http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2007/12/29/index.php?section=opinion&article=022a1mun

Robert Fisk
No culpan a Al Qaeda, culpan a Musharraf

Qué raro, ¿verdad? La forma en que rápidamente nos presentan la narración. Benazir Bhutto, la valerosa lideresa del Partido Popular de Pakistán (PPP), es asesinada en Rawalpindi, lugar pegado a la capital, Islamabad, donde vive el ex general Pervez Musharraf, y George W. Bush nos dice que sus asesinos eran “extremistas” y “terroristas”. Bueno, eso sí que no se puede refutar.

Pero la implicación del comentario de Bush era que islamitas están detrás del asesinato. Fueron nuevamente los locos talibanes, esa araña de Al Qaeda que atacó a esta mujer, sola y valiente, quien se atrevió a pedir democracia para su país.

Desde luego, dada la pueril cobertura de esta tragedia atroz, e independientemente de lo corrupta que pudo haber sido la señora Bhutto, no nos hagamos ilusiones de que esta valiente dama es ciertamente una verdadera mártir. No es sorpresa que el viejo caballito de batalla de “el bien contra el mal” sea expuesto de nuevo para explicar la carnicería en Rawalpindi.

A juzgar por lo que informaron el jueves la BBC y CNN, quién se hubiera imaginado que los dos hermanos de la ex primera ministra, Murtaza y Shahawaz, secuestraron un avión comercial paquistaní en 1981 y lo llevaron hasta Kabul, donde Murtaza exigió la excarcelación de prisioneros políticos de Pakistán. En el episodio, un oficial militar a bordo de la nave fue asesinado. Había estadunidenses entre los pasajeros, lo cual probablemente explica por qué todos los prisioneros fueron liberados.

Hace sólo unos días, en uno de los más notables pronunciamientos del año (y que, como es típico, fue ignorado), Tariq Ali publicó una brillante disección de la corrupción en Pakistán (incluyendo el gobierno de Bhutto) en la revista London Review of Books. Hizo énfasis en Benazir y la llamó en el encabezado “La hija de Occidente”. De hecho, el artículo estaba en mi escritorio, listo para ser fotocopiado, cuando su protagonista era asesinada en Rawalpindi.

Hacia el final de este análisis, Tariq Ali se dedicó largamente a detallar el asesinato de Murtaza Bhutto a manos de la policía, cerca de su domicilio, cuando Benazir era primera ministra y estaba furiosa con Murtaza porque éste exigía regresar a los valores tradicionales del PPP y la criticaba por haber nombrado a su propio marido como ministro de Industria, un puesto altamente lucrativo.

En un pasaje del análisis que sigue siendo vigente aún después del asesinato y sus consecuencias se afirma: “La bala fatal fue disparada a corta distancia. La trampa fue tendida, como se acostumbra en Pakistán, con una operación burda, reportes falsos en las bitácoras policiales, evidencias perdidas, testigos que fueron arrestados e intimidados, un policía asesinado porque se temía que hablara. Todo esto evidencia el hecho de que ejecutar al hermano de la primera ministra fue una decisión tomada a muy alto nivel”.

Cuando Fátima, la hija de 14 años de Murtaza, llamó por teléfono a su tía para preguntarle por qué estaban arrestando a testigos y no a los asesinos de su padre, ella afirma que Benazir le explicó: “Mira, eres demasiado joven. No entiendes las cosas”, o al menos eso nos dice Tariq Ali en su exposición.

Sobre todo esto, sin embargo, se cierne el asombroso poder de los Interservicios Secretos de Pakistán (ISI). Esta vasta, corrupta y brutal institución trabaja para Musharraf.

Pero también trabajó y aún trabaja para el talibán. También trabaja para Estados Unidos. De hecho, trabaja para todo el mundo. Pero es la llave que Musharraf puede utilizar para abrir conversaciones con los enemigos de Washington cuando él se siente amenazado o quiere presionar a Afganistán, o bien, aplacar a los “extremistas” y “terroristas” que tienen al presidente Bush tan consternado.

Recordemos, dicho sea de paso, que Daniel Pearl, el reportero del Wall Street Journal decapitado por sus captores islamitas en Karachi, concertó su cita fatal con sus futuros asesinos en la oficina del comandante de los ISI.

El libro Talibán, de Ahmed Rashid, contiene pruebas fascinantes de la red de corrupción y violencia de los ISI. Léanlo, y verán que todo lo que he dicho tiene mucho más sentido.

