Bhutto — what a man!

One of the greatest French leaders Napoleon Bonaparte rightly believed that "it is the cause, and not the death, that makes the martyr.” In his historic perspective those leaders become immortal who live and die for causes dear to them. And from our own chequered history there could not be better example of father and daughter who died for the causes they had struggled for all their lives and ever onward rule the hearts and minds of the people from their graves. 

Very few leaders enjoy that niche in the hall of fame that martyred Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (Born Jan 5, 1928) has. Born with a silver spoon, Bhutto Sahib from the days of his school-had chosen the difficult and hazardous pathway to eternal glory by opting for waging a dauntless struggle to unshackle the poor and give the downtrodden respect and a voice. He walked to the gallows to arm Pakistan with a nuclear glow so that his country and his people would not have to lower their heads ever again in shame. As a school student he had pledged to Quaid—that if need be, he would die for Pakistan.

Bhutto Sahib’s original letter and Quaid-i-Azam’s reply to him is preserved as part of Shamsul Hasan Papers in the National Archives in Islamabad—a record of MAJ’s correspondence handed by the Quaid to my late father for posterity. Seventeen-year-old Zulfikar wrote (April 1945)--“You, Sir, have brought us on one platform, under one flag, and the cry of every Muslim should be onward to Pakistan. Our destiny is Pakistan. Our aim is Pakistan. Nobody can stop us. We are a nation by ourselves and India is a subcontinent. You have inspired us and we are proud of you. Being still in school, I am unable to help the establishment of our sacred land. But the time will come when I will even sacrifice my life for Pakistan.”

Indeed true to his word, he sacrificed his life for Pakistan exactly thirty-four years later in April 1979. In a historic coincidence ZAB’s letter too was written in the month of April 1945. In an affectionate response MAJ advised him (May 1, 1945): “I was very glad to read your letter of 26th April and to note that you have been following the various political events. I would advise you, if you are interested in politics, to make a thorough study of it. But, don’t neglect your education, and when you have completed your student’s career, I have no doubt that you will be all better qualified if you study thoroughly the political problems of India, when you enter the struggle of life. Signed: MA Jinnah.”

It is nothing but a sort of Shakespearean tragedy that Bhutto Sahib did not die in a foreign prison, neither his killers were aliens. He was judicially murdered on the orders of a dictator—his ungrateful beneficiary. What made the crime more horrendous was the fact that in cahoots with him were four persons belonging to legal fraternity. Ever since then, Pakistani judiciary has this judgment hanged around its neck as an albatross.

Quaid was his idol, his only leader. He took MAJ’s advice to his heart, got drowned in his studies to prepare himself for the future leadership role. Perhaps no one in history has sustained his fame and coveted place among the top leaders despite year after year of slander on him by successive generations of unscrupulous power manipulators. He remains enamoured among the masses notwithstanding the fact that everybody knew what was the result of 1965 and 1971 wars. It seems to be a rare phenomenon—the most dominant political personality in post-1947 Pakistan until death came to him "not with the due panoply of justice but like a thief in the night, a deed done shamefully, apprehensively and with desperation".

Bhutto, a young man of thirty, found his way forward when the power troika comprising of generals, judges and top civil bureaucrats had shown the door to the vintage politicians. They had become ineffective and made the task of filling the vacuum more difficult especially when their very survival had become impossible in the new ball game, with rules made to order, by players who represented the powerful Establishment rather than the people of Pakistan. Always a moot point that he owed his political career to a military dictator--Bhutto had learnt much earlier in the day to practice politics as the art of the impossible. His entry was a means to an end and not an end in itself. And in due course of time he outplayed them all.

Bhutto’s extraordinary reservoir of multifaceted talents and charismatic personality got immensely reflected soon after his advent in the corridors of power. As minister of Science & Technology, he set the country on the course to harness nuclear technology both for cheap power and security deterrence. He outshone all previous foreign ministers to date by providing unique dynamism by unshackling Pakistan’s toothless and subservient foreign policy to American diktats and making it proactive.

If Pakistan ever had an independent foreign policy, it was during Bhutto’s time. If one wants to know how field marshal Ayub Khan had devalued Pakistan with the United States, reading of ZAB’s “Myth of Independence” is a must. It is an eye opener that tells how intrusive American interference had become in the day to day affairs of running Pakistan. Even the man responsible for this abject degradation falsely glorified as “Asian De Gaulle” lamented it almost crying in his book, “Friends, Not Masters”. 

Once I was asked by some ex-foreign office wizards –my friends-- to give my journalistic opinion on their compilation of what in their view should be Pakistan’s foreign policy. It was definitely substantive input with many appendices, footnotes etc. It was quite amusing to go through 50 odd pages of their research.

It was much more reflective of the Tales from Arabian Nights by the former inmates of Hotel Scherzade. My conscientious comment was—instead of beating about the bush saying nothing--typical of diplomats—I just crossed the pages from beginning to the end and wrote: “Pakistan’s foreign policy is made in Washington and executed by security apparatus”. If one looks at it from the days of General Ziaul Haq to this day, it is nothing but kowtowing the Americans, more related to defence procurement and financial assistance for military needs—whether it is CSF or those suitcases full of dollars that CIA delivered to the last two generals who captured the presidency at gun-point.

Except for Bhutto’s initiative to charter an independent foreign policy, lay the foundation of ever lasting friendship with China, building bridges with the Third World, uniting the Muslim countries—Pakistan was leased out by Ayub Khan as the safest place for the American spy planes to snoop over Russia.

Thank God, he did not allow Pakistani Praetorian men-power to be used by Americans. What two of Ayub’s later successors- holding the country as a hostage for over two decades—did by offering their own services plus lives of those under their command to be used by Americans—not only committed an act of abject ignominy but of lethal consequences that continue to cast a shadow of uncertainty on our future. Both became kingpins in the American designs for “enhancing uncertainties abroad".

Only a student of history can spell out the near fatal consequences when a colossus is removed from the scene. It is like displacing the foundation stone of a state. Bhutto’s unnatural demise unleashed nearly four decades of unease, disruption, dislocation, ethnicity, divisiveness, sectarianism, ongoing trauma, terrorism and unending war between the Praetorian establishment and the people—the former defending its right to a security state and later seeking the supremacy of the vote as the sole arbiter of power—a phenomenon symbolic of martyred Bhuttos.

The birth of ISIL, horrific situation in Syria, Yemen too on the slide and an overall dismally vicious environment —our current rulers must not repeat the mistakes of the two previous dictators. Their foreign policy is neither here nor there. With new players calling the shots globally, despicable situation demands a serious reflection on the state of our internal and external affairs. George W. Bush Jr. made United States a citadel of security by a calculated policy of enhancing uncertainties abroad, the new man in town could be much worse. It is much more of the same as Mae West used to say about herself –“when I am bad, I am good.”

The author is the former High Commissioner for Pakistan to UK, long time adviser to prime minister Benazir Bhutto and a veteran journalist.