evolution of Islamic fundamentalism into its current state, including the use of suicide bombers and terrorism as a key weapon in their struggle. Certainly the West over decades, centuries has had a major, negative hand in its evolution. But the key point is that the immediate and medium term goal of people like Osama Bin Laden is the complete overthrow of all governments with significant Islamic populations, which are not fully in line with their radical fundamentalist viewpoint of the world. They want to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate based on their fundamentalist beliefs. The immediate targets are Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. But make no mistake about it; countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt are very much in their gun sights as well. We are confronting two related and extremely complex problems in trying to deal with this challenge. The first is that for decades, most of the people in the populous Muslim world have lived and continue to live in great poverty with authoritarian governments giving them few outlets for expression or growth. For a long time, the West looked the other way and did not worry too much about democratization in these countries as long as the oil kept flowing. But we are now paying for price for these lost years, as the opportunity to transform the societies peacefully, gradually, and effectively has passed us by. We are "hoisted on our own petard." Efforts to encourage democratic transition seem now only to result in giving power and influence to groups like Hamas in Gaza or end up increasing political instability in a very volatile region. But doing nothing only postpones the day of reckoning. The second problem is that the West, and the United States in particular have followed policies for years, which have angered, frustrated, and humiliated (in their eyes) the Muslim world. This includes our strong, unwavering support for Israel, despite its many counter-productive actions. It includes our backing of authoritarian rulers in countries considered "friendly" to us. It includes the invasion and occupation of Iraq, along with incidents such as those at Abu Ghraib prison and the many deaths of civilians due to what all to often appears as a "shoot first and ask questions later" protection tactic for our soldiers. All of the above provides ample fuel for the Muslim extremists. Our opponent's aim in targeting Western societies by terrorism is three-fold. First of all, it generates the sort of response from our societies, which the extremists want. The "clash of civilizations" comes closer to reality. Muslims in Europe in particular are under increased scrutiny and even hostility. Secondly, it gives a focus to the rage felt by the Muslim world. And thirdly, it gives the Muslims a new sense of power lacking for so long. So while the extremists are targeting us and actually do hate our values, the actual goal is to influence the Muslim world and make it more radical. And unfortunately, they are succeeding all too well. There is no easy answer to these challenges. This conflict will be with us for years to come. But solving it has to begin with a better understanding of our enemy. All too often in the Middle East in particular we have followed policies without fully appreciating their long-term negative consequences. We are now paying a heavy price for those mistakes. Pakistanis at Benazir Bhutto's grave (FoNet) During one of the many heated "crises" Zoran Djindjic faced while Prime Minister of Serbia, he was asked if he was afraid of assassination. His reply was that "they can kill me, but they cannot kill our ideas." William Montgomery We may never know who was behind the assassination, as there are so many likely or possible candidates, including President Musharraf; rogue elements of his intelligence services (known for their violent covert operations and links to extremist groups).

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto

But, unfortunately, all too often assassins have in fact done just that. The assassinations of Egyptian President Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Rabin played a significant role in derailing the efforts to establish a formal reconciliation between Israel and its neighbors.

The assassinations of Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy, as well as those of Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, dramatically changed American destiny a century apart. The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo was the catalyst for the First World War and all that has followed in this region.

Only dictatorships, which brutally suppress individual liberties, are willing or able to take the sort of sweeping preventative measures, which greatly reduce the threat of assassination. Democracies are particularly vulnerable in this regard, as politicians must maintain a connection with ordinary people to win elections.

Thus, Benazir Bhutto chose the vulnerability of standing in the sunroof, halfway out of her armored personnel carrier rather than riding in it as she made her way out of a political rally. She did so despite the bombing of her motorcade upon return to Pakistan two months earlier and many serious threats after that.

She also disregarded both Pakistan's violent history and that of her own immediate family. She had two brothers separately murdered and her father was overthrown in a military coup and subsequently hung. President Zia, who led that coup, was later murdered when his aircraft crashed under mysterious circumstances.

The second Prime Minister of Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan, was gunned down in the same park as Benazir Bhutto in 1951.