Pero volviendo a la narrativa oficial, George W. Bush anunció el jueves anterior que “esperaba” hablar con su viejo amigo Musharraf. Desde luego, hablarán de Benazir. Seguramente no charlarán sobre el hecho de que Musharraf sigue protegiendo a su viejo conocido, un cierto señor Khan, quien proporcionó secretos nucleares paquistaníes a Libia e Irán. No, pero es mejor que no traigamos a colación el asuntito ese del “eje del mal”.

Desde luego, se nos pidió una vez más concentrarnos en esos “extremistas” y “terroristas”, y alejarnos de la lógica de cuestionar lo que muchos paquistaníes sintieron tras el asesinato de Benazir.

No hace falta ser un experto para comprender que las odiadas elecciones legislativas que ensombrecían a Musharraf se pospondrían indefinidamente si su principal opositor político era liquidado antes del día de los comicios.

Analicemos esta lógica como lo haría el inspector Ian Blair, en su cuaderno, antes de convertirse en el más importante policía de Londres.

Pregunta: ¿Quién obligó a Benazir Bhutto a permanecer en Londres y quiso evitar su regreso a Pakistán? Respuesta: El general Musharraf. Pregunta: ¿Quién ordenó este mes el arresto de cientos de simpatizantes de Bhutto? Respuesta: el general Musharraf. Pregunta: ¿Quién le impuso a Benazir un arresto domiciliario temporal este mes? Respuesta: el general Musharraf. Pregunta: ¿Quién declaró el estado de emergencia este mes? Respuesta: el general Musharraf.

Pregunta: ¿Quién mató a Benazir Bhutto? Eh, sí. Bueno, sí…

¿Ven cuál es el problema? Ayer nuestros guerreros televisivos nos informaron que los miembros del PPP gritaban que Musharraf era un “asesino”, quejándose de que no dio suficiente protección a Benazir. Error. Gritaban esto porque creen que él fue quien la mató.

© The Independent

Traducción: Gabriela Fonseca

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3291600.ece

Robert Fisk: They don't blame al-Qa'ida. They blame Musharraf
Published: 29 December 2007

Weird, isn't it, how swiftly the narrative is laid down for us. Benazir Bhutto, the courageous leader of the Pakistan People's Party, is assassinated in Rawalpindi – attached to the very capital of Islamabad wherein ex-General Pervez Musharraf lives – and we are told by George Bush that her murderers were "extremists" and "terrorists". Well, you can't dispute that.

But the implication of the Bush comment was that Islamists were behind the assassination. It was the Taliban madmen again, the al-Qa'ida spider who struck at this lone and brave woman who had dared to call for democracy in her country.

Of course, given the childish coverage of this appalling tragedy – and however corrupt Ms Bhutto may have been, let us be under no illusions that this brave lady is indeed a true martyr – it's not surprising that the "good-versus-evil" donkey can be trotted out to explain the carnage in Rawalpindi.

Who would have imagined, watching the BBC or CNN on Thursday, that her two brothers, Murtaza and Shahnawaz, hijacked a Pakistani airliner in 1981 and flew it to Kabul where Murtaza demanded the release of political prisoners in Pakistan. Here, a military officer on the plane was murdered. There were Americans aboard the flight – which is probably why the prisoners were indeed released.

Only a few days ago – in one of the most remarkable (but typically unrecognised) scoops of the year – Tariq Ali published a brilliant dissection of Pakistan (and Bhutto) corruption in the London Review of Books, focusing on Benazir and headlined: "Daughter of the West". In fact, the article was on my desk to photocopy as its subject was being murdered in Rawalpindi.

Towards the end of this report, Tariq Ali dwelt at length on the subsequent murder of Murtaza Bhutto by police close to his home at a time when Benazir was prime minister – and at a time when Benazir was enraged at Murtaza for demanding a return to PPP values and for condemning Benazir's appointment of her own husband as minister for industry, a highly lucrative post.

In a passage which may yet be applied to the aftermath of Benazir's murder, the report continues: "The fatal bullet had been fired at close range. The trap had been carefully laid, but, as is the way in Pakistan, the crudeness of the operation – false entries in police log-books, lost evidence, witnesses arrested and intimidated – a policeman killed who they feared might talk – made it obvious that the decision to execute the prime minister's brother had been taken at a very high level."

When Murtaza's 14-year-old daughter, Fatima, rang her aunt Benazir to ask why witnesses were being arrested – rather than her father's killers – she says Benazir told her: "Look, you're very young. You don't understand things." Or so Tariq Ali's exposé would have us believe. Over all this, however, looms the shocking power of Pakistan's ISI, the Inter Services Intelligence.

This vast institution – corrupt, venal and brutal – works for Musharraf.

