I am not defending Bhutto on these grounds. In fact, I am defending him on other grounds. Yes, he used power to kill opponents. There is no doubt about that. But, the reason for which he was killed was unjustified. His death was unjustified. We agree that he was a charismatic leader indeed. My point of view is that in Pakistan there are a lot of problems.
Ever since our founder's death there has been a lot of corruption of all sorts in our government. They range from political corruption to financial corruption. Politics is a dirty business in our country and this is a known fact. Yes, I agree that it should not be there and Pakistan should have no corruption at all. But, the truth is that when you have so much dirt to clean we cannot be picky. You take things one at a time. As a start I believe that no change can come in Pakistan overnight. It has to be in phases. The utmost priority of our government should be to eliminate corruption. For that to happen, we need to first control the financial corruption or change the system. In Pakistan, no leader except the Army people are powerful enough to do that. Bhutto should be given the credit for uniting the nation on a constitution. This is a big achievement because a country whose politicians are so diverse and dynamic and who are not even able to settle on an LFO, then it must have been a brilliance of an extraordinary man to pass a whole set of laws, the 1973 constitution. Not only this, he organized the world's largest Islamic Summit in Lahore, which was attended by one of the most prolific leaders. In addition, he got Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan to our country. If he was not there, would we have been the first Islamic nuclear power? Ofcourse not.
Second, there is no doubt in my mind that Bhutto played a certain role in splitting the country. I will not even say anything else to justify that. But, I do not defend him on this ground. I defend him because after the separation he made us powerful again. He picked a country from bits and pieces. Yes, he came to politics through Army, Mr. Ayub Khan who belongs from my maternal roots, but he came to power through the people. And, we all know that Army was already involved in its atrocities with the Bengalis way before the separation. This was bound to happen anyway. If we did not, do you think the Western powers would have allowed such an arrangement of a divided country to take place? Would India have not tried its level best to separate us at some point in time? The truth is that East and West Pakistan was never a reality. But, yes the separation was one of the saddest time in our country. But, we recovered after that. And, we recovered well only because of one man; Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
Yes, he nationalized everything and that hurt the industrialists in Pakistan. But, that also was necessary during that era. Because, 22 families in Pakistan had 90 percent of the wealth of Pakistan. He did not loot them but he only took over their business with not so appropriate compensation. We all know that if Bhutto was born in this era then he would have been in favor of privatization because times have changed. At that time, we were against the imperialists and we were starting from scratch.
I do not understand some people. They tend to overlook the fact that Z.A. Bhutto had never been allegedly involved in any financial corruption. Is this not enough to prove a leader's worth? Again, in a country where billions of dollars have been looted during the 1990s it is a shame that people overlook the financial aspect. There is no rocket science involved in it. The money which has been stolen from our national treasuries, if recovered can make a significant difference on our poverty levels. We, the blessed class of Pakistan, can sit in our air-conditioned rooms and talk about the minute issues such as Bhutto killed opponents. Or, he separated our country even though it was bound to happen. But, we do not represent the masses of Pakistan. The masses of Pakistan are impoverished and deprived. Their utmost concern is being able to eat 2 times a day - 'do wakt ki roti.' I have seen these people closely because I, myself, do not belong from the metropolitan cities.
Bhutto, a man who slapped his own cousin because he wanted to study abroad in Germany on governments expense, could not have been a man of financial greed. Yes, he was hungry for power. But, if a man has a desire to serve the people and that is his appetite, then doesn't he be rightful of that hunger for power ? If a man understands the need of our masses and says he will provide them with 'Roti,Kapra Aur Makan' - (Food, clothes, and shelter) - then isn't he a class of its own. I would suggest everyone to read the manifesto of Pakistan Peoples Party and discover what Bhutto really was.
Again, Bhutto was not the factor that caused the separation infact he was the catalyst who caused it. If the Bangladeshi administration was ever loyal then they would not have allowed India to enter the war. We all know that we would have surrendered anyway. See, if a father and a son in their house and the neighbors are involved, it takes the matter into another context. This is what happened with West and East Pakistan. No family likes the interference of outsiders in their internal matters. But by calling the neighbor you make the thing more public and therefore more egos are involved. Therefore, no sensitive matter is successful if it is publicized too much.
