Just another WordPress weblog

This has been one of the coldest weeks in Washington, so cold that to step out of wherever you are hovelled in is to embrace the third cousin of a nasty flu and at the very least an exceedingly annoying bout of sniffles. One’s nose runneth over, no matter how well you keep it covered against the biting Canadian wind (another reason for Americans to complain about their neighbour to the north).

Also in town during the week were two of the more noteworthy stars of the Pakistani political firmament: Imran Khan and Sherry Rehman.

While the PPP spokeswoman and one of Benazir Bhutto’s close friends did not only Capitol Hill and some of the think tanks, she and her two companions, were also received at the State Department by Richard Boucher, head of South Asia, who visits Pakistan at the drop of a hat, which must be the reason he suffers from a semi-permanent jetlag.

Imran Khan made no effort to reach out to official Washington because he believes that it is too late in the day for the Bush administration to make a course correction on Pakistan. He believes it is Capitol Hill and its key legislators whose influence on US policy towards our part of the world will determine the course of events in the coming months. If the Democrats win, which is more likely than not, and if the winner is Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton, important changes in how the next administration deals with Pakistan can be expected. If Hillary wins, it might be more of the same because in the opinion of many, she is a Republican trapped in the body of a Democrat.

Imran Khan’s main thesis at the think tanks, where he was invited to speak, and in his meetings with congressmen and senators on the Hill was primarily that unless the judges of the higher judiciary are reinstated, there is no point in holding elections. While he was being heard with interest, many viewed his argument as idealistic. As one person said, it is not the “what” that matters but the “how” that clinches the issue. Obviously, President Musharraf is not going to commit hara-kiri by letting the eliminated judges come back. It does not require one to be a rocket scientist to work out what a reinstated court will have in store for the incumbent of the office that the former army chief now holds.

If politics is the art of the possible, then what Imran Khan is demanding is not doable, not at least as things stand. Nawaz Sharif and his party have the same position as Imran Khan on the judges, yet they are taking part in the February 18 election, regardless of its imperfections. Nothing is simple in life anyway and in politics, things are even less simple. If it is the legitimate business of a politician to want to come to power so that he can make the changes he has promised his followers to make, then maybe the route chosen by Benazir Bhutto and her party is more practical and carries a greater chance of success than those who have decided to sit it out altogether and make demands that can only be fulfilled if the person of whom those demands are being made has decided to jump from the cliff on which he is perched.

One might add that where there are Pakistanis there is cricket, so Imran Khan could not have hoped to leave Washington without cricket coming up. So it was that he told a meeting held at the ungodly hour of 8.30 in the morning at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies that the only thing common between cricket and baseball is that both games have a bat and a ball, “which is where the resemblance stops”. His other reference was a swipe at Dr Nasim Ashraf whom he likened to the president, a reference the former nephrologist from Arizona might find flattering.

But to return to Sherry Rehman, she made a polished and impressive presentation at the Brookings Institution. She spoke off the cuff but in perfect cadences and she had an answer for every question asked of her. On Thursday night, she addressed a group, mostly made up of Pakistani expats, plus reptiles of the press, at Amnesty International, and although the proceedings got fiery at times, she was once again able to state in cool, clear terms what the position of her party on basic issues was. Questioned more than once on the PPP’s reluctance to join the call for the reinstatement of the judges, she made the same answer she has made in the past, which stops short of actually verbalising that the deposed judges should be returned to the bench. However, there was more weight to the answer she made after the meeting was over. She said, “There is no constitutional way of reinstating the judges, but we are looking for a formula.” Perhaps that is the answer the party should give rather than resort to generalities about being a believer in the independence of the judiciary. Everyone is, including President Pervez Musharraf.

Sherry Rehman said Benazir Bhutto is irreplaceable but what the party has put in place is a collegial as opposed to a dynastic leadership. She said it was wrong to claim that the family had disallowed a post-mortem. Under the law, no permission is required and a post-mortem should have been performed. She also spoke of the “unholy hurry” with which Benazir’s body was boxed and flown from Chaklala to Naudero (reminiscent of the way Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s body was hurriedly flown to his home village nearly 30 years ago). She also clarified that the call to the Bhutto family about a possible post-mortem was made not from the hospital but the Chaklala air base. She said the PPP and the family are not interested in the “cause of death” because “we all know what she died of — a bullet wound. What we want is to connect the dots and know who was behind her killing.”

According to the PPP delegation, a supercomputer has been installed at Ojhri Camp, Rawalpindi (will it also go up with a bang, in line with the tradition of the place?), as well as at ISI headquarters and at the Pakistan Army General Headquarters to “rig the results”. After the meeting was over, someone suggested that the way to beat those supercomputers lies with young Pakistani techies who have excelled at creating computer viruses. “Why doesn’t the PPP get hold of a few smart 11-year olds in Lahore who, with heads joined, have the ability to create a supervirus that will knock out any supercomputer?” So good are these kids, I am sure, that after scoring those three hits, they would yell with one voice, “Bring’m on”.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

Through the 50s and the 60s, those of us who went to watch Indian movies considered Dev Anand one of their favourites. He played debonair, carefree, swaggering young men, complete with his trademark cap, tilted well above the hairline, and his scarf jauntily thrown across his neck. He looked six-feet-tall. And he always got the girl. Lucky dog.

The screening of Indian movies in Pakistan came to a stop after the 1965 war, which lasted 17 days but put the country back 17 years. Indian movie aficionados who could manage a visa would even travel to Delhi, but it was easier to go to Kabul where Indian movies were still shown. The video and the DVD still lay many years into the future. Once, my friend Akmal Aleemi and I, both reporters at Progressive Papers Ltd., managed to get included in a party of pilgrims to Nizamuddin Aulia’s annual urs. While we did pay quick homage to the saint, we did not linger long, having made a quick getaway to catch some movies. The year was 1968 and it was my first sighting of Saira Bano. My second sighting, this time in the flesh, came in 1998 when she arrived in Pakistan with Dilip. Time forgives no one is all I can say.

But I am getting carried away, so back to Dev Anand. He always looked six-feet-tall and that is the way he remained in my memory until that day in London in 1980 when Kuldip Nayar had me meet him. It nearly threw me when I realised that he was very short. Moral: do not ever believe what the camera wants you to see. I have not been to a Dev Anand film for more years than I can remember, but I still fondly recall such of his movies as Baazi and Taxi Driver. The latter introduced Kalpana Kartak, who came from Lahore, being the niece – or so one heard at the time - of famous Punjab University registrar S.P. Singha. Kalpana Kartak and Dev Anand are still married, which is no small miracle if all the stories of Dev Anand’s conquests recounted in his just-published book, Romancing with Life, are true. No pretty girl has passed within 10 feet of him without being presented with a flower, “the loveliest in the bunch.” Where he gets all those flowers at such convenient moments, one should not ask because in such matters suspension of disbelief is the best policy.

I saw Dev Anand for the second time when he crossed into Pakistan with Atal Behari Vajpayee in what came to be known as the Lahore Spring. But that was not to last as the brilliant army commanders stole into Kargil, sealing the fate of Kashmir for the foreseeable future, if not forever. More people at the Wahga border were waving to Dev Anand than to the Indian Prime Minister. Dev Anand was born in Batala but came to Government College, Lahore, from where he graduated in the early 1940s. He moved to Bombay, where he found a job in the army censor office (the Second World War was raging and the Japanese were knocking at the gates of India). But one day, he told all the pretty Anglo-Indian girls who worked with him that he was quitting to become a “star.” Most such hopefuls fall by the wayside; Dev Anand actually became a star and has never looked back. More than 82 years old now, he is still making movies, though directing rather than acting in them. One thing he cannot be accused of is modesty. Consider: “I, Dev Anand, am certainly the central point of everything I say and do … as a popular star, the image of Dev Anand is like that of a deity to his millions of fans.”