But it also worked – and still works – for the Taliban. It also works for the Americans. In fact, it works for everybody. But it is the key which Musharraf can use to open talks with America's enemies when he feels threatened or wants to put pressure on Afghanistan or wants to appease the " extremists" and "terrorists" who so oppress George Bush. And let us remember, by the way, that Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter beheaded by his Islamist captors in Karachi, actually made his fatal appointment with his future murderers from an ISI commander's office. Ahmed Rashid's book Taliban provides riveting proof of the ISI's web of corruption and violence. Read it, and all of the above makes more sense.

But back to the official narrative. George Bush announced on Thursday he was "looking forward" to talking to his old friend Musharraf. Of course, they would talk about Benazir. They certainly would not talk about the fact that Musharraf continues to protect his old acquaintance – a certain Mr Khan – who supplied all Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Libya and Iran. No, let's not bring that bit of the "axis of evil" into this.

So, of course, we were asked to concentrate once more on all those " extremists" and "terrorists", not on the logic of questioning which many Pakistanis were feeling their way through in the aftermath of Benazir's assassination.

It doesn't, after all, take much to comprehend that the hated elections looming over Musharraf would probably be postponed indefinitely if his principal political opponent happened to be liquidated before polling day.

So let's run through this logic in the way that Inspector Ian Blair might have done in his policeman's notebook before he became the top cop in London.

Question: Who forced Benazir Bhutto to stay in London and tried to prevent her return to Pakistan? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who ordered the arrest of thousands of Benazir's supporters this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who placed Benazir under temporary house arrest this month? Answer: General Musharraf.

Question: Who declared martial law this month? Answer General Musharraf.

Question: who killed Benazir Bhutto?

Er. Yes. Well quite.

You see the problem? Yesterday, our television warriors informed us the PPP members shouting that Musharraf was a "murderer" were complaining he had not provided sufficient security for Benazir. Wrong. They were shouting this because they believe he killed her.


http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2007/12/29/index.php?section=opinion&article=016a1pol



Tariq Ali*
Benazir Bhutto

Aun aquellos que tajantemente criticamos el comportamiento y las políticas de Benazir Bhutto mientras ocupó el cargo de primera ministra y también en épocas recientes, estamos pasmados y furiosos por su muerte. La indignación y el miedo merodean de nuevo el país. Es esta extraña coexistencia de despotismo militar y caos lo que provocó las condiciones que condujeron a su asesinato en Rawalpindi el día de ayer. En el pasado, el régimen militar fue diseñado para preservar el orden, y lo hizo por algunos años, pero ya no. Hoy crea desorden y promueve el menosprecio de las leyes. ¿Puede alguien explicar el despido del magistrado en jefe y otros ocho jueces de la Suprema Corte por intentar que los aparatos de inteligencia del país y la policía rindieran cuentas ante la Corte? Su remplazo carece de estructura para hacer algo, ya no digamos conducir una averiguación apropiada sobre las malas acciones de las agencias que pudiera descubrir la verdad que subyace tras el cuidadosamente organizado asesinato de una líder política importante. ¿Cómo puede Pakistán ser otra cosa que una conflagración de desesperaciones? Se asume que los asesinos eran fanáticos de la jihad. Esto puede ser cierto, pero ¿actuaron por cuenta propia?

Benazir, según su gente cercana, había estado tentada de boicotear las falaces elecciones, pero carecía de la valentía política para desafiar a Washington. Tenía, eso sí, mucho coraje físico y no se dejaba intimidar por las amenazas de sus oponentes locales. En un mitin electoral en Liaquat Bagh, se dirigió al público. Es éste un espacio popular que tomó su nombre del primer ministro Liaquat Ali Khan, primero en asumir el cargo, quien fuera ultimado en 1953 por Said Akbar, un asesino solitario, al que mataron de inmediato a balazos por órdenes del oficial de policía implicado en la confabulación. No lejos de ahí, se alzó alguna vez lo que fuera una estructura colonial donde eran encarcelados los nacionalistas: la cárcel de Rawalpindi. Ahí, fue ahorcado en abril de 1979 el padre de Benazir, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. El tirano militar responsable de su crimen judicial se aseguró de que el sitio de la tragedia fuera destruido también. La muerte de Bhutto envenenó las relaciones entre su partido (el Partido Popular de Pakistán) y el ejército, por lo que los activistas, particularmente en la provincia de Sind, fueron brutalmente torturados y humillados. En ocasiones llegaron a desaparecerlos o asesinarlos.

La turbulenta historia de Pakistán, resultado de un dominio militar continuo y de alianzas globales antipopulares, hoy confronta a la élite dominante ante serias disyuntivas. No parece haber, para nada, propósitos positivos. La abrumadora mayoría de la población desaprueba la política exterior del gobierno. Está furiosa por la falta de una política interna seria, porque la actual únicamente enriquece a una élite voraz y enquistada que incluye a los inflados y parásitos militares. Hoy esta mayoría mira indefensa cómo asesinan a los políticos frente a ella.