We may never know who was behind the assassination, as there are so many likely or possible candidates, including President Musharraf; rogue elements of his intelligence services (known for their violent covert operations and links to extremist groups); Al-Qaeda or related terrorist groups like the Taliban; or rival tribal groups opposed to the Bhutto clan and their ethnic Sindhi supporters.

All the indications thus far are that the investigation was botched, forensic evidence washed away, and conflicting accounts issued over the actual cause of death.

What is certain, however, is that her assassination was a major blow against Western efforts to mediate some sort of peaceful transition/joint rule with President Musharraf. Under these scenarios, the Western hope was that Pakistan would be able to stabilize itself on a democratic path and maintain or increase the effort made against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

There is a saying that "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions." This may well apply to this situation, as it was the Western powers which pressed Bhutto to return and pressed Musharraf to permit it to happen. The end result is that Pakistan with its nuclear arsenal and key role in the Afghanistan war has lurched even further and more dramatically towards anarchy and violence.

It is important, however, to put the turmoil in Pakistan in its global context. The reality is that there is a worldwide struggle underway in which radical Islamic extremists are trying to impose their own fundamentalist view of Islam to the exclusion of all others. While we are naturally focused on the threat of terrorism from these extremists, we need to keep well in mind that it is only a means to an end.

In fighting our "war on terror," we often actually play into the hands of the radical Islamic extremists. While President Musharraf has many faults, it is very clear that our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan and requests to him for assistance in those efforts and in suppressing terrorist groups in Pakistan has greatly increased the level of political instability in that country.

It would take a book to describe the evolution of Islamic fundamentalism into its current state, including the use of suicide bombers and terrorism as a key weapon in their struggle. Certainly the West over decades, centuries has had a major, negative hand in its evolution. But the key point is that the immediate and medium term goal of people like Osama Bin Laden is the complete overthrow of all governments with significant Islamic populations, which are not fully in line with their radical fundamentalist viewpoint of the world.

They want to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate based on their fundamentalist beliefs. The immediate targets are Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. But make no mistake about it; countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt are very much in their gun sights as well.

We are confronting two related and extremely complex problems in trying to deal with this challenge. The first is that for decades, most of the people in the populous Muslim world have lived and continue to live in great poverty with authoritarian governments giving them few outlets for expression or growth. For a long time, the West looked the other way and did not worry too much about democratization in these countries as long as the oil kept flowing.

But we are now paying for price for these lost years, as the opportunity to transform the societies peacefully, gradually, and effectively has passed us by. We are "hoisted on our own petard." Efforts to encourage democratic transition seem now only to result in giving power and influence to groups like Hamas in Gaza or end up increasing political instability in a very volatile region. But doing nothing only postpones the day of reckoning.

The second problem is that the West, and the United States in particular have followed policies for years, which have angered, frustrated, and humiliated (in their eyes) the Muslim world. This includes our strong, unwavering support for Israel, despite its many counter-productive actions. It includes our backing of authoritarian rulers in countries considered "friendly" to us.

It includes the invasion and occupation of Iraq, along with incidents such as those at Abu Ghraib prison and the many deaths of civilians due to what all to often appears as a "shoot first and ask questions later" protection tactic for our soldiers. All of the above provides ample fuel for the Muslim extremists.

Our opponent's aim in targeting Western societies by terrorism is three-fold. First of all, it generates the sort of response from our societies, which the extremists want. The "clash of civilizations" comes closer to reality. Muslims in Europe in particular are under increased scrutiny and even hostility.

Secondly, it gives a focus to the rage felt by the Muslim world. And thirdly, it gives the Muslims a new sense of power lacking for so long. So while the extremists are targeting us and actually do hate our values, the actual goal is to influence the Muslim world and make it more radical. And unfortunately, they are succeeding all too well.

There is no easy answer to these challenges. This conflict will be with us for years to come. But solving it has to begin with a better understanding of our enemy. All too often in the Middle East in particular we have followed policies without fully appreciating their long-term negative consequences. We are now paying a heavy price for those mistakes.