Dev Anand’s first love - unrequited as all first loves are – was Usha Chopra, a fellow Government College student. Being an out-of-towner, he lived in Quadrangle Hostel and later in New Hostel. When he came with Vajpayee, he spent several hours at his old college. One of his contemporaries was the great H.K. Burki, an Olympic hockey player who captained the winning Pakistan team at Barcelona. Dev Anand’s first movie in Bombay was Hum Ek Hain and his second, Aage Bhado, with the great singing star Khursheed (who came from the small town of Chuniyaan, not far from Lahore. Imagine!). Dev Anand’s first hit was Ziddi, starring Kamni Kaushal (a Lahori girl who went to Kinnaird College, where she was known by her given name of Uma Kayshap. The family lived near Chauburji).

The book provides confirmation that the great love of Dev Anand’s life was Suraiya. The two would have married had it not been for her greedy and controlling family, especially her grandmother who forced her to end the relationship. The family was not bothered about Suraiya’s happiness, as the lovely and tragic Madhubala’s father did not really care for his daughter, being interested only in squandering her money on disastrous movie ventures. Dev Anand called Suraiya “Nosey,” she called him “Steve.” He writes, “Suraiya had no say in her own life; its sole arbiter was her granny.” Dev Anand even bought a ring for her. In the end, the family put its foot down and made her take an oath that she would sever her relationship with the only man she ever loved. She threw the ring into the sea. Suraiya, who died well over a year ago, never married. She came from Lahore, as so many of the stars of those days did. Her name was Malika and of her, Khurshid Anwar once said, she was a natural and an effortless singer.

Dev Anand, who appeared with Madhubala in Kala Pani calls her “the most beautiful of all the heroines in the fairyland of films, with her natural looks, always fresh as morning dew, sans heavy makeup, false eyelashes, contact lenses or scanty dresses fashioned by designers to impart artificial glamour. Her childlike innocence was accentuated by the most noticeable trait in her character, her famous giggle. Every time I think of her, I hear her giggle outside my makeup room, followed by a knock at the door that announced her arrival. Many times she would suddenly start giggling during a take when the camera was on. The lights had to be switched off indefinitely and tea ordered, until she was able to get a hold on herself and rein in her mirth.” She died at 37. There was a hole in her heart and not only in a physical sense. Dilip Kumar, the man she loved, treated her brutally, exactly as another great star, Nargis, was treated by Raj Kapoor.

Dev Anand once fell head over heels in love with Zeenat Amman, but realised, with no small blow to his ego, that she had already been netted in by Raj Kapoor, who reprimanded her drunkenly when she had walked into a party on Dev Anand’s arm that she had broken her promise of never appearing before him except in a white sari. Raj Kapoor must have had a thing about white saris because he had Nargis also wear them much of the time during their years of intimacy. There is a lesson in it for all. If Dev Anand can be jilted, so can lesser mortals who are not movie stars. However, when Dev Anand fell in his tub while showering and hurt his back, it was his wife Mona, the former Kalpana Kartak of moviedom, who came to his rescue. It follows that when you fall in your tub, girlfriends are of little help.

I have only one problem with Dev Anand’s memoirs. Every conversation, no matter when it took place, has been reproduced in dialogue form within quotes. He needed a better ghost writer than the one who took his money.

Few people have been mourned with as much feeling across the world as Benazir Bhutto. Poems have been written about her from Indonesia to Spain and across the seas, in America and Latin America. The savage act that cut short her incandescent life at a moment when she stood at the threshold of a new era, when she would have made up for the failings of the past, has moved many to tears. She had this strange quality about her. Long after you had left her company, you kept feeling a certain glow that was hard to explain. She made you feel good. She was a woman of immense good humour and she never wished anyone ill, which makes death at the hands of an assassin indescribably tragic.

I have been scouring the Internet, looking for a poem that she wrote on her 50th birthday. I did not find it, but I found much else, posted by people who never met her, never saw her and yet they felt devastated by her death. That was her magic.

A Pakistani, living in Spain, writes in Urdu — and his words are so simple and eloquent as to be poetry:

“Wherever you look in Spanish newspapers, there is just one headline/Those who look at us, know that we are Pakistanis/They are the ones to whom we were always saying, ‘This is how Pakistan is; that is how Pakistan is.’/ But now, the more we try to show Pakistan in a good light to them, the more we fail/There is just on everyone’s lips today, given what the newspapers carry/But they ask it not/They say nothing/ They only look at us in a strange way/They say nothing and yet they are saying much/What can we say?/How can we explain why what has happened has happened?/ There are bomb blasts every day/Why?/How do we explain it to them?/We no longer have words to speak or things to say/Our only refuge is silence/We must bear what has come to pass/That seems best/People can speak ill of Pakistan and Pakistanis but we say nothing/It’s painful but we have to bear the pain/It isn’t easy to go out/Not easy after the news we’ve heard/Not easy to talk to anyone/Please tell us what to say for we can find no words.”

Someone else, an American, writes, “I really felt that Benazir was a leader that would not only bring peace to my brothers and sisters in Pakistan, but also aid in the war on terror. The war on terror must come to an end, and to do this, we as human beings must care for our peoples and the well-being of their souls. We must stop killing one another, our Creator demands this, the Creator of all beings. I believe she will lead many from this day on, in her passing. She has inspired change! I wrote this as tears fell from my eyes upon the terrible news! May we all live to usher in peace!”

Another person, who signs himself Shaer or poet, writes, “As tears rolled down my face (I believe in peace) and I felt the damage that was done to world peace, I felt saddened to feel the loss in my heart. She was beautiful, and caring of the situations that needed attention. She was brave! May God bless Benazir Bhutto, and may you find peace in this poem.”

The poem reads: “A woman/with three young children/putting her life on the line for a cause/I wonder how a mother could put her life on the line/Again/With three young children/I always thought/a mother’s instinct is stronger than anything/Benazir indicated that her country is a greater cause/Brother, she is in the hands of God/Now let’s pray for her soul/But brother/I grieve for those children.”

One short poem dedicated to her goes: “The children are motherless/Let’s hope that her sacrifice will be an offering/for a better Pakistan/In the eyes of God/blood sacrifice supercedes life itself/Go in peace, Sister.” Someone signing herself as Anna writes: Benazir Bhutto was assassinated today/she expired at 6:16/I have no poetry for you/words have no meaning sometimes/and the poet is gone/absent from all reason/all choked up/with nothing to say.”

A young woman named Mehnaz Malik, whom Benazir befriended, dedicates a poem by David Harkins, written in 1981, to “Bibi”:

“She is gone/You can shed tears that she is gone/Or you can smile because she has lived/You can close your eyes and pray that she will come back/Or you can open your eyes and see all that she has left/Your heart can be empty because you can’t see her/Or you can be full of the love that you shared/You can turn your back on tomorrow and live yesterday/Or you can be happy for tomorrow because of yesterday/You can remember her and only that she is gone/Or you can cherish her memory and let it live on/You can cry and close your mind, be empty and turn your back/Or you can do what she would want: smile, open your eyes, love and go on.”

Mehnaz writes, “Her critics say she was a pampered princess, and yet I never saw her rest. Bibi was a workaholic glued to her computer. She was extremely efficient with answering emails, and reading copious amounts of paper. Bibi kept her staff to the minimum, there was no entourage of assistants or professionals, just the bare minimum. I often sent her the odd intern to ease her workload because she was so overstretched. Contrary to what people think, she was not living in a palace with a large staff. Her HQ was always a few computers with various volunteers helping out. At the very centre of activity was Bibi working away, until we would drag her to take that much needed break. More recently, with her lecture circuit, we used to discuss how much we had to travel just to earn a living.”

But I would like to end this in Bibi’s own words, “I don’t fear death. I remember my last meeting with my father when he told me, ‘You know, tonight when I will be killed, my mother and my father will be waiting for me.’ It makes me weepy but I don’t think it can happen unless God wants it to happen because so many people have tried to kill me.”

