|Moments before she was assassinated, Pakistan's opposition leader Benazir Bhutto waves to her supporters.|
The wider political tragedy behind the personal loss of assassinated former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto Thursday is how common - almost predictable and inevitable - this sort of event has become in that troubled region from North Africa, across the Middle East to southern Asia. Pakistan and the world will hear many exhortations in the coming days, about democracy, stability, restraint, terrorism and other such big questions. The sad reality is that much of this wide region that has been increasingly plagued by intermittent political violence in recent decades is now defined by it.
More troubling, in this case as in many other big name assassinations in recent years, is the ugly fact that multiple plausible culprits can be identified. The repetition and predictability of the crime takes its significance beyond the particular evil deed itself. The use of political violence has become so routine, in so many lands, that it demands a level of analysis somewhat higher than the identity of the killers or the specific timing or target of the latest attack.
What should be done? A starting point for a relevant reaction would be to acknowledge that lone gunmen, local militias, suicide terrorists, state armies, and even some elected leaders in dozens of countries have all become colleagues in an extensive drama. The absence of credible governance systems based on the rule of law and the equal rights of all citizens has slowly pushed people and authorities to rely on explosions and intimidation, rather than electoral or accountable legitimacy, to make their point, or to perpetuate their incumbency by eliminating their opponents.
The chronic resort to violence and militarism by gunmen, gangs and governments alike - in Asia, the Middle East and parts of the West- has made such assassinations routine, and subsequently inevitable.
Presidents, kings and warlords in Asia, America, Europe and other parts of the world will all speak passionate volumes now about the senseless death of courageous politicians who valued democracy - yet it will be hard to take seriously any of their pronouncements, for many of the speakers have spent the last generation sending their armies to war, toppling regimes, authorizing covert assassinations, arming gangs and militias, cozying up to terrorists, lauding autocrats, and ignoring true democrats.
Democracy is here to stay. As a muslim women it is my duty to protect democracy to keep her spirit alive.
It bothers me sometimes to see the Muslim countries in an uproar. Some of these so called Muslim countries are in a sad state of affairs.
I have friends here in Ottawa, and I asked them what did they think of the assassanation. They stated, that Butto was no better than Musarif. We all agreed that her murder was sad.
As far as blaming of course Al-Qieda and others, I do not think we should do that. Anyone could have killed Bhutto. As I listened to the news here, their Ambassador here stated that they did not know who was responsible for her murder.
As muslims, we need to be praying for the Pakistanian people, and for the muslims all over
the world. We all need to come back to the deen. Islam really is the only answer for us today.
Salam Alaikum to all,
Ironically, in American or Israeli term, this sort of killing would be called "Pre-emptive Strike" or "defending ourselves", and is a justifiable act if perpetrated by them... even if dozens of innocent children and women were killed in the process!
Assalamualaikum, I'm so glad that a brother in Islam had the sincerety to point out where I might gone wrong. Listen Brother, I am not accusing any group of anything expressly or impliedly. Please do not be misunderstood by my writings. I only implied that if in any event it is done by Muslims that it may affect the image of Islam. I never mention al-Qaeda or Taliban, Brother Azeez. We all, I think have reservoir of reservations on the late Bhutto and honestly all this while I prayed hard, that she wouldn't again lead a Muslim nation of Pakistan. She has nothing to offer Pakistan other than her selfish ambitions and personal interest to the wealth of the state. This is unjust to the ordinary and decent Pakistanis who are miserable and poor and yet no significant development has reach the masses. Besides I also believe that she may tried to clamp down the fundamentalists upon the advice of U.S. Too much is at stake her.
But not this way, Brother Azeez, not this way and not this manner of getting rid of her by way of murder.
And like I said that in my last paragraph in my last post " ALLAH is the Knower of everything ". This it explicitly means that whoever did it, then ALLAH Knows and I leave it to the ALL MIGHTY to decides what will be fallen upon those who did this crime.
Thank you Brother Azeez and may ALLAH bestow HIS Rahmah upon you, always.
And let us pray for Pakistan and all the Muslim people.
Throughout history heredity monarchs have failed. Military rule have failed. So where is the choice for a viable government? Countries that have turned away from such charismatic personalities in the form of dynasties and allowed their constitution to evolve have prospered and are politically stable.