Ayer, Benazir había sobrevivido al bombazo, pero cayó muerta por las balas que llovieron sobre su automóvil. Los asesinos, sabedores de su fracaso en Karachi el mes pasado, buscaron asegurarse esta vez. La querían muerta. Ahora es imposible que una elección, inclusive fraudulenta, se lleve a cabo. Tendrá que posponerse y, sin duda, el alto mando contempla la posibilidad de aplicar otra dosis de régimen militar si la situación empeora, lo cual puede ocurrir muy fácilmente.

Lo que ha pasado es una tragedia de muchas capas. Es una tragedia para un país que se encamina a muchos más desastres. Torrentes y cataratas espumosas nos esperan más adelante. Es, además, una tragedia personal. La casa de la familia Bhutto ha perdido a otra de sus integrantes. El padre, dos hijos y ahora una hija, han fallecido de muertes no naturales.

Conocí a Benazir en la casa de su padre en Karachi cuando apenas era una adolescente ávida de diversiones, y después volví a tratarla cuando fue a Oxford. No era una política natural; siempre quiso ser diplomática de carrera, pero la historia y la tragedia personal la empujaron en otra dirección. La muerte de su padre la transformó. Se volvió otra persona, decidida a enfrentar al dictador militar de entonces. Vivía en un pequeño apartamento en Londres, donde discutía interminablemente sobre el futuro del país. Estaba de acuerdo en que la reforma agraria, los programas de educación masiva, los servicios de salud y una política exterior independiente eran fines positivos, constructivos y cruciales si queríamos salvar al país de los buitres con y sin uniforme. Su base electoral era pobre y eso la enorgullecía.

Cambió de nuevo al convertirse en primera ministra. En los primeros tiempos solíamos discutir y en respuesta a mis numerosas quejas ella decía que el mundo era lo que había cambiado. No quería estar del “lado equivocado de la historia”. Y así, como muchos otros, hizo la paz con Washington. Fue esto lo que finalmente condujo al arreglo con Musharraf y a su retorno a casa tras 10 años de exilio. En algunas ocasiones en el pasado me dijo que no tenía miedo a la muerte. Era esto uno de los peligros de jugar a la política en Pakistán.

Es difícil imaginar que algo bueno surja de esta tragedia, pero hay una posibilidad. Pakistán necesita desesperadamente un partido político que pueda hablar en favor de las necesidades sociales del grueso de la población. El Partido Popular fundado por Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto fue obra de los militantes del único movimiento popular de masas que el país haya conocido: estudiantes, campesinos y obreros que lucharon durante tres meses entre 1968 y 1969 por derrocar al primer dictador militar. Que el pueblo lo vea como su partido y la emoción de esas luchas persiste en algunas partes del país hasta hoy, a pesar de todo.

La horrenda muerte de Benazir debería darle a sus colegas la pausa necesaria para reflexionar. Depender de una persona o una familia puede ser necesario en ocasiones, pero es una debilidad estructural para la organización política, no una fuerza. El Partido Popular necesita una refundación que lo convierta en una organización moderna y democrática, abierta al debate honesto y a la discusión, que defienda los derechos sociales y humanos, y que una a los muchos y dispersos grupos e individuos que hoy desesperan en Pakistán por una alternativa decente y compartida que además proponga soluciones concretas que estabilicen el Afganistán devastado por la guerra. Esto se puede y debe hacerse. No se le debe pedir a la familia Bhutto mayores sacrificios.

Traducción: Ramón Vera Herrera

*Tariq Ali, historiador, escritor y director de cine paquistaní. Su próximo libro The Duel: Pakistan on the Flightpath of American Power (El duelo: Pakistán en el derrotero aéreo del poder estadunidense) será publicado por Scribner en 2008

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3293975.ece

Land of the damned: Election in jeopardy as search starts for Benazir's heir
Charismatic leader's death has left her country in flames, the region under threat and the world in danger. By Raymond Whitaker, Saeed Shah in Larkana and Omar Waraich in Karachi
Published: 30 December 2007

In a dramatic development which shows the depth of the crisis in Pakistan over the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the government yesterday called for her body to be exhumed to settle the question of how she died.

The charismatic political leader was buried in a sealed coffin on Friday, less than 24 hours after she died in an attack by a suicide bomber at a rally in Rawalpindi. The caretaker Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mohammad Mian Soomro, told the Cabinet that Ms Bhutto's husband, Asif Ali Zardari, had insisted on no autopsy, a statement he has not contested. But conflicting accounts of how she died, and disputes over who bore responsibility, have fuelled rioting that by yesterday had claimed more than 40 lives and caused tens of millions of dollars of damage.