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

his is the centenary year for Ian Fleming, the creator of James Bond, British Agent 007, irresistible to women with names like Vesper Lynd, Domino Vitali, Kissy Suzuki, Mary Goodnight, Tiffany Case, Solitaire and Tatiana Romanova. For the baddies of the world, who in his day were mostly commies or crazy men like Dr No who planned to dominate the world through terror and blackmail, Bond was the nemesis. And despite his great partiality for hard liquour – scotch, vodka and martinis – shaken not stirred – and up to 70 specially blended cigarettes a day, Bond got the better of all he confronted, though in the process he often took some heavy punishment, the most painful being what the Russian spy Le Chiffre inflicted on him in Casino Royale , which practically knocked off his whatdoyoucallit.

In celebration of Fleming’s life and unique achievement, all 14 of his books have been reissued in paperback and nowhere else is there more absorbing reading to be experienced than in following James Bond as he brings death and destruction to the enemies of the British empire (or what was left of it) and the West. Fleming published his first book in 1953, when he was in his forties, the book being Casino Royale . Then one after the other came his thrillers, delighting the world and making James Bond and the man who first played him on the screen, Sean Connery, household names around the world, including the Soviet Union and the Iron Curtain countries of Eastern Europe, though surely in smuggled editions.

Bond is a wish fulfillment. He is what most of us would like to be, but aren’t. He has no wife to nag him, no children whom he has to walk to school and no unpaid bills. He is answerable only to M, the head of MI6, and as M’s secretary, Miss Moneypenny, is in love with Bond (a love that remains unrequited), that gives him an additional advantage. After all, it is a given that having the boss’s secretary on your side guarantees you remaining in his good books, even after a botched operation. Bond lives in style when in London, his bachelor pad being off King’s Road, which was the area to be in. He does not have to suffer travel by bus and tube. He has his supercharged Bentley to take him places. He gets sent to the world’s most exotic spots to dispatch one baddy after another, and he always gets the girl.

Bond’s ethics are essentially English public school. He believes in queen and country and he is not exactly fond of foreigners. All the villains he deals with are from other countries and races: Asians, Russians and Eastern Europeans. Fleming’s books were written at a time when the Cold War was at its coldest. It was a world in which McCarthy could happen. It was a world in which the Rosenbergs could be executed for spying for Russia. That world may have vanished with the fall of communism, but as one watches the new Russia gain in wealth, power and influence, it seems only a matter of time before the return of the Bond world. But would there be another Ian Fleming to spin yarns about it? Not likely, for such storytellers are not born every day.

A great deal has been written this year, principally in Britain, about Fleming and the world he created. The Imperial War Museum has mounted an exhibition, featuring an array of material, most of it on public display for the first time. The exhibition explores the early life of Ian Fleming, his wartime career and work as a journalist and travel writer and how, as an author, he drew upon his own experiences to create James Bond. According to the actress Joanna Lumley, who played one of the Bond girls, Fleming was “a complicated personality: a ladies’ man with an amusing sardonic face, impeccable connections and lazy elegance. He had an upper-class drawl and was as fit as a flea, which is always very attractive. He was capable of great sweetness, which you see in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, which he wrote for his son Caspar. But the more I learnt about him, the more I found him to be a solitary man. His pastimes and pleasures were solitary: golf, cards, cars, writing … the things he loved most were lonely; and there is also a loneliness to James Bond, which is part of his allure.”

Roger Moore, who played Bond from 1973 to 1985, writes that he was an aficionado of James Bond – both the books and the films. “I have a vested interest in the character. I feel protective towards him. When I hear people say: ‘Oh, why don’t they call it a day and kill him off?’ I feel compelled to speak out, like a custodial father. It’s true that, like Conan Doyle and Sherlock Holmes, Fleming once toyed with killing off Bond. But his readers protested and he listened. They wouldn’t allow James Bond to die then, and I don’t believe we should any time soon either.” Moore concedes that Sean Connery was the first and probably the best Bond as he originated and defined the cinematic interpretation of the character. Bond, Moore adds, has survived not only Connery’s departure, but five other actors too, and he’s thrived. What’s more, he’s now more popular than ever, hardly breathing the last gasp of a dying man.

Michael Hewitt, in his tribute to Bond, wonders if Bond could afford his extravagant lifestyle today, earning in 1955 a modern-day equivalent of 43,000 pounds. In his first book, Bond was in his thirties, which would make him 90 plus today, a bit past it, wouldn’t you say! Hewitt notes that Bond’s eating habits are hardly guaranteed to make him the picture of health, since he “kicks off each day with an artery-hardening cooked breakfast, courtesy of his housekeeper, May. When travelling, he insists on his own-recipe scrambled eggs. The short story 007 in New York says this includes half a pack of butter and double cream. Otherwise, Bond subsists on ‘grilled soles, oeufs cocotte and cold roast beef with potato salad.’ He loathes fresh fruit and vegetables.” He also has a drinking problem, down as he does half a bottle of spirits a day when off duty. He smokes special Balkan and Turkish mixture cigarettes at the rate of 60 or 70 a day. An MI6 spokesman is supposed to have said, “Obviously, we can’t comment on exactly who we do employ, but I can say that the character described in the books would probably find great difficulty getting a job with us as a cleaner, let alone a field agent.”

The nameless MI6 spokesman is lucky that James Bond did not hear that, otherwise he would have met the same end the baddies do at 007’s hands.

Murray College, Sialkot, where I spent ten years, first as a student and then as a junior lecturer, I have not visited for some time because I want to remember it as it was and not as it reportedly is. It was established as Scotch Mission College in 1889 by Scottish missionaries who came to Sialkot in January 1857. Rev. Thomas Hunter, the first Scottish missionary, his wife Jane and his infant son were murdered during the 1857 uprising.

As my friend and classmate Muhammad Rafiq wrote some years ago, the Scottish missionaries who established the Scotch Mission College were a small group born and bred in the comparative comfort of Scotland, deeply moral, each one of them educated in one of the five ancient universities of their country. They worked largely without recompense to educate people of a town very different from theirs. In 1972, the independent nation of Pakistan dismissed the Scottish missionaries – who had nurtured the cause of education in Sialkot for so long – unceremoniously ‘from all further conduct’ of Murray College affairs without a word of thanks.

Recently, Amanatullah Chaudhry, an old Murray College student, put together a slim volume by way of a tribute to some of the old teachers, but I was sorry to see that he had made no mention of the greatest English teacher of them all: Prof. Arthur Mowat. But he did list Rev. D.L. Scott, the college’s last Scottish principal, the legendary William Garret and the eminent philosopher William Lilly, whose book on ethics is widely recognised as a classic. Prof. Lilly and Allama Muhammad Iqbal used to act as examiners in philosophy for the Punjab University.

By reproducing a tribute by A.D. Azhar, Aslam Azhar’s father and another Murray College student, to Shams-ul-Ulema Maulvi Syed Mir Hasan (Iqbal’s teacher), Amanatullah Chaudhry has performed a service because while everyone has heard of this great oriental scholar, little has been written about him. Maulvi Mir Hasan, under whom Azhar studied, died in 1929 at the age of 88. When he was 82, Azhar asked him, “Why don’t you take some rest now?” “Because I want to live a little longer,” he replied. His body was frail, Azhar wrote, but his mind was fresh and full of the light of knowledge and unfailing humour. “In my four years as his student, I never found his genius for repartee falter. One day, after some hesitation, I asked him if he had ever been left speechless by anyone,” Azhar recounted. “Yes,” answered the sage. “Every year an animal fair takes place in the small town of Gullo Shah near Sialkot. Once when I went there, I found a sign in bold letters at the entrance saying ‘ Maal Mandi Mela Mawaishiyaan .’ I looked up noticing a neatly dressed Chaudhry who looked educated, I asked him what the overhead sign said. He looked at my big, bulbous eyes and replied in Punjabi, ‘ Baba , you have been staring at that sign with your sheep-sized eyes for so long, how come you can’t read what is written there?’ I did not know what to say to that.”

