Today
is fourth of April and this date awakens, in the minds of a large number of
people, deep thoughts about the wayward course of our history. On this day,
twenty-five years ago, military ruler General Zia-ul-Haq sent Zulfikar Ali
Bhutto to the gallows. Twenty-five years is a long time in the span of
living memory and almost an entire generation has grown that has no personal
linkage to that traumatic moment in the life of this country. But Bhutto,
the mercurial prince of our politics, remains a pulsating point of reference
in our national affairs. All of us had - and have - a Bhutto of our own.
I find it difficult to
summarise my thoughts in this brief write-up because of my personal
involvement with the events of that period as a journalist and columnist.
And writing about Bhutto was never easy because of his multitudinous
character and his political role in an era of momentous developments. As I
have said earlier, he remains a thread of scarlet in the drab fabric of our
public life. Operating at various different levels, he was essentially an
instrument of passion in our politics and that passion is hard to be erased
from our collective consciousness.
Just as his passionate
admirers have to be aware of some of his failings as a ruling politician,
his equally passionate detractors must acknowledge the brilliance that he
masterly invested in the service of this nation. He was the only charismatic
leader to have emerged in our post-independence history and the party that
he founded has survived the unending and brutal opposition by the
establishment. Yet, the establishment itself is indebted to his role as the
father of the nuclear programme and as the leader who injected hope and a
sense of renewal at the darkest moment in our history in December 1971.
However, the idea here is not
to go into the details of Bhutto’s remarkably eventful life and his
complex influence on Pakistan’s destiny. Today, we are reminded, in
particular, of not so much his life, as his death. We need to remember that
he, a former prime minister, was the only man of high political stature to
have been executed in the entire history of Pakistan, in spite of the fact
that this history is replete with gross derelictions of all kinds, including
subversion of the constitution. And it is also tainted with so many
political murders.
On this anniversary of
Bhutto’s execution, we should underline the need for the establishment as
well as the political class to make a fresh effort to come to terms with the
life and death of Bhutto. The Bhutto phenomenon should be understood in the
context of our present wanderings in political wilderness. The Pakistan
People’s Party of Benazir Bhutto must also ponder the role that it should
play at a time when the system is so thoroughly corrupted and is so devoid
of creativity. Benazir has inherited her father’s charisma, and such is
the power of this inheritance that she has twice defeated the machinations
of the establishment to become the prime minister of Pakistan.
Whether the PPP can be
rejuvenated or not is a separate subject but it may be instructive to recall
the initial promise of this party in the late sixties. The times, surely,
have changed. Still, the radical change that Bhutto had brought about at
that time is a unique chapter in our history. It will be difficult for those
who did not witness that unprecedented popular movement to have any idea of
what it was. At that time, Bhutto represented the immortal yearnings of the
ordinary people of this country for change and progress. He was the first
and, remains so far, the only leader who awakened the masses and planted the
seed of hope in their hearts. Has that hope survived the depredations of
more than a quarter century?
Indeed, that mobilisation is
the soul of the Bhutto phenomenon. Results of the elections of 1970 were a
revolution of a kind. Though many aspirations kindled at that time were
somewhat betrayed in later years, that initial investment has not totally
been exhausted. We should recognise that conditions in which Bhutto assumed
power, and then governed the country, were exceptional. The manner, in which
he rose to the occasion, as I have said, is a demonstration of what
leadership can achieve in a period of national distress. It was his great
achievement that in a short time, it seemed business as usual.
By the way, some of the most
touching memories of Bhutto are situated in that address to the nation he
made late at night on December 20, 1971. In that speech, he had said that he
would "like to move the mountains, to change the course of
history". This is the challenge that belongs to our present leaders.
The party that Bhutto had founded and its leader, Benazir Bhutto, are
particularly obliged to take up the gauntlet. But we are also reminded, with
a sense of regret, that there is no other leader of Bhutto’s brilliance
and intellectual vigour.
Thoughts about Bhutto’s
death, and about the last year of his life that he spent in a death cell,
inevitably remind you of General Zia-ul-Haq and what he did to our polity.
While Bhutto was very much an enigmatic figure, there should be no confusion
about the dark legacy of Zia. The present establishment is carrying that
burden in its strivings against religious extremism and terrorism. That it
can still honour Zia’s son with a place in the federal cabinet and
maintain hostility towards Bhutto’s party is an indication of the inherent
attitude of this establishment towards the concept of a democratic
dispensation in this country.
At some level, Bhutto’s
execution was part of a grand design to discredit politicians. If the most
brilliant of them with such a large popular following could be treated in
that fashion, the rest could hardly be inclined to defy the powers that be.
Hence the tradition of collaboration in our public life. It is always easy
to become ‘patriots’ by joining the king’s party. Unfortunately,
Bhutto’s execution was possible only with the connivance of some members
of the higher judiciary. At least in this respect, a new judgment on how
that trial was conducted is very much in order. Bhutto’s detractors may
still have some arguments that are valid but no sane and sensible person can
deny the fact that Zia had planned the execution for his own political
purposes.
Whether a proper juridical
review of Bhutto’s case is possible or not, this anniversary does make us
think of the tragic event that took place twenty-five years ago. Even though
it is difficult to relate to the Bhutto phenomenon without encountering
deeply personal responses, its decisive influence cannot be rejected. Here
was a great drama, surpassing the passion of a Greek tragedy. I find it
interesting that most of his admirers often cherish the memories of the time
when he was out of power; while those who oppose him can only recall the
time he was in power.
In any case, all these
memories have to be preserved because they constitute the raw material of a
history we have not properly recorded or understood. Let me conclude with a
quotation from Milan Kundera: "Man’s struggle against power is
memory’s struggle against forgetting". Let us not forget.
Go Back