Suspicions over the complicity of Pervez Musharraf's government in the killing were fuelled by its failure to order a post-mortem, regardless of Mr Zardari's wishes, and the fact that the scene of the bombing was washed down with a high-pressure hose within an hour, removing potential forensic evidence. Under the criminal law of Pakistan, an autopsy should have been mandatory, according to a leading lawyer, Athar Minallah. "It is absurd because without autopsy it is not possible to investigate," he said. "Is the state not interested in reaching the perpetrators of this heinous crime, or was there a cover-up?"

Yesterday an Interior Ministry spokesman said an offer had been made to Ms Bhutto's family and her Pakistan People's Party (PPP) to exhume her remains for scientific examination. There was no immediate response. But in her ancestral village of Naudero in rural Sindh province, where she was buried beside her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and where her husband was receiving a stream of mourners offering condolences – among them his wife's former bitter political rival, Nawaz Sharif – supporters continued to accuse the government of responsibility for her death.

Ms Bhutto died as she was leaving the rally on Thursday evening. The car in which she was travelling was bullet- and blast-proof, but she had stood up through the open roof to wave to her supporters when the attackers approached. Two or three shots were heard seconds before the explosion.

Doctors at the hospital where she was taken initially said she had been shot twice, but some of them later said the cause of death was shrapnel from the explosion. On Friday, however, the Interior Ministry said Ms Bhutto had suffered no bullet or serious shrapnel wounds, and the car's other occupants had been unharmed by the bomb explosion, which killed at least 20 other people. Instead a new explanation was put forward: the charismatic political leader had fractured her skull as the blast from the bomb slammed her into the handle which opened the car's roof.

The claim that her death was accidental, and the announcement that intercepted phone calls showed al-Qa'ida carried out the bombing, were seen by her supporters as an attempt by the government to deny any blame for her killing. "To hear that Ms Bhutto fell from an impact from a bump on a sunroof is absolutely rubbish," Sherry Rehman, a PPP spokeswoman who was with her at the time, said yesterday. "There was a clear bullet wound at the back of the neck. It went in one direction and came out another ... My entire car is coated with her blood, my clothes, everybody – so she did not concuss her head against the sunroof."

Babar Awan, a senior party official, said the sunroof claim was "false". He had seen her body and there were at least two bullet marks, one in the neck and one on the top of the head. "It was a targeted, planned killing. The firing was from more than one side," said Mr Awan.

Although the violence in the wake of the killing is fairly sporadic by Pakistani standards, the country has been paralysed during the three days of mourning declared for Ms Bhutto, ending tomorrow. The government said 176 banks, 72 train carriages and 18 stations had been destroyed, and petrol stations across the country were closed for fear of attack, creating long queues of cars at the few that remained open. Many flights were cancelled, leaving passengers stranded.

With shops shuttered in many parts of Pakistan, there were fears of food shortages. In Karachi, scene of some of the worst outbreaks, the police were authorised to open fire on rioters if they were attacked, and three people were killed in a clash yesterday as food stores were looted. "There was bound to be a reaction to such a tragedy," said Farhat Hayat, a senior Karachi police officer. "Hopefully the situation will calm down over the coming days. We are monitoring things very closely."

The accusations of Ms Bhutto's close associates, and the reaction of her followers on the streets, are only part of the pressure on President Musharraf, who is facing conflicting demands to quit and to delay the election, scheduled for 8 January, which he had hoped would legitimise his increasingly unpopular regime. At the urging of Britain and America, increasingly concerned at the growing strength of Islamist extremism in Pakistan, he had sought a power-sharing deal with Ms Bhutto under which she was allowed to return from eight years in exile.

The loss of the PPP leader, who for all her flaws was the only determinedly secular political leader in Pakistan, leaves Western policy in disarray. After the 9/11 attacks the US set aside its criticism of Mr Musharraf, who as chief of the army seized power from Mr Sharif in 1999, and set him up as a bulwark in its "war on terror". Since 2001 Pakistan has received nearly $11bn (£5.5bn) in American aid, but Mr Musharraf's lack of a democratic mandate has not only made him unable to deal with Islamist militancy but has forced him to compromise with it.

Extremist influence in parts of the military and intelligence establishment of this nuclear-armed state have led some analysts to conclude that Pakistan is now more of a danger to world peace than Afghanistan, from where the 9/11 attacks were carried out. The situation in 2001, when the US, Britain and their allies intervened in Afghanistan to oust al-Qa'ida and its Taliban hosts, has now reversed. Instead of Afghanistan threatening to destabilise the region, it is Pakistan, and particularly its ungovernable tribal areas along the border, where al-Qa'ida and the Taliban have fled, that has become the problem.