Azhar recalled that Maulvi Mir Hasan would not let anyone walk next to him. Once when Azhar asked him why, the old man smiled and said, “You are young, your ambition is young. You will walk a step ahead of me. You may not say anything but in your heart you will curse this miserable old man. I want your prayers. I don’t want you to curse me, which is why I shoo you off.” Maulvi Mir Hasan was a great admirer of the poet Momin. When Muhammad Hussain Azad’s classic work Aab-e-Hayat was published, Maulvi Mir Hasan noticed that one poet he had left out was Momin, perhaps because Azad was a Shia and Momin was a Sunni. Maulvi Mir Hasan wrote to Azad, pointing out the omission, which, to his credit, Azad made up for in the second edition. When Azad was sent on pension in 1889 by the Punjab government, the position was offered to Maulvi Mir Hasan, but he turned it down, saying, “How can I leave the Mission that I have served for so many years.” He taught Arabic and Persian all his life at what became Murray College. Both Iqbal and Faiz were his students, as everyone knows. It was also Iqbal who insisted that before he would accept a knighthood, he would want his teacher’s scholarship to be recognized and honoured. When asked if Maulvi Mir Hasan had produced any work, Iqbal replied, “I am the work he produced.”

A student once complained during class that a boy in one of the back rows was peppering him with pebbles. Maulvi Mir Hasan left the class and returned with a fistful of pebbles, handed them to the complainant and asked him to start pelting the offender, Azhar recalled. In 1920, Azhar wrote, some of the boys cut classes and went to Gujranwala to hear Lala Lajpat Rai and Syed Ataullah Shah Bukhari rant against the British. When they returned, Maulvi Mir Hasan asked Azhar where he had been. “Gujranwala,” Azhar replied. “And the other boys?” he asked. “They too were in Gujranwala.” Maulvi Mir Hasan observed philosophically, “If the mare went off to get its hooves shoed, did the chicken have to go with her?” He was once asked if music was haram in Islam, to which he replied, “It is haram for haramis .”

The book also contains the reprint of an article the late Warris Mir wrote about some of his teachers when he was a student at Murray College. About the inimitable Zamurrad Malik, he wrote, “December was drawing to an end. The soon-to-dawn New Year was still wrapped up in mist over the horizon when one day, in front of the college library, a strange boy carrying loads of books stretched his hand towards me. It was Zamurrad Malik, who was in the final year of his master’s in English. He had just been assigned to teach us English. Whether he was turning the pages of a never-to-be-understood book or rearranging tongue-tied pawns on a chessboard or urging tiny billiard balls to move in a certain direction or waiting in the cricket ground for a catch that was never going to come his way or just walking on the road, he was always Zamurrad Malik. When you sat next to him, you felt that his eyes were looking at a sky other than the one we were familiar with, a sky whose stars had yet to rise.”

Of the saintly Rev. David Leslie Scott, our principal, Prof. C.W. Tressler, the arch disciplinarian of whom every rogue on the college rolls was terrified, used to say, “In this place you can go Scott-free, but you can never go Tressler-free.” And truer words were never spoken because Mr Scott would begin every sentence with “I am afraid,” something that Nisar Chaudhry of Narowal, one of our mates, found so mystifying that one day he asked, “Scott is the principal so why is he always afraid?”

Google World

Filed Under Postcard USA 

In the mid or late 1980s, one of the American newsweeklies ran a cover story on the Internet. I was then living in Vienna and recall picking up a copy of the magazine from a newsstand that sold English-language periodicals and journals. I read the story more than once but could not quite understand it. It sounded more science fiction than science. How could what it described be possible, I kept wondering, which only brings home the fact, and one that we overlook, as to how new a phenomenon the Internet is. Today, we treat computers and what they do as if they had always been there.

I remember many long years ago in Sialkot, word spread that someone had brought a strange machine from America that recorded your voice and played it right back to you. Nobody could quite believe it. The machine, which like many others I also went to see, was a Grundig wire recorder that was half a storey high and needed a weightlifter to shift it from one table to the next.

It did record sound, scratchy though it was. The wire snapped often and had to be mended and realigned. It was like the eighth wonder of the world to some of us in that small, laid-back city. If a man who died in the 1940s was to return to the world and put in front of a giant plasma TV, handed a mobile phone and a Blackberry, seated before a computer and taken on a tour of the Internet and the amazing search engine Google, driven around in a car equipped with a navigational system, he would immediately be transported to where he had come from — out of absolute shock.

The story of the world’s largest, most used Internet search engine, Google, is quite amazing. So much has Google become a part of our lives that the word has gone into the language as a verb (Let us google that).

A 6,000-word profile of Google in the New Yorker this week is full of fascinating details. Google is not even quite ten yet, having been founded in 1998 by two youngsters by the names of Sergey Brin, then 24, and Larry Page, 25 at the time. What Google has created is an ingenious tool for searching the Internet that has evolved into something almost unimaginably far-reaching. The company’s mission is “to organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”.

Making information “universally accessible”, though, is an ambitious goal that often clashes with those whose business is to own and distribute it, according to Ken Auletta, who wrote the New Yorker profile of this amazing enterprise.

Google also owns YouTube, the largest online video site (which contains everything under the sun, including mujras in Lahore’s exclusive homes by those with money to throw and an eye for pretty girls).

Google now faces a billion-dollar lawsuit for copyright infringement. Google wants to digitise all the world’s books, including those under copyright. “Despite Google’s assurances that it would protect authors and publishers, the company was unable to allay the fear that digitisation would eventually cheapen the value of the books; and publishers and writers expressed concern that Google would profit from book searches without sharing the ad revenue.

Newspapers were unhappy that Google was luring away readers and advertisers. And Microsoft, the world’s mightiest technology company, feared that Google was becoming too powerful — that it was designing Web-based software applications similar to Microsoft’s Office,” writes Auletta.

Google today is among America’s ten richest corporations, with a market value of just over $200 billion, ExxonMobil being No 1 at $500 billion. Google has amassed one of the world’s largest databases, a resource that has helped in altering its mission. “We are in the advertising business,” Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, told Auletta not long ago.

Google, he writes, which is based in Mountain View, California, now accounts for just over 60 percent of the world’s Internet searches, and its power comes from the data it collects from all those searches. “When a search is done on Google, a ‘cookie,’ or fingerprint, is created and stored in the browser of the computer being used. It records what you’re looking for and what you read or simply what you’re curious about. Your search query is stored by Google for eighteen months. Over time, Google might be tempted to extract more and more user data to better target ads. This year, Google’s ad revenues are expected to reach sixteen billion dollars, approaching the combined national advertising revenues of the four major broadcast networks.”

According to Auletta, in 1995, Brin and Page, graduate students at Stanford, figured out a way to scan and index the Internet. Earlier search engines had done this, but Brin and Page did it better. By 1998, they had incorporated Google, coming up with a company name that suggested the audacity of their ambition. (“Googol” is the math term for the figure 1 followed by a hundred zeros.) And they came up with an informal company motto to signal their benign intent: “Don’t be evil”.

In 1999, when Marissa Mayer was hired as the first female engineer and the nineteenth Google employee, the entire Google search index, she says, “was thirty million pages, and we did four hundred thousand searches my first day.”

Today, it reaches billions of pages. And, according to ComScore, Google does an estimated four hundred billion searches a year. In 2004, Google went public, selling its stock at an opening price of eighty-five dollars per share. Page and Brin, each of whom owned about fifteen per cent of the company, became billionaires; so did Schmidt, who owned about six per cent. Google’s stock has at times climbed over seven hundred dollars a share, and a great many Google employees have become fabulously wealthy.

Google News was invented by an Indian-born engineer named Krishna Bharat, who still works for the company. The company now employs about 16,000, receives more than a million résumés a year, and through much of 2007 hired about 150 people a week, half of them engineers. Brin and Page work without assistants. They love kite surfing, which involves using a power kite to pull a rider through the water on a small surfboard or a kiteboard.

Google CEO Schmidt told Auletta that because Google is “run by three computer scientists we’re going to make all the mistakes computer scientists running a company would make. But one of the mistakes we’re not going to make is the mistake that non-scientists make. We’re going to make mistakes based on facts and data and analysis.”

He paused. Then he said, “What kills a company is not competition but arrogance. We control our fate.”