Now at the end about Zia Ul Haq. He was not forced to come in. If he hanged Bhutto and would have left power, I assure you I would have respected him a bit more. But he stayed in the country for 11 years after taking oath on the Holy Quran. If people are so concerned about killing people who opposed Bhutto, then is this not a biggest 'sin' to move away from an oath taken on the most religious book for our people. Isn't that more embarrassing for Pakistan when a nation is lied on religious grounds? Or is it more embarrassing to have elections rigged to gain an overwhelming victory? We all know that even in fair and free elections Bhutto would have won with a majority. But, his problem was that he wanted complete power which would have extended to around 90 percent. Again, I never claim he was an angel. But, he was one of an intelligent devil's mind who was dealing with fire when our country separated. I reiterate that we are not Denmark or Sweden where there is no sorts of corruption at all. We have to make the most out of what we have. Moving on, about the 'achievement' Zia Ul Haq in getting the American government sided with us.
Please do not tell me that America came to us because of Zia. Zia was so unpopular at the beginning that no one was talking to him at international level. Americans needed us and we helped them. I support Zia on this decision. But, what about the aftermath ? Did we forget the Ojri Camp 'accident' ? The amount of people killed from early 90s to today through countless AK 47. The bullets have come from where? Do you know that ? The whole culture of guns came from where? Karachi has become a playground but where did the toys come from ? Who killed Zia in plane crash ? Are we so insane now that we still think that America can be of our help ?
I support Bhutto for what positive he has given. Yes he had flaws like any other human being. But, to even his opponents he was the most intelligent they have ever encountered. He was the youngest minister when we became the Energy Minister during General Ayub Khan's reign, at the age of just 29. I support him because he had achievements. Importantly, he got Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan to Pakistan. If there was no N-bomb then India would have been one, ruling Pakistan, God forbid. Yes, N-bomb should not be our priority because we are a poor nation. But when you have to choose between standing up against a size three times bigger than you, and going to slavery I will never hesitate in choosing the former.
Ever since our founder's death there has been a lot of corruption of all sorts in our government. They range from political corruption to financial corruption. Politics is a dirty business in our country and this is a known fact. Yes, I agree that it should not be there and Pakistan should have no corruption at all. But, the truth is that when you have so much dirt to clean we cannot be picky. You take things one at a time. As a start I believe that no change can come in Pakistan overnight. It has to be in phases. The utmost priority of our government should be to eliminate corruption. For that to happen, we need to first control the financial corruption or change the system. In Pakistan, no leader except the Army people are powerful enough to do that. Bhutto should be given the credit for uniting the nation on a constitution. This is a big achievement because a country whose politicians are so diverse and dynamic and who are not even able to settle on an LFO, then it must have been a brilliance of an extraordinary man to pass a whole set of laws, the 1973 constitution. Not only this, he organized the world's largest Islamic Summit in Lahore, which was attended by one of the most prolific leaders. In addition, he got Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan to our country. If he was not there, would we have been the first Islamic nuclear power? Ofcourse not.
Second, there is no doubt in my mind that Bhutto played a certain role in splitting the country. I will not even say anything else to justify that. But, I do not defend him on this ground. I defend him because after the separation he made us powerful again. He picked a country from bits and pieces. Yes, he came to politics through Army, Mr. Ayub Khan who belongs from my maternal roots, but he came to power through the people. And, we all know that Army was already involved in its atrocities with the Bengalis way before the separation. This was bound to happen anyway. If we did not, do you think the Western powers would have allowed such an arrangement of a divided country to take place? Would India have not tried its level best to separate us at some point in time? The truth is that East and West Pakistan was never a reality. But, yes the separation was one of the saddest time in our country. But, we recovered after that. And, we recovered well only because of one man; Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
Yes, he nationalized everything and that hurt the industrialists in Pakistan. But, that also was necessary during that era. Because, 22 families in Pakistan had 90 percent of the wealth of Pakistan. He did not loot them but he only took over their business with not so appropriate compensation. We all know that if Bhutto was born in this era then he would have been in favor of privatization because times have changed. At that time, we were against the imperialists and we were starting from scratch.
