Al Qaeda wants to take control of a country and Pakistan presents some ideal conditions: as neighbors it has Iran, Afghanistan and India; it has a conflict (Cachemir) that is considered universal by the Muslims, and, above all, it has an exit to the Arabian Sea which would close the oil traffic of the Golf monarchies, who are considered by Al Qaeda to be the principal source of corruption. Besides, it has nuclear missiles (Ghauri). Benazir Bhutto represented the only democratic option opposing Pervez Musharraf and the Islamist radicals.

(From London) THE FIGURE OF BENAZIR BHUTTO is only comparable to that of the president of Latvia, Vaira Vike-Freiberga, or the unequalled Margaret Thatcher. Born into a landowning family in the Sindh region, Bhutto always had a very controversial personality, even within her own family, where she emphatically refused to wear the burka. Her own father knew how unusual her daughter’s personality was, and it is possible that for that reason he called her Benazir, which means unique.

A woman of refined and Western education, she graduated from Harvard University with a degree in Political Science, and later received her doctorate from Oxford University. However, she never renounced the modernization of her country, a fact that, in the end, cost her her life, just like it had cost her father and brothers theirs.

“Bhutto asked the government for protection but, due to inability or a lack of will, Musharraf did not protect her” Curiously, Benazir Bhutto’s assassination took place only a few kilometers from where her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was hanged, executed by General Zia under the accusation of murder. Her father’s controversial death marked her life, given that it reasserted her commitment to Pakistan.

A few minutes before her assassination, Benazir Bhutto stated that her entire family had sacrificed their lives for Pakistan. She was not going to be an exception.

A LEADER HATED BY ALL

Bhutto soon became an uncomfortable figure for all of Pakistan’s political forces, from General Musharraf’s soldiers to the Islamic radicals who had sworn to assassinate her on several occasions. The sole current opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, is no different, as he did not hesitate to ally himself with Ayub Khan’s political might in order to remove her from power in the beginning of the Nineties.

“The most depressing thing is to think that everyone has emerged victorious from Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, given that she was the alternative to the Islamists as much as to Musharraf himself” Even Benazir’s own brother Murtaza confronted her upon her designation as leader of Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), and it was precisely during her term of office when he was beaten by Pakistani police forces.

Following a long forced exile (1999-2007) after being accused of corruption, she returned to Pakistan this past October 18 and, as a welcome, Islamist groups attempted to assassinate her.

After this attack, in which 140 people died, Benazir Bhutto earnestly asked the Pakistani government for protection, although, either due to inability or a lack of will, Musharraf did not protect her.

“Bhutto’s assassination really signifies, without any room for doubt, the beheading of the opposition” Aside from this, last November’s State of Emergency declaration and, above all, the closing of private radio stations, forced the candidates to spread their message by word of mouth. This measure exponentially increased the danger of suffering terrorist attacks. The risk was so great that Benazir Bhutto’s entourage ended up asking Israeli intelligence for protection, although the secret service did not accept the proposal so as to not compromise its international position.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ASSASINATION

As always, nothing is clear in Pakistan, even though everyone is pointing to one sole culprit. Immediately following the attack, Pervez Musharraf’s government pointed to Al Qaeda as the mastermind behind the assassination. Specifically, it was said that the assassination was carried out by the group Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of Al Qaeda in the southern Asian country. Curiously, Musharraf’s government signed a non-aggression pact (2005) with Baitullah Mehsud, although it was later broken with the governmental attack on the Zamazola camp.

The most depressing thing of all is to think that everyone has emerged victorious from Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, given that she was the alternative to the Islamists as much as to Musharraf himself. On one hand, the already ex-General can once again present himself to the West as the only option opposing the Islamic hordes that threaten to take control of Pakistan. On the other hand, the radical Islamists have managed to get rid of the only democratic option that Pakistan had. Bhutto was rejected for being a woman, democratic and, above all, for defending the secular option.

However, Musharraf and the Islamists are not as far from each other as it might seem, given that it is precisely the super powerful secret service ISI who has created Pakistan’s most radical groups, and provided them with supplies. The Army of the Pure (Lashkar-e-Tayyaba), The Warriors of God’s Party (Hizbul Mujahidin) and The Army of Mohammed (Jaish-e-Mohammed), the perpetrators of the assassination of the journalist Daniel Pearl, could serve as an example.

In short, Bhutto’s assassination really signifies, without any room for doubt, the beheading of the opposition and, as was hoped, the postponement of the legislative elections that the PPP was going to win (and which it appears will be held on February 18).

As political heirs, she has left her husband Asif Ali Zardari, accused of corruption, and her very young son Bilawal, who we hope can carry out the mission that neither his grandfather nor his mother were able to complete.

A WELL-CALCULATED AND COLDLY EXECUTED BLOW

In regards to the future of Pakistan, the situation presents itself as complicated.

“Islamist control over Pakistan would be, well, an international tragedy since it would directly destabilize the region and indirectly destabilize the world” For some time it has seemed that Al Qaeda wants to take control of a country, and Pakistan presents some ideal conditions. The succession of weak, populist-style military governments are the best invitation for Islamists to take over. Bhutto was the only democratic option in opposition to Musharraf and the Islamists; while the former cannot offer security and control over the radicals anymore, the latter are looking for an opportunity to take control of the country. If clean elections are held today, the victory will be disputed amongst Mawdudi’s followers and Bhutto’s followers.

However, even though an Islamist victory would have terrible consequences for the future of the country, just like what happened in Palestine or in Lebanon, in the case of Pakistan the foreign repercussion would be even worse. On one hand, the possession of nuclear arms makes Pakistan a very attractive country for the Islamists. Islamist control over Pakistan would be, well, an international tragedy since it would directly destabilize the region and indirectly destabilize the world. Pakistan is in possession of missiles like the Ghauri, with a range of 1500km (Iran and all of India), although it is working on the Ghauri II and the Tipu, which could have ranges of up to 4000 km. These weapons could become a global threat if they were to fall into the wrong hands; we only have to remind ourselves of the story of Khan and his relationship with North Korea.

“President Musharraf has not been capable of ending the permeability of the border, and this strengthens the Taliban, while, of course, it weakens the credibility of NATO itself” On the other hand, Pakistan’s strategic geographical location makes it an object of desire for Al-Qaeda. Pakistan is a neighbor of countries like Iran, Afghanistan and India, it is in the midst of a conflict (Cachemira) considered universal by the Muslims, and, above all, it has an exit to the Arabian Sea that would close the oil traffic of the Gulf monarchies, who are considered by Al Qaeda to be the principal source of corruption. All of these characteristics make Pakistan a desirable State to the radical Islamists.

The situation that Pakistan is undergoing does not favor neighboring Afghanistan in the least bit. Since the times of the British Empire, the futures of Afghanistan and Pakistan have been inextricably linked. In the seventies, Zulfikar Bhutto initiated an Islamization of Afghanistan campaign, promoting the creation of the mujahadines, which are today returning to Pakistan like a threatening boomerang. The chaos on the frontier is favorable to incursions and above all the impossibility of definitively overthrowing the Taliban, who find refuge and support in Pakistan. President Musharraf has not been capable of ending the permeability of the border, and this strengthens the Taliban, while, of course, it weakens the credibility of NATO itself.

This is how Bhutto’s assassination has been a well-calculated and coldly executed blow and, above all, has had consequences that go above and beyond what had been imagined. We will have to wait some time before we get to see its true repercussion.