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

This year marks the 60th anniversary of one of the darkest chapters in American history because it was exactly that long ago when Hollywood and the entire entertainment industry, including television, were subjected to an anti-Communist witch hunt of such virulence that, in the words of the Writers Guild of America, the lives and careers of writers, directors, performers and countless others were destroyed. “The blacklist was a vicious whispering campaign that bullied and intimidated. It terrorised friends into betraying friends and drove some to suicide and economic despair. It sent writers to prison, uprooted families and attempted to crush the creative spirit of magnificent American storytellers.”

The anniversary brought together to Washington this week two of the survivors of the witch hunt. I heard them speak about those times at a news conference at the National Press Club, not so much with bitterness as with sadness. One of the two who traveled to Washington to mark the day was 90-year old and still sprightly actress Marsha Hunt, who was blacklisted at a point in her career when she had already made 52 movies and earned the title of “Hollywood’s youngest character actress.” The other was Walter Bernstein, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter who, after his blacklisting, had to work under a pseudonym until 1960. He wrote the screenplay for the movie Failsafe, while his unaccredited work included The Magnificent Seven , starring Yul Brynner, and The Train .

The House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) summoned 43 Hollywood figures in September 1947, including the famous actress Paulette Goddard. Only 11 testified. The first 10 refused to cooperate and were charged with contempt of Congress. That was how they who came to be known as the Hollywood Ten. In 1947, Marsha Hunt joined Hollywood stars Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall, Katharine Hepburn, Danny Kaye, John Huston, William Wyler, Sterling Hayden, Gene Kelly and Ira Gershwin as a member of the Committee for the First Amendment and flew to Washington to protest the actions of the House committee and to support the Hollywood Ten. Her blacklisting, along with that of Bernstein and 151 actors and writers, came in an anti-Communist publication called Red Channels: the Report of Communist Influence in Radio and Television. She was included in the smear list, apparently because of her membership in the Committee of the First Amendment and the 1947 flight to Washington showing support for the Hollywood Ten.

By 1951, anti-Communism had been whipped to a feverish pitch, led by Sen. Joseph McCarthy, whose name only lives in infamy now, having given the English language the perfect word for a witch hunt: McCarthyism. In the next couple of years, scores of witnesses were called by the committee and asked to name names. Some took the Fifth Amendment, which protects a person from testifying against himself. Others, such as the great Charlie Chaplin, escaped to Europe, never to return to the United States. Hundreds were blacklisted, which meant they could find no work. In the words of the Writers Guild Foundation, “Lives were ruined, marriages broke up, people committed suicide. Those blacklisted were social outcasts, their children pariahs on school playgrounds. Once blacklisted, even if for a scant cause, a person could not clear his or her name unless he was prepared to ‘name names’ before the HUAC.”

Elia Kazan, one of the greatest film directors of his time, appeared before HUAC in 1952 and said he was a member of the Party, as was Clifford Odets. Playwright Lillian Hellman refused to tell the committee whether she was ever a member of the Party. Then she delivered that classic line, “I cannot and will not cut my conscience to fit this year’s fashions.” The First Amendment that HUAC had violated in letter and spirit says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Ultimately, many of the wrongs were righted but an injustice once done can never really be righted. There were some heroic resisters. Walter Bernstein told the news conference in Washington that when novelist Ring Lardner was asked to name names, he replied, “I would answer your question, but I would hate myself in the morning.” To put things in perspective, it was the height of the Cold War and people imagined “reds under beds.” A subversive activities control board was set up and every police department had Red Squads. There were moments of levity too. When Howard Silva, Bernstein recalled, was asked if he was a Communist, he replied, “We’re not supposed to tell.”

Marsha Hunt recalled that when their chartered flight arrived in Washington, it was greeted by a mixed press. “We were misquoted and maligned and treated like criminals. There was brazen distortion of facts. We handed to Congress a redress of grievances petition. The flight home was very different, although Danny Kay kept clowning to keep everyone amused but the atmosphere had changed.” I asked her why Humphrey Bogart and his wife Lauren Bacall had recanted some time later. She answered, “It was ill-advised, but caution ruled the day.” She recalled that she had three TV show offers at the time. They were all withdrawn. “We were all now being treated as fellow travelers, all of us who were on the flight to Washington,” she said. Bernstein said that Red Channels that issued lists of Communists and their supporters were actually a protection racket. Your name would appear and then someone would come and tell you that if you paid so much, you could be taken off the list. Many paid. Bernstein recalled Carlo Ponti, husband of Sophia Loren, arriving in New York and asking him to write a screenplay for him. When Bernstein explained to him that he would have to do that under an assumed name because of what was going on, Ponti, who did not speak any English, thought for a moment and then asked through his interpreter, “Who has to be fixed and for how much?” Bernstein, when asked how he survived, replied, “You needed to be resilient and have a sense of humour.” And how did it end? “It ended because they ran out of Communists,” he replied with a laugh. Marsha Hunt spent the next couple of decades doing volunteer work for a number of UN agencies. Asked if there were any similarities between those times and post-9/11 America, Bernstein replied that in times such as these, the first thing that is suspended are civil liberties. Hysteria takes over. He recalled that at the press, including the New York Times, Variety and Hollywood Reporter, never even mentioned that there was such a thing as a Black List.

While the suspicion with which Muslims are viewed in America and most Western countries is nowhere close to the hysteria of those Cold War years, one can only fear the worst. With teenage daughters being strangled to death by their fathers for not wearing the hijab in a city like Toronto, things are bound to go downhill unless the Muslim mainstream and civil society wake up, take charge and say stop. Let the religion and the brotherhood of Islam not be defined by Muhammad Parvez, the man who murdered 16-year old Aqsa, his daughter, because she would not wear the hijab.

Remembering Benazir Bhutto

 

 

Khalid Hasan
recounts, in words and in pictures, an association spanning a lifetime

 

 



Adjust Font Size 

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto in Islamabad, 1992

 

 

 

 

Khalid Hasan with Begum Bhutto, Kriesky Award visit, Austria 1987

 

 

 

 

Being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not
to settle any

 

 

 

 

 

At the Kriesky Award
ceremony, 1987

 

 

 

 

BB at her Barbican flat,
1984 or 1985

 

 

 

 

In Simla, the Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah. ZAB was not interested but felt it would be rude to say no, so he asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall … we later went to a bookshop where I bought lots of books for ZAB

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir and Begum Bhutto at the Kreisky Award ceremony

 

 

 

 

At a party meeting, London 2005

 

 

 

 

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather
than Italy”

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University, Washington 1995

 

 

 

 

“Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics … The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to my father’s expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do”

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir with Bilawal on the cover of Paris Match

 

 

 

 

BB with Khalid Hasan (middle) and Shaheen Sehbai,
Washington, 2004/5

 

 

 

 

BB at party meeting in London 2005 with Akbar Khawaja (L) and Shah Mehmood Qureshi

 

 

 

 

No matter where she was, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her ‘sent by blackberry device’ emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto’s last photograph

 

 

 

 

A family picture sent as a
 New Year card

If Benazir Bhutto was to be summed up in one word, that word would be kind. Indomitable though her will was, and extraordinary the courage she was gifted with, behind her sometimes steely exterior lay a deeply humane woman who felt for the poor and the deprived, a quality she had inherited from her father. In many respects, she resembled him, but in several ways she was quite different from him. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto found it hard to forgive those who had once crossed him, or who he thought had crossed him. Even minor incidents, sometimes quite innocent, he found hard to overlook or let go. That was his great failing. When I mentioned this once to Maulana Kausar Niazi, he took a deep breath and replied philosophically that the failings of great men were also often great.

Benazir was forgiving. She had an amazing capacity to take personal abuse – and that was one count on which she was never to want. She would shrug her shoulders and move on. She preferred to concentrate on the essentials of her relationships with people, not the trivia that often gets to define them. She was by nature a generous person. She did not harbour a grudge; but being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, both cut in the middle, one by the renegade Farooq Leghari, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not to settle any. I went back with her a long way. A week after ZAB took office in the dying days of that catastrophic year of 1971, he sent for me and asked me to work for him. Until then, the press officer to the president – which ZAB then was – was called a public relations officer, which I thought was more appropriate to someone selling soap. I said that much to ZAB and suggested that I should be his press secretary. “Fine,” he said, “but not the kind they have in America.” Benazir was in school in the US by then. She came home for a visit around then and that is when I first spoke to her. From amongst ZAB’s children, my rapport was with the precocious Shahnawaz who had a sharp mind and on whose face I always saw a smile full of mischief. But I’ll leave that story for another day.