The 44,000 Nato troops, 7,800 of them British, who are battling to prevent a Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan will never succeed while their opponents have bases across the border from which they can attack with impunity. But intense pressure on Mr Musharraf to deal with the insurgents on his own territory has been of little avail. Not only were the Pakistani army's sometimes half-hearted incursions into the tribal areas bloodily repulsed, with hundreds of soldiers being captured, but Pakistan has paid the price in an upsurge of terrorism.

The country is under assault from al-Qa'ida, which has issued a steady flow of demands for the overthrow of Mr Musharraf, and local allies. The week before last their target was a former government minister, Aftab Sherpao. He survived a suicide attack on a mosque, but 50 others died. This year, there have been dozens of similar bloody attacks, largely against the military and police, displaying highly sophisticated capability and intelligence. Responsibility for the attempted assassination of Mr Sherpao was claimed, unusually, by a new organisation called Tehreek Taliban-i Pakistan, which is an attempt to unite the Taliban-inspired groups operating in the country. In short, the Pakistani version of the Taliban has fused with al-Qa'ida.

Benazir Bhutto had promised that if she was elected prime minister, she would have allowed Nato forces to strike across the border against al-Qa'ida and its tribal allies. This clearly made her a target for the extremists, and the attack on her bore all their hallmarks. Yet Pakistan has always been a country where political trust is absent, inflammatory rhetoric is commonplace and conspiracy theories reign supreme.

In this atmosphere, many were sceptical about the government's claim that telephone intercepts showed Baitullah Mehsud, a tribal militant operating from the lawless South Waziristan area, had ordered the killing. He was said to have called afterwards to congratulate those immediately in charge of the operation; a spokesman for the militant leader denied it.

In many respects, this was simply the latest in a series of bombings that have caused increasing tension in Pakistan because no on can be sure who is carrying them out. No official findings have been made public on the perpetrators of the previous attack on Ms Bhutto, in Karachi on 18 October, the day she returned from eight years in exile.

She herself, and many ordinary people in Pakistan, believed that elements of the army and the intelligence agencies are behind the bombings. But security experts think that while there may be rogue officers within the army and intelligence that provide help to militants, the wholesale involvement of the state is improbable. For one thing, it is the army itself that is the main target of the explosions. The Inter-Services Intelligence organisation, often accused of undercover political operations and killings, has been hit by two huge bombs on buses this year that killed scores of its officers as they were going to work.

The MQM, the Karachi-based party which draws its support from Urdu speakers who fled India at Partition, has come under suspicion. It had a history of violent clashes with the Pakistan People's Party in the 1990s, and some believed it could be involved in the attacks on Ms Bhutto. However, while there is evidence that the MQM has been involved in extortion, beatings and murder, it does not seem able or motivated to carry out anything on the scale of the bombings on 18 October and 27 December.

"Bhutto's death will exponentially exacerbate the existing state of political unrest, because the blame will fall on Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's regime," said Kamran Bokhari, director of Middle East analysis at consultancy Strategic Forecasting.

"This situation benefits the Taliban and al-Qa'ida, and their supporters who would want Pakistan's security forces to be busy containing political unrest and violence rather than performing counter-jihadist operations focused on north-western Pakistan."

The Pakistan People's Party has been left hollow. Founded by Ms Bhutto's father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, it works as an institutionalised cult for the Bhutto family. The allegiance of its followers was to the memory of Mr Bhutto, who was enormously popular among Pakistan's poor, and through him to Ms Bhutto. The party never held internal elections – Benazir named herself "president for life" and never allowed other senior officials to become national figures. The deputy leader of the party, Amin Fahim, is respected, but he lacks charisma and could in no way replace her.

So who could inherit this dynasty? Mr Zardari has been most prominent since his wife's death, and said yesterday that a meeting of the PPP central committee would be held soon. He also announced that the couple's eldest child and only son, Bilawal, a 19-year-old student in his first term at Oxford University, would read out his mother's will today. Asked whether he could take over as PPP leader, Mr Zardari said he was "too young".

What about Mr Zardari himself? What did the will say? Mr Zardari, who said yesterday he had only just became acquainted with the document's contents, told questioners to "wait and see". But few see him as a plausible leader in the longer term. Not only is he not from the top tier of Sindh's feudal families, as the Bhuttos are, he remains entangled in corruption investigations in several countries outside Pakistan, where he benefited from the political deal that brought him and his wife in from the cold. Now she is gone, he could be vulnerable once more.

