*UPDATED* Pakistan’s Arafat
December 27, 2007
Benazir Bhutto was a ‘pro democracy proponent’? Benazir Bhutto was a ’soldier for democracy’?
On what planet?
Benazir Bhutto was Pakistan’s Arafat. She stole billions of dollars from her nation and was forced to leave office twice because of corruption charges and allegations she had her own brother assassinated. Her husband spent 8 years in prison, convicted of those corruption charges.
Dr Sanity quotes Cliff May and sees clearly into the neighborhood in which Ms Bhutto lived and played.
Bhutto’s murder points to a lesson we (the Foreign Policy Establishment in particular) has been slow to learn:
This is not some extraordinary event. This is not the work of some lone madman. This is how militant Islamists contest elections – not just in Pakistan but also in Lebanon and Gaza and wherever they they get a foothold.
That there are Pakistanis who hail Bhutto as a ‘democratic’ leader should come as no surprise. There are those Palestinians who venerate Arafat and the Hamas leadership despite decades of corruption and deliberate exploitation.
Arafat spend decades being feted by European and American leaders. He dined with Kings and Princes, Presidents and Prime Ministers. In the end, not even they could not camouflage his corruption, repression and oppression and bestow upon him any kind of legitimacy. Arafat’s legacy is visible in the wretched lives, poverty and hopelessness of Palestinians.
The same is true in Pakistan. There are no more than 15 families that wield power and influence in that nation and during her lifetime, Benazir Bhutto did nothing to change that reality or empower her people, despite the most generous of election promises. Her legacy, like that of the Arab league, is one of maintaining the status quo.
She was a terribly conflicted person who deep in her heart wanted to save Pakistan from its evils, but was unable to put her personal lifestyle choices aside in doing so.
Arafat desperately wanted to be the George Washington of the Palestinians. Unfortunately, he could not change who and what he was. The same is true of Benazir Bhutto.
In the same way Arafat spoke out of both sides of his mouth when it came to terror, so did Benazir Bhutto. She recognized the Taliban regime (one of only 3 nations to do so) and made a deal to turn a blind eye to terror as long as it was directed elsewhere.
It may be in our political interest to play along and support a mythology that elevates Benazir Bhutto, for the time being, in the same way we gave Arafat a certain status he did not deserve. Certainly, political candidates on the stump are bestowing sainthood status on Benazir Bhutto faster than they did for Mother Teresa.
We gave Stalin support in WWII and we treat the most vile and dysfunctional despots in the Middle East as if they were equal to leaders of free and democratic societies, because it is in our best political interest to do so.
When in it is all said and done, Benazir Bhutto was Arafat in a hijab. Like Arafat, she will be remembered for who she really was- corrupt and oppressive and someone who cared little for her people.
*UPDATED* Reports of Bhutto’s corruption are not exaggerated. See the NYT’s Bhutto Clan Leaves A Trail Of Corruption In Pakistan. The article was written in 1998 and does not reflect later charges of corruption, or the ensuing conviction by Swiss courts on money laundering charges.
December 27, 2007 at 2:58 pm
“Like Arafat, she will be remembered for who she really was- corrupt and oppressive and someone who cared little for her people.”
Not if CNN has anything to say about it, I figure.
December 27, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Thank you for this dose of reality. We are not going to be getting this from anyone in a position of influence today, since, as you said, they all have to do what is in the best political interests (either their own or in general). Granted, we’re not going to be getting this from the mass media because they are just plain ignorant of anything outside their own little world of agenda-driven nonsense.
December 27, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Excellent and timely reminder of Bhutto’s thoroughly un-democratic past.
December 27, 2007 at 10:59 pm
[...] the real reality check by Sigmund, Carl and Alfred on Bhutto, here. And check out Spree’s summary of the events of the day, especially of the candidates [...]
December 27, 2007 at 11:26 pm
SC&A:
I thought you had a Navy background. You should know better than to urinate to windward.
She was female. She was attractive, she was articulate, she was assassinated.
By the prolethink of our cultural masters, she’s right on up there with Mother Theresa now.
Such nitwittery will be the doom of us all.
December 28, 2007 at 7:40 am
We may castigate BBhutto as a false hero, but a hero she was to many people, and international promises of elections rode on her participation. Those elections are less than half a month away.
You may complain about the foot that you limp on, but when the terrorists blow that foot off, it’s time to worry about your new problem.
December 28, 2007 at 9:04 am
[...] 28, 2007 We noted yesterday that It may be in our political interest to play along and support a mythology that [...]
December 28, 2007 at 12:00 pm
By the prolethink of our cultural masters, she’s right on up there with Mother Theresa now.
Ees Party Line, Comrades.
Don’t ask “Political Questions”.
December 28, 2007 at 1:19 pm
[...] Hillary had no problem with Pakistan’s Arafat. Why isn’t that surprising? Posted by SC&A Filed in [...]
December 28, 2007 at 4:28 pm
[...] from Islamabad to the Zurich)? Reading the international press & blogs, I found this article, somewhat reflecting my own thoughts (not every word though): Benazir Bhutto was a ‘pro democracy [...]
December 29, 2007 at 4:24 pm
[...] from Islamabad to the Zurich)? Reading the international press & blogs, I found this article, somewhat reflecting my own thoughts (not every word though): Benazir Bhutto was a ‘pro democracy [...]
January 4, 2008 at 4:00 am
You don’t tell us anything new, you can’t prove the cold tea you’re serving us neither can you destroy the image and symbol that she was, despite of all problems which aroused in Benazir’s time as PM, for her people. Actually, since again all of your truths on Bhutto’s “bad” past were already listed and provided and proved with quite more evident facts at other places worldwide, I can drive the conclusion from it that your article here is worthless.
January 4, 2008 at 7:16 am
Chaya K, your remarks are absurd.
The Swiss convicted both Bhuttos and other Euro nations are considering the same. There is no escaping that. The Pakistani courts that convicted Bhutto were scorned by her until they overturned the convictions- an act that by all accounts was overtly fraudulent.
Her niece (and a good part of Pakistan) Fatima, believes that her father was killed on Benazir’s orders and not only did she deal with the Taliban (and recognize the regime in Kabul, one of only three nations to do so), she was by virtually every political savant to be the worst leader in South Asia, ever. The lists of her assets acquired during her terms in office speaks for itself.
If you have any evidence otherwise, present it. Simply making a statement without being able to back it up only highlights the truth that you are a lightweight- and irrelevant to boot.
That there are those like yourself that refuse to deal with reality (I suspect you believe Yasser Arafat was a kind of saint, too) does nothing to obfuscate that truths.
I suggest you avoid politics and analysis. Clearly, those topics aren’t your strong suit.