As I sit here in faraway Washington trying to write this, my mind goes to and fro over the vast stretch of years that divide then from now. Let me cite one example of Benazir’s ability, her gift I would say, to refuse to take offence where most others would. Some years ago, in a long memoir I wrote of her father, I described an incident involving the teenager Benazir in New York in 1971 when ZAB had come to the United Nations to try to retrieve what he could of his disintegrating country’s honour. This was what I wrote, “My friend Hayat Mehdi, who was deputy permanent representative at Pakistan’s UN Mission, Agha Shahi being the permanent representative, told me that as he went to Bhutto’s room to pick up some papers that he wanted, he nearly fell to the floor with shock when he heard the teenage Benazir, who had come from her school in the East to be with her father, chattering away on the phone to a friend telling her what her father was going to do the next day at the UN and that she should not miss it on television. I am not sure if Mehdi snatched the phone from her hand or put his hand on her mouth as she was giving away the best-kept secret of the day. Next day, Bhutto entered the Security Council looking grim and made the most emotional, though well-prepared, speech of his career. It was in that speech that he said, ‘I have not come here to accept abject surrender. If the Security Council wants me to be a party of the legalisation of abject surrender, then I say that under no circumstances, shall it be so. The United Nations resembles those fashion houses which hide ugly realities by draping ungainly figures in alluring apparel’.”

I never sent Benazir the book that included my Bhutto memoir for fear that some of what I had written might offend her. A few years ago, on one of her visits to Washington, she told me that she had read the book and liked it. “But there is one thing that you got wrong,” she added. When I asked her what it was, she replied that the 1971 incident I had described had never taken place. “I am sorry,” I said, “but I wrote what Hayat Mehdi had told me, word for word.” “Then that is not your fault, but of the person who told you,” she said. Having worked with her father and been in situations where he took umbrage at something written about him, I could never imagine him just dropping the matter and moving on. She was like that. She was not bitter and she had this tremendous capacity to go on, no matter what the odds and how difficult the situation in which she found herself. When she came to America on one of her lecture tours, she always found time to meet her party workers, her friends, whose number always remained large, and even those who merely wanted to meet her because she was Benazir Bhutto. Some of them had no interest in politics or in her as such. I suppose they met her in order to be able to let drop casually at a later social evening that they had spent time with her the other day. Her brow never furrowed when in company that could not possibly have been the source of any pleasure or benefit to her. Like her father, she remembered names, especially of her party workers.

Benazir did not attend the all parties conference organised by Nawaz Sharif in London last summer. While she sent three members of the party, including what I described in a piece as “the fragrant Sherry Rehman,” she herself went off to Paris, though she remained connected to what was going on - laptop to laptop. I wrote about it tongue in cheek but she was not offended. When she came to the US this year after the living arrangement with Musharraf had been successfully brokered by the Americans and the British, she stayed in New York for more than two weeks. Once again, she was not offended by what I had written, which was, “The Musharraf-Bhutto arrangement is viewed as one best equipped to deal with the ‘spectre of terrorism and extremism’ – as the mantra has it. To that end, high-gloss exposure of Ms. Bhutto, the acceptable face of the Musharraf regime, has been facilitated. There is the long arm of the government and then there is the well-financed and well-connected, high-powered public relations and lobbying network to which the United States is home. Selling, be it soap or politicians, local or foreign, has been perfected to an art form in this country. Ms. Bhutto stands sold.” She phoned to say before she left New York that she was finally returning home. When I asked her if journalists would be going with her, she asked me to come along. The next day, I received a mail from Farhatullah Babar asking for passport number and the rest. As it was, I did not go, having had things to do here requiring my presence.

She had a puckish sense of humour and there was a glint in her eye and a childlike expression of mischief on her face when she wanted to tease someone. Her loyal follower, former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who would not leave her side whenever she came to the US – and she let him do that because she obviously must have liked him – was and remains a good friend of mine. Writing about her last visit to Washington, I took a gentle dig at Akbar Khawaja when I wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was in town for three days, but had it been left to former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who followed her like a shadow and never let her out of his sight till such time as he would be told to go home and grab some shut-eye, we would never have known she was here. That being so, if there is a prize for keeping secrets, Akbar Khawaja should get it.” Akbar told me later that in Karachi, where he had gone with her from London, she turned around and found him standing behind her. That was at Bilawal House. She said, “Oh! it is you. I am going to tell Khalid.”

She also told him once, “Khalid is family.” I think one reason she always treated me with great affection and much respect was because I had never asked her for anything when by any measure, I should have been at least accorded what I had voluntarily turned my back on after the July 1977 coup. I was a member of the Pakistan Foreign Service and posted at London – by ZAB personally – and I resigned rather than serve the military government or, in Lillian Hellmann’s words, “cut my conscience to suit today’s fashion.” The only time I broached the subject with her was when I asked her several years later what I should say to those who ask me why I alone of all the Bhutto people had been left out of the camp of victory. She did not answer that but I could see from her expression that she was sensitive to what I had said. Once someone who knew about such things and how they work, told me that she had tried both times she was in office to find me a position to suit my wishes and my experience but both times it was the ISI that had shot it down. One day, I am going to ask the ISI – to quote Gen. Yahya Khan – at what point did I inadvertently “untie its tethered goat.”

In 2001, while I was rifling through some old papers, I came across a photograph of Benazir, sent to her father and mother from school in the United States with a long, loving note scribbled to them on the back. She must have been around seventeen then. I mailed it to her in London, saying it belonged to her. She wrote back to say how time had passed and how wistful one felt thinking of those young and early years. In Simla, Benazir who had accompanied her father because Begum Bhutto was ill at the time in Karachi, was put under my charge, so to speak. She had barely turned 19 and was a big hit with the Indian media. I remember one headline that ran, “Benazir is benazir.” Everybody wanted to interview her but I was under instructions from ZAB himself to say no to all such requests. The only exception made – after due permission from the President – was a meeting with the late Indian journalist Dilip Mukerjee who had published a hurriedly written biography of Bhutto. He told me that more than him, it was his daughter, also Benazir’s age, who had her heart set on meeting her. When I asked ZAB if an exception could be made in this case, he told me to go ahead as long as I remained present at the meeting. Mukerjee was thrilled when I told him that he could come along with his daughter to the Vice Regal Lodge where we were staying. The two came but Benazir paid little attention to the starry-eyed girl, instead going hammer and tongs after Mukerjee, whom she faulted for having got several facts about her father wrong. Mukerjee, one of India’s most respected journalists, and a great Bengali gentleman of the old school, spent the meeting fending off Benazir’s blows. At one point I asked her if we had not had enough of that and if we could perhaps move on to other things. She reluctantly let go and Mukerjee heaved a sigh of relief. She then turned to the girl and spoke to her for quite some time to put her at ease. The Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah, a “Muslim social” as the Bombay film industry classifies such productions. ZAB was not interested but felt that it would be rude to say no and asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall, which I did. We later took a walk and also visited a bookshop where I bought many books for ZAB that he had asked me to do.

