After Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto is the only leader in Pakistan whose life, personality, politics, and services have been extensively documented in thousands of books and articles, with countless more expected in the future. Millions of admirers continue to cherish his legacy, passing their admiration from generation to generation. His memory endures in countless hearts, making Shaheed Bhutto an eternal figure in Pakistan's history.
Tragically, even in this modern era of knowledge and information, baseless and fabricated accusations from decades past are still repeated in an attempt to tarnish his legacy. Despite historical records and credible sources debunking these allegations, some persist in their relentless propaganda, as if denying daylight or calling an apple bitter could alter reality. Such obstinate denial reflects closed minds, for which no remedy exists. On Shaheed Bhutto’s birthday, it is fitting to address and analyze the major accusations against him, separating fact from fiction.
One common claim is that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto owed his political career to General Ayub Khan. However, this assertion blatantly disregards Bhutto’s family’s political heritage. Born on January 5, 1928, in Larkana, Bhutto hailed from a prominent political family of the subcontinent. His father, Sir Shahnawaz Bhutto, was a trailblazer, becoming a member of the Bombay Legislative Assembly at just 33 years old in 1921. A staunch advocate for Sindh’s separation from Bombay, Sir Shahnawaz represented Sindh’s Muslims at the 1931 Roundtable Conference and later served as an advisor to the Governor of Sindh and Vice Chairman of the Sindh United Party. In 1947, he played a pivotal role as Prime Minister of Junagadh, convincing Nawab Mahabat Khanji to accede to Pakistan.
To claim that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the scion of such a distinguished family, needed Ayub Khan’s patronage to enter politics is a gross distortion of history.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s academic and professional achievements further disprove this myth. He earned degrees in Political Science from the University of Southern California and UC Berkeley, followed by advanced studies in Jurisprudence and Political Science at Christ Church, Oxford. Later, he became a lecturer at the University of Southampton and a member of Lincoln’s Inn.
During Prime Minister Chaudhry Muhammad Ali’s tenure, Bhutto was considered for inclusion in a United Nations delegation. By 1957, he had represented Pakistan at the United Nations under Prime Minister Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy and later attended the United Nations Conference on Maritime Law in 1958. These accomplishments demonstrated his exceptional intellect and expertise, qualities that eventually led Ayub Khan to entrust him with multiple ministerial portfolios, including the pivotal role of Foreign Minister.
In their relentless hostility toward the Bhutto family, some detractors, often devoid of ethical restraint, have accused Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of addressing Ayub Khan as “Daddy.” However, no credible evidence has ever been presented to substantiate this claim. This allegation is alternately attributed to Gohar Ayub or his son, but neither has ever produced proof. It is worth noting that political associations evolve over time. Even Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah began his political journey with the Indian National Congress before aligning with the All India Muslim League. Similarly, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, once a part of Ayub Khan’s government, chose to distance himself upon realizing the regime’s disregard for addressing the genuine needs of the people. This marked the inception of the Pakistan People’s Party, which quickly resonated as the voice of the nation’s aspirations.
Recently, a baseless propaganda campaign has surfaced on social media, alleging that Bhutto wrote a letter to Iskander Mirza, purportedly describing him as a greater leader than Quaid-e-Azam. This claim traces back to 1967-68, when General Musa Khan—a close associate of Ayub Khan and the then-Governor of West Pakistan—asserted that Bhutto had written in the letter that his father had advised him to collaborate with Mirza. Remarkably, despite the ferocity of opposition campaigns, often backed by external funding, during Bhutto’s rise to the Prime Ministership, neither this letter surfaced at the time nor did any opposition figure ever accuse Bhutto of such a claim.
The alleged letter first emerged in 1997 within the book Iskander Mirza Speaks. By this point, Pakistan had already endured the oppressive regime of Zia-ul-Haq, infamous for distorting history and fabricating documents. Given the context, the authenticity of this letter remains highly questionable and cannot be accepted at face value.
Critics also accuse Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of contributing to Pakistan’s breakup by coining the slogan “Idhar Hum, Udhar Tum” (We are here, you are there) and threatening participants of the Dhaka assembly session. However, the broader context and facts are essential for a fair assessment. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman contested the 1970 elections on the platform of his six points, which effectively proposed that provinces operate as independent states with separate currencies, militias, and economic systems. After securing a majority, Sheikh Mujib declared his intent to pass these points in the assembly’s inaugural session, effectively dissolving Pakistan’s unity.
At this critical juncture, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto took a resolute stand to protect Pakistan’s integrity. Driven by his unwavering commitment to national unity, he famously warned that anyone attending the assembly session in Dhaka would face dire consequences. Even Mujib’s own allies have since acknowledged the existence of the Agartala Conspiracy, revealing India’s use of the Awami League to orchestrate Pakistan’s division.
Bhutto travelled to Dhaka for negotiations and demonstrated flexibility by agreeing to almost five of Mujib’s six points. However, he firmly opposed the establishment of separate paramilitary forces for each province, a move that would have effectively fragmented Pakistan into multiple independent entities. Sheikh Mujib’s refusal to compromise led to widespread unrest in East Pakistan, followed by a military operation, and eventually, India’s intervention culminated in the division of Pakistan.
It is crucial to recognize that had Bhutto not taken a firm stance, the Pakistan we know today might not have survived. Mujib’s six points, if passed, would have unraveled Quaid-e-Azam’s vision, leaving Pakistan disintegrated.
Criticism of Bhutto’s constitutional amendments often stems from prejudice. His crowning achievement was the creation of Pakistan’s first consensus-based democratic constitution, which safeguarded the rights of its citizens. Bhutto also restored national morale after the 1971 crisis, secured the return of 90,000 prisoners of war through the Simla Agreement, and initiated Pakistan’s nuclear program, ensuring its security despite immense global pressure.
For these contributions, he faced overthrow and a highly controversial trial, culminating in his execution. Decades later, the Supreme Court acknowledged the unfairness of his trial, yet the architects of his judicial murder remain unpunished.
Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s legacy deserves celebration, not defamation. His unwavering love for Pakistan, his sacrifices, and his vision for a prosperous future remain unparalleled. His story should inspire future generations and be included in textbooks to guide them with his example of resilience, hope, and unwavering dedication to the nation.
The writer is a PPP MPA in the Sindh Assembly
Sohail Anwar Sial says they have CCTV footage in which Abbasi's son and his friends are seen firing at his house
It is noteworthy that current bilateral trade volume between Pakistan and UAE stands at approximately $8 billion