Now America's foreign policies have much to be desired; but its ability to rely on constitutional rule and a balance of power within the aspects of government instead of the charismatic leadership of certain descendents remains to date, unshakable. That's the America I love.
The formal US president John Kennedy and his family were charismatic, charming and cared for the American people. But America had a great and beautiful constitution and was in no need for a particular family to rule. The Kennedy brothers were about to succeed to the thrown one after the other. That would have been a mistake. It would have focused America away from the written law and into the charismatic spell of "the family" and their despotic personalities.
Surly Pakistan should see the weakness of its choice. Why keep allowing the same people to rule? Whether by Military rule or civilian dynasty it's still the same despotisms and will ultimately fail.
A great constitution will allow anyone from among the people to lead. Nevertheless, if the Bhutto family happens to entrench themselves into the absolute rule of Pakistan they will have been ironically placed there by the people themselves, the democratic way. Despotism by free and fair election.
It doesn't matter whether she's pro U.S or pro Taliban, or anything, whatever bad little politics it may be. Why don't we take the lessons of struggle of Prophet Muhammad ( pbuh ). More often than not, he ( s.a.w ) forgave his enemies. He doesn't use force even in the early period of Islamic struggle. Even those who tried to killed the Prophet ( s.a.w ) were forgiven, to the extent that it opened their hearts to accept Islam. Because they see the rich humanity in Islam.
If anybody were to hold Benazir Bhutto is disdain, then put me in that list too. I don't have high regards for her pro U.S policies or her corrupt reign as two times Prime Minister. If the segments of those fighting for Islam wanted to get rid of her, then do it by legal means. Charge her for corruption and abuse of power, depose her if need be, or seize her corrupt assets. Ban her political vehicle if she finance it from ill gotten gains. Do whatever it takes. But not killing.
The Quran states that killing in Islam can only be in self defense.
I am telling all now, the reason why westerners, the ordinary and decent ones, are attracted to Islam is because Islam is the faith that brings no contradiction to their conscience, brings serenity to their hearts, religion that promotes peace as seen by the examples of Rasullullah ( s.a.w ). And this killing by a small segment, though a small one, will inevitably affect the image of Islam. Why can't Muslims see that ?
There must be other ways to depose off leaders other than killing them. Unless the leader himself or herself are cruel murderous tyrants. ALLAH is the Knower of everything.
Fine, I and many others differ from Bhutto's policies and stand, but nothing justify her killing. And I honestly do not think she will win the elections either. The most she can get is an almost one third majority, if she wishes to depose Musharaf, she has to form alliance with Nawaz sharrif.
But looking at the other face of the coin, Musharraf is no alternative either, but the real rulers in Pakistan are the army, the military. Whether for good or for bad, that's a subjective analysis to be made. To start of with Musharaff cannot simply call in the U.S and started to uproot the fundamentalist because the fundamentalist are already in the army. The intelligence service in the ISS are made up of fundamentalists, some are said to be incline to the Islamic cause. Mushharaf cannot simply ignore this, he cannot antagonise too much fragments in the army because that it his real constituency.
Is this good for Pakistan ? In the short term yes. But in the longer prospect of securing peace and stability, a real and more meaningful democracy which is not contrary to Islam must be made the alternative.
The Shaw of Iran 'Pahlavi' for example was not voted into office as he attempted his "white" revolution. As a consequent, he was exiled and the Mullahs were placed in charge. Once upon a time the Statue of liberty revealed its face in Tiananmen Square- that didn't last long. Those old communist clowns also knew imperially that the evolutionary process of cultural change does not happen overnight, in an unplanned chaotic fashion.
In reality, Bhutto was somewhat reckless in her approach. In mathematics the square root of 2 is an irrational number; both Bhutto and Musharraf leading Pakistan would not have worked. Sharing of power? What was that to mean? They were too divided ideologically; making her manner of return from exile destabilizing facto for Pakistan. Now the fight against al-Qaida can be won in a comfortably, chaotic environment. She stood as another graphic example of how people continue to place their all and all on a single personality -leader. This headlong thrust one person will make to the top of politics has never effectively changed society for the better. Change has always come from the bottom- the so-called grass root people determined to change.
Perhaps if there is enough discontent Pakistan will changed- democracy will be a by-product of such change- not because they followed one charismatic- western-educated leader.
saves Pakistan from the Americans