Except for the last year and a half or so, I kept a steady to and fro email correspondence with Benazir. She was a great email sender, though the last time we spoke I said to her that for long we had not exchanged emails, whereas I often ran into people who bragged about getting emails from her all the time. “Not emails, but SMS,” she replied. I was not into SMS – one gadget less to fiddle with – but I had decided to SMS her from now on. But that was not to be. I have more pictures of Benazir than anyone I know – all my own work. Several of them are appearing in this special TFT issue. Off and on, while rifling through my piles of photographs, I would pick up some of hers and email them to her. I have a message from her dated December 3 2003 which says, “Dear Khalid bhai, Thank you for sending me the pictures taken at Dr. Javed’s House (Dr Javed Manzur, Washington PPP president at whose house she always met journalists and party workers). Your picture collection is phenomenal, covering many a decade and many an era. Bibi.” Another mail dated January 3 2004 says, “Such beautiful pictures you have. Thank you for sending it to me. It brought back many memories of a happier time.” A birthday greeting I sent her in 2002 brought back this response: “I am writing to thank you for the greetings on the occasion of my birthday on June 21, 2002. It was kind of you to remember the occasion. I appreciate the prayers and the good wishes. It is such gestures which give me strength to work for the restoration of a democratic process in our country Pakistan.”

A set of pictures I took of her in 1992, when she was living in a rented house in Islamabad’s F-8 sector, I sent to her in early August 2003. She wrote on August 22, “Thank you for the photos which I received. I was thin and wish I could be so again. It is too much effort. Nice to know about Nadira becoming Lady Naipaul.” (When I took the pictures, Nadira was interviewing her along with Roshan Dhunjibhoy for a German TV channel.) When a scandal involving Pakistan’s UN ambassador striking his woman friend broke in New York four years ago, the PPP issued a formal condemnation. I wrote to Bibi about it, reminding her that Munir Akram was Pakistan’s most brilliant ambassador and one of the few Sindhis in the foreign service. She replied on January 14 2003, “Dear Khalid bhai, Munir is a woman beater and PPP feels strongly about the rights of women. A man who beats a woman is unfit, to my mind, to represent Pakistan.” She wrote to me on May 31 2003, in response to my early birthday message, “It is kind of you to remember my birthday so early on. Thank you for the good wishes for the occasion. I am going to be half a century old and that makes for reflection. I have written a poem called Banazir’s Story inspired by Marvi of Malir, written by Shah Latif. Marvi was in exile from her land and pined for it as I do too. I was moved when I read it and adapted it to the present circumstances.” Daily Times published the entire poem.

When Ijaz Batalvi died, I wrote a column on his passing in these TFT pages. I stated that he was never the same after ZAB’s execution and in later years and in private regretted his role in the case. Rao Rashid wrote a letter to TFT castigating Batalvi’s role. Benazir who saw the column wrote to me, “Dear KH, I saw this article. It made me think the better of Rao for taking exception to the obituary on Batalvi. It also cooled the heart to know that Batalvi was never the same again and in private regretted it. Wish it could have been at a public level. Batalvi would have had so much knowledge about what went on behind the scenes. I firmly believe that someone has to come forward to tell the truth, someone who was part of the fray and knew exactly what went on with the assurance that what is wanted is an end to perversion of justice and not retribution. This is why I keep calling for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission knowing how many were tortured and how justice was shredded in the name of justice itself. Bibi.”

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather than Italy.” In 2002, certain stories were planted in the press by the regime or its friends that Benazir was not a graduate of Radcliffe. I got in touch with Radcliffe, which confirmed that she was not only a graduate but had passed with honours in 1973. Daily Times printed my story on July 13 2002. When Benazir saw it on July 16, she wrote, “Khalid bhai, Got the message upon my return. The regime began the wrong propaganda and I was to nail them on the day of filing the nomination. They seized my papers previously and now thought they could do ‘dada-giri’. However, I was alerted when FL (Farooq Leghari) dismissed the government and argued that I was never a graduate. Thank you for working to defending my reputation in the face of the manifold lies of the regime. Insha Allah, all their lies will be caught. Bibi.”

Yusuf Buch, who worked for several years as ZAB’s special assistant for information, told me that ZAB wanted Benazir to be spared the rough and tumble of politics. Instead, he wanted her to go into foreign service, get married to a nice young man and raise a family. I mentioned this in a column, which Benazir saw. She wrote to me, “I am surprised Yusuf Buch told you that all my father wanted me to do was to join the Foreign Service and get married and have children. Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics. It was I who wanted to join the Foreign Service. In fact, mother contested in 1977 to pave the way for me to enter parliament when I turned twenty-five. When my father was imprisoned, destiny took hold of my life and I followed the path that he had chosen for me. He was proud of my having done that. The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to his expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do. Bibi.”

Benazir was a beautiful person. But she was not free of faults. Once she said to me – it was her first term as prime minister – that she was always judged harshly. I replied that she was judged harshly because much was expected of her. The never-to-go-away charges of corruption that hovered over her head bothered me deeply, as they did all those who admired her and wished her well. Although she kept denying them, the fact is that she was not pure as driven snow. Was it Asif Zardari who led her to that path? Or was it something innate to her? She told me in Casablanca in 1995 – if I have the year right – where she had gone for the Islamic Summit, that when she was ejected out of 70 Clifton, all she had on her were the clothes she was wearing, She told me that had her husband not had “some money,” they would have been on their own.

I recall walking on a Casablanca road, having just filed my report to my Lahore newspaper from the telegraph office, when Benazir’s prime ministerial cavalcade with sirens blaring passed me by. She saw me and had her car and the rest of the motorcade come to a stop. Khalid Shafi, then chief of protocol and ZAB’s ADC when I was his press secretary, jumped out of the car and said, “The prime minister says get Khalid in the car and bring him over.” I spent that entire afternoon with her, talking about old times and about ZAB whom we both adored. Not always was she the best judge of people, however. In her first term, it was people like Happy Minwala who roosted around and pretended as if the sun rose every morning not from the east but from some orifice on their person. When she fell, they abandoned her without wasting a minute. I also could not understand how she could come close to people like Gulzar Chaudhry (a dismissed patwari) who because of her munificence became a millionaire. It always bothered me that she would stay at his residence when in Lahore. That someone like Rehman Malik, a policeman of dubious reputation, became such a close companion of hers, I never quite understood. He christened himself as her chief security adviser and yet he failed to protect her, first in Karachi, where she was lucky to have survived, and then in Rawalpindi, where she wasn’t. He has not even had the decency to offer an apology to the nation and confess that he failed in the task he had assigned to himself or that had been assigned to him. But let all that is now laid to rest with her in the eternal earth of her beloved Sindh. She is one with Marvi with whom she had once compared herself. She is gone and as the Quran says, speak only well of the dead.

I asked three people – Husain Haqqani, fellow correspondent and friend Iftikhar Ali in New York, and VOA broadcaster Murtaza Solangi - to share with me briefly their memories of Benazir. Let me end this long, rambling piece with their words. Husain Haqqani, who came very close to her in her last years and did a lot of work on her behalf in Washington and with the US media, wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was the most amazing, loving and lovable person I have ever known. For those who only saw her as a distant political figure, her human dimension clearly did not matter. For everyone whose life she touched, her humanity transcended the politics. Most powerful figures in Pakistan know how to turn friends into enemies, but Benazir Bhutto had the capacity to turn critics into admirers. When I first met her, I worked for her opponent but she won me over by her charm and persuasion, leading to fifteen years of close relations and my absolute personal loyalty to her. She was told many things about me but she never believed any and on more than one occasion put her appreciation or praise in writing. ‘I know something about vilification, Haqqani Saab’ she would say.

“The day after Farooq Leghari dismissed her second government I showed up to meet Bibi who was under house arrest at the Prime Minister’s House. She turned to someone present there and said, ‘See, I told you Haqqani Saab will remain with us. He is not like (and then she named someone who had joined Leghari’s cabinet even though he was a PPP senator after working as her spokesman earlier). We disagreed vehemently once when I was Information Secretary and she asked me to suggest a way of “keeping our friendship while relocating you from here.” She asked why I did not consider electoral politics in Karachi, which led me to move back to Karachi and engage in direct politics for a while. Our relationship became much closer after my marriage to Farahnaz Ispahani. Bibi sent a gift from Dubai she said she had chosen herself and invited the two of us to visit her. She said she knew this was the beginning of personal happiness for me. When Farah and I moved to Washington in 2002, Bibi called us and arranged a meeting every time she visited the US. I told her I did not have a home big enough to entertain, unlike some of her rich doctor and Pakistani businessmen supporters. She said she would be happy to meet me in my office. Everyone at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was surprised when Benazir Bhutto arrived unannounced at the reception one morning and spent the entire day in my small cubicle. She spoke on the phone to Asif Zardari, who was still in prison and being advised by the then head of ISI’s Internal Wing to break with her and find happiness. I heard her side of the conversation and she filled me in on what was said from the other side. Then she told me, ‘You will now understand why Asif remains so precious to me.’