I do not understand some people. They tend to overlook the fact that Z.A. Bhutto had never been allegedly involved in any financial corruption. Is this not enough to prove a leader's worth? Again, in a country where billions of dollars have been looted during the 1990s it is a shame that people overlook the financial aspect. There is no rocket science involved in it. The money which has been stolen from our national treasuries, if recovered can make a significant difference on our poverty levels. We, the blessed class of Pakistan, can sit in our air-conditioned rooms and talk about the minute issues such as Bhutto killed opponents. Or, he separated our country even though it was bound to happen. But, we do not represent the masses of Pakistan. The masses of Pakistan are impoverished and deprived. Their utmost concern is being able to eat 2 times a day - 'do wakt ki roti.' I have seen these people closely because I, myself, do not belong from the metropolitan cities.
Bhutto, a man who slapped his own cousin because he wanted to study abroad in Germany on governments expense, could not have been a man of financial greed. Yes, he was hungry for power. But, if a man has a desire to serve the people and that is his appetite, then doesn't he be rightful of that hunger for power ? If a man understands the need of our masses and says he will provide them with 'Roti,Kapra Aur Makan' - (Food, clothes, and shelter) - then isn't he a class of its own. I would suggest everyone to read the manifesto of Pakistan Peoples Party and discover what Bhutto really was.
Again, Bhutto was not the factor that caused the separation infact he was the catalyst who caused it. If the Bangladeshi administration was ever loyal then they would not have allowed India to enter the war. We all know that we would have surrendered anyway. See, if a father and a son in their house and the neighbors are involved, it takes the matter into another context. This is what happened with West and East Pakistan. No family likes the interference of outsiders in their internal matters. But by calling the neighbor you make the thing more public and therefore more egos are involved. Therefore, no sensitive matter is successful if it is publicized too much.
Now at the end about Zia Ul Haq. He was not forced to come in. If he hanged Bhutto and would have left power, I assure you I would have respected him a bit more. But he stayed in the country for 11 years after taking oath on the Holy Quran. If people are so concerned about killing people who opposed Bhutto, then is this not a biggest 'sin' to move away from an oath taken on the most religious book for our people. Isn't that more embarrassing for Pakistan when a nation is lied on religious grounds? Or is it more embarrassing to have elections rigged to gain an overwhelming victory? We all know that even in fair and free elections Bhutto would have won with a majority. But, his problem was that he wanted complete power which would have extended to around 90 percent. Again, I never claim he was an angel. But, he was one of an intelligent devil's mind who was dealing with fire when our country separated. I reiterate that we are not Denmark or Sweden where there is no sorts of corruption at all. We have to make the most out of what we have. Moving on, about the 'achievement' Zia Ul Haq in getting the American government sided with us.
Please do not tell me that America came to us because of Zia. Zia was so unpopular at the beginning that no one was talking to him at international level. Americans needed us and we helped them. I support Zia on this decision. But, what about the aftermath ? Did we forget the Ojri Camp 'accident' ? The amount of people killed from early 90s to today through countless AK 47. The bullets have come from where? Do you know that ? The whole culture of guns came from where? Karachi has become a playground but where did the toys come from ? Who killed Zia in plane crash ? Are we so insane now that we still think that America can be of our help ?
I support Bhutto for what positive he has given. Yes he had flaws like any other human being. But, to even his opponents he was the most intelligent they have ever encountered. He was the youngest minister when we became the Energy Minister during General Ayub Khan's reign, at the age of just 29. I support him because he had achievements. Importantly, he got Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan to Pakistan. If there was no N-bomb then India would have been one, ruling Pakistan, God forbid. Yes, N-bomb should not be our priority because we are a poor nation. But when you have to choose between standing up against a size three times bigger than you, and going to slavery I will never hesitate in choosing the former.
No comments:
Post a Comment