Benazir's mother, Begum Nusrat Bhutto, is too old, and in poor health. Her sister Sanam, the only surviving child of Zulfikar, has always avoided political involvement. There are other people in public life with the name of Bhutto, but they are estranged by the tangled history of the family.

Unless an autopsy resolves the question of how Benazir died, her death will remain as much of a mystery as those of her father, the man who ousted him, and her brother. Zulfikar, who was overthrown by his army chief, General Zia ul-Haq, and sentenced to death by a military court, was hurriedly buried in 1979 under strict army supervision. No autopsy was carried out, despite claims that he was actually tortured to death, not hanged.

In 1988, when General Zia was blown out of the sky, his remains were never handed over for scientific examination. The explosion on board his aircraft has never been explained. As for Ms Bhutto's brother, Murtaza, he had fallen out with the family and formed a guerrilla group to oppose military rule. In 1996, when his sister was prime minister, he was gunned down in Karachi during a clash with police. No policemen were ever charged in connection with the incident, which remains murky.

In other circumstances Murtaza's 25-year-old journalist daughter Fatima might be seen as Benazir's heir. She is as intelligent and feisty as her aunt, but ceaselessly attacked her in her newspaper columns, always referring to her as "Mrs Zardari" to emphasise that she was influenced more by her husband than her father. But she did pay her respects in Naudero, leaving open the possibility of a reconciliation.

Then there is a family elder, Mumtaz Bhutto, who resented Benazir's seizure of the limelight. Her less than principled deal to share power with President Musharraf gave him ammunition – he said they were conspiring to "strip Pakistan's bones clean" – but it remains to be seen whether he or anyone else can hold the PPP together and prevent it collapsing into factions. What seems certain is that the party will not want the elections to be held next week.

Mr Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-N said after the assassination that it would now boycott the poll. Even the MQM, which is closely allied to President Musharraf, called for the election to be postponed.

What is clear is that it is not possible to campaign normally any more – public gatherings are just too dangerous. But without rallies and meetings, many would contend that any election lacked legitimacy. The government, aware that the US has been pressing for an election to legitimise its "war on terror", has been insisting that it will go ahead, but many believe it is waiting for street violence to die down before announcing a postponement. It is holding consultations with the political parties, in the hope that they will sanction the decision and avoid the appearance of authoritarianism.

Given Pakistan's turmoil, the international community is likely to accept a temporary postponement of the elections. Members of Pakistan's political class and analysts are in agreement that the government will have to steer the country back towards stability. But too long a delay could raise another possibility: that the military might step in.

It is common in Pakistani politics for whoever is out of power to demand that the incumbents be removed by the generals and for fresh elections to be called. But numerous previous interventions in politics have made most military commanders highly wary of becoming entangled in politics, and President Musharraf, who doffed his uniform only this month, has taken care to put close associates in key positions.

Some troops have already been deployed in Pakistan's major cities, however, to quell the violence triggered by Ms Bhutto's assassination, and there are suggestions that any further unrest could take the country back to the imposition of martial law.

Last month, President Musharraf handed over control of the 500,000-strong army to General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. He is widely admired as a professional soldier with no obvious political ambitions, and is favoured by Washington. He is said to want to pull the army out of politics and restore some of its damaged reputation.

But as President Musharraf's future looks increasingly uncertain, Pakistan's chief sponsors may begin to explore other options.

The US could greenlight a temporary army takeover with the provision that elections are held as soon as order is restored. President Musharraf, widely considered a source of instability, would be removed. And Gen Kayani would step in with the promise of free and fair elections in a matter of months. In Pakistan's troubled history, this would be nothing new. After the street demonstrations of 1968 that called for the end of military dictatorship, Field Marshal Ayub Khan was asked to step aside and his deputy, Gen Yahya Khan took over. In 1970, he presided over Pakistan's first truly democratic election, and one still considered its fairest.

But many generals have taken power in a military coup and promised a quick return to democracy. Gen Zia-ul-Haq, Pakistan's longest-serving dictator, said he intended to hold elections within "90 days". He stayed for 11 years. And Gen Musharraf, who famously declared in 1999, "I will not perpetuate myself", has yet to let go.

Future of the dynasty

Asif Ali Zardari 51, Benazir's widower. Married in 1987, they had three children. Like his wife, he is from a Sindh feudal family, though much less prominent. He became known as "Mr 10 Per Cent" during her periods in office, and charges of corruption against him may be revived now Benazir is gone.

Bilawal Zardari 19, Benazir's eldest child and only son, is in his first term at Oxford University. His father says he is too young to succeed, but today he is due to read out his mother's will, which may spell out his future. Significantly, her Karachi residence was named Bilawal House after him.

Sanam Bhutto 50, the only survivor among Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's four children. Devoted to her elder sister Benazir – she went with her into exile – she has always shunned politics. Her teenage daughter Azadi is regarded as equally unlikely to take up the family mantle.

Fatima Bhutto 25, Benazir's niece, shares her intelligence and looks, but accused her aunt of complicity in the death of her father, Murtaza. He had fallen out with his sister, and was shot dead by police in 1996, while she was PM. But Fatima has joined Benazir's mourners, possibly signalling a return to the fold.


http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3293916.ece

Raymond Whitaker: As it mourns its lost leader, Pakistan is in the eye of the storm
The year is off to a fearful start in south Asia; the US continues to plot a dangerous course in Iraq, with its arming of Sunni militias; and the Israeli-Palestinian problem is no nearer a solution
Published: 30 December 2007

The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan has ensured that 2008 will get off to a fearful start, and with reason. If any part of the world gives cause for concern in the coming year, it will be the region encompassing Afghanistan and Pakistan, and particularly the lawless border between the two countries.

Not only is Pakistan nuclear-armed, but its barely governed tribal areas have become the headquarters of al-Qa'ida and a base for the Taliban to regain a foothold in Afghanistan, where 7,800 British soldiers and 36,000 other Nato troops are battling to stabilise the country from which the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington were plotted. In 2008, it may well become accepted that Pakistan is a worse problem for the international community than its neighbour. That in turn could spell renewed trouble in Kashmir, that eternal flashpoint between Pakistan and India, the superpower of south Asia.

The respected Conflict Data Programme at Uppsala University in Sweden says there was a trend in 2007 for some of the world's worst conflicts to spill beyond their original borders, drawing in the whole region. This was true not only of Afghanistan, but of Iraq. Turkey has already begun counter-attacking into northern Iraq against the Kurdish guerrilla movement, the PKK, which has taken a heavy toll of soldiers and civilians in south-eastern Turkey, and is likely to carry on doing so in 2008.

But the main question in the coming year will be whether the US will be able to declare its troops "surge" a success by the summer, when it plans to start bringing large numbers of its forces home. Although violence has fallen sharply over the past year, and a measure of normal life has returned to Baghdad and other parts of the "Sunni triangle" in central Iraq, a political settlement between Sunnis and the Shia-dominated government of Nouri al-Maliki remains elusive, and the US may be tempted to try to replace him. But its arming of Sunni "neighbourhood militias", while successful in curbing al-Qa'ida in Iraq, may be disastrous in the longer term.

Britain, meanwhile, is due to reduce its remaining troop contingent from 4,500 to around 2,500 by the spring. Having handed over security responsibility in mid-December to Iraqi forces in Basra, the last of the four provinces under its control, Gordon Brown hopes to have no more than a token British force in southern Iraq by the end of 2008.

As for the crisis that many see as the root of Islamist hostility towards the West, Israel and Palestine, it is hard to envisage much progress over the next 12 months. The White House at least got peace negotiations started at Annapolis for the first time in seven years, but the old issues, including the status of Jerusalem and the right of Palestinians to return, are no closer to being solved. And Hamas, which seized control of Gaza, is not taking part. Border closures and heavy Israeli intervention in Gaza are highly likely in 2008 if militants continue firing Qassam rockets into Israel.

Any of these conflicts could have an impact on the biggest show of the year: the US presidential election. Given the relentless tendency to hold state primaries ever earlier, the Republican and Democratic candidates may well be known long before the party conventions in the summer, which is when the fun will really start. The sums likely to be spent on the campaign will exceed the GDPs of many Third World countries.

As for potential trouble spots, look no further than Kosovo. The Albanian majority population were restrained with difficulty from declaring independence from Serbia immediately after the election that brought the former Kosovo Liberation Army commander, Hashim Thaci, to power, but the US and EU will give their blessing to a breakaway early in 2008. Serbia and its ally, Russia, are sure to react angrily, and may encourage the Serbian-majority enclave around Mitrovica to split away in its turn.

Russia is due to hold its own presidential election, but the result, unlike America's, is not in doubt. President Vladimir Putin has already named his successor, Dmitry Medvedev, and the votes will follow in March. The only question is how Mr Putin will continue to run the country.

If one is seeking light relief, there are the Beijing Olympics to look forward to, though the less than subtle Chinese efforts to use the games to proclaim the country's greatness could prove annoying. In football there is the African Cup of Nations in January and February, which will deprive the Premiership of some of its best players, and Euro 2008 in Switzerland and Austria in June. None of the home nations is taking part, which at least keeps the occasion out of the "conflict" category.