“For the next five years, I assisted Bibi as she tried to convince a sceptical Washington of the merits of democracy in Pakistan. Hundreds of emails and text messages were exchanged between us. She went over every word that was written on her behalf and wrote significant portions of her own statements and articles. I was always elated by emails that said ‘Excellent’ or ‘I will share these points with the party’ in response to some article of mine. After I became a professor at Boston University she introduced me to her American friends as ‘my favourite professor.’ I probably wasn’t but she said it anyway and it made me feel good. She had the capacity to make people feel good, which is the most important attribute of a politician – something cold-blooded analysts and technocrats cannot understand. Yesterday, I printed out one of her recent emails and framed it alongside her portrait in my office. It read, ‘Ur judgement is invariably correct haqqani sahib. So nice to work with someone with such a good mind. Bibi.’ Even if she wrote it just to make me feel good, I would rather believe that than the news that she is not there any longer to lead the fight against the butchery of nihilists and the arrogance of Pakistan’s authoritarian state machinery.”

Iftikhar Ali, who was APP correspondent at the United Nations in 1971, wrote, “I first saw Benazir in November of 1971 when she came from Boston to join her father in New York who had come to fight Pakistan’s case at the United Nations – a losing battle with Pakistani troops failing to defend the country’s frontiers in what was East Pakistan. Mr. Bhutto stayed at Pierre Hotel on Central Park. She appeared to be Mr. Bhutto’s secretary as she picked up the phone virtually every time I called. Mr. Bhutto had asked me to keep him informed about the developments on the war front at any time of the day or night. He was not the type who would rely on the information providedby the Pakistan Mission. Whenever I called Mr. Bhutto’s hotel room, she would invariably ask me, ‘Anything big?’ And I would tell her. Reuters had given me access to their UN office and I would pick up the news from the ticker and read out to him. When Mr. Bhutto was not in his room, she would ask me to tell her the news and she would listen with great attention.

“But she stayed in New York just over a week before returning to her college. During that time, she came to the UN with her father a couple of times, dressed in pantsuits. As far as I know, she never sat on the official meetings which her father was having with diplomats at the UN. She always waited outside talking to Mission officials. Whenever she spotted me, she would ask me, ‘What’s the news on your net?’ She was remarkably thin, in fact, skinny in those days. She could get along with everyone, and never behaved like the daughter of a Deputy Prime Minister. Subsequently, I met her a couple of times at Ambassador Iqbal Akhund’s residence where she stayed during her holiday breaks at the college. She was into American politics, especially as the race for 1972 presidential election was picking up. My impression was that she was inclined towards Democrats – her preferred candidate seemed to be Edmund Muskie, a liberal, who subsequently couldn’t get the Democratic nomination. The party nominated George McGovern, who lost to Richard Nixon badly. She was up-to-date on American politics and generally dominated dinner conversations. And like most young people in those days, she was against US involvement in the Vietnam War.

“I never saw her until she was released from jail and was allowed to travel out of Pakistan. In New York, she addressed a number of highly emotional meetings of Pakistani supporters of Mr. Bhutto and organised her party - Shabbir and Zulfiqar were her lieutenants. Because of the news clampdown during Zia days, not many people knew about the Bhutto case and she worked hard to apprise not only the Pakistanis but also opinion leaders here. She lived very simply here mostly with family friends, especially Shama Haider, Mrs. Bhutto’s secretary. There were no parties or eating out in fancy restaurants. Shama always drove her around; sometimes she also used PPP workers’ cars. She developed close relations with her party workers, visited their homes and even knew the name of their wives and children. During her Oct. visit, she was in the big league. While she was invited to top class events in think-tanks and other forums, she held two press conferences in the homes of her workers who lived in such obscure places in New York that even taxi drivers have difficulty getting there. There was hardly any place to sit in those homes with dozens of reporters chasing her. I never had her direct phone number but whenever I called Shama and told her that I wished to speak to herabout some matter, she would call back within hours. She was a very decent and charming person. May she rest in peace!”

Murtaza Solangi, who is from Sindh, became close to her in the last three years of her life, exchanging emails with her and speaking to her on the phone with great frequency. He wrote, “She was the leader of the next century who had completely changed her lifestyle to meet the political demands of this age. No Pakistani politician has harnessed the Internet to political advantage as she did. If she thought anybody would help advance her cause, she was in instantaneous contact with that person. She traveled a lot in the last eight years, but no matter what part of the world she was in, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her “sent by blackberry device” emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would find a way to handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful. Like her father, she had an amazing memory. She would always call you by your name. I think she had realised that this could be her last trip to the US. She came here many times in 2007. And every time she came, she was on every network, every radio station, in every newspaper, at every think tank and forum in order to advance her cause. The difference between 2006 and 2007 was that Musharraf was here all over the place in 2006. In 2007, Benazir had conquered every American institution and every American media outlet. She knew that she was running out of time. She had to speak her mind before life quit on her.”

I would like to close this tribute to that gentle lady whose like we will not see again with something my friend Ziauddin wrote for Dawn from London where he now lives: “She listened, defended and argued but never for a moment did I find her losing her patience or her cool. I had gone to (one) meeting after hearing many stories about her arrogance, hot temper and short fuse. But the Benazir I met was a person one could communicate, enter into heated debate and argue with. After this meeting I had several longish debates with her mostly in the company of the late H.K. Burki. On these occasions, I would listen mostly to the monologue of Mr Burki who would dissect her policies and actions like a surgeon without mincing words. She would listen attentively and would never make even the slightest unpleasant response to the most unpleasant and uncharitable criticism of Mr Burki. He was perhaps the first person to tell her on her face that her choice of Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari as the president was wrong and he even went on to predict that Mr Leghari would betray her. In my discussions with her, I found her to have a deep understanding of economic issues. She was very well versed in the subject and could stand her ground in a debate on economic issues even with the experts.”

– This is a regular column by TFT’s Washington correspondent. He can be reached at khasan2@cox.net

 

 

 

Remembering Benazir Bhutto

 

 

Khalid Hasan
recounts, in words and in pictures, an association spanning a lifetime

 

 



Adjust Font Size 

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto in Islamabad, 1992

 

 

 

 

Khalid Hasan with Begum Bhutto, Kriesky Award visit, Austria 1987

 

 

 

 

Being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not
to settle any

 

 

 

 

 

At the Kriesky Award
ceremony, 1987

 

 

 

 

BB at her Barbican flat,
1984 or 1985

 

 

 

 

In Simla, the Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah. ZAB was not interested but felt it would be rude to say no, so he asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall … we later went to a bookshop where I bought lots of books for ZAB

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir and Begum Bhutto at the Kreisky Award ceremony

 

 

 

 

At a party meeting, London 2005

 

 

 

 

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather
than Italy”

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University, Washington 1995

 

 

 

 

“Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics … The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to my father’s expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do”

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir with Bilawal on the cover of Paris Match

 

 

 

 

BB with Khalid Hasan (middle) and Shaheen Sehbai,
Washington, 2004/5

 

 

 

 

BB at party meeting in London 2005 with Akbar Khawaja (L) and Shah Mehmood Qureshi

 

 

 

 

No matter where she was, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her ‘sent by blackberry device’ emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto’s last photograph

 

 

 

 

A family picture sent as a
 New Year card

If Benazir Bhutto was to be summed up in one word, that word would be kind. Indomitable though her will was, and extraordinary the courage she was gifted with, behind her sometimes steely exterior lay a deeply humane woman who felt for the poor and the deprived, a quality she had inherited from her father. In many respects, she resembled him, but in several ways she was quite different from him. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto found it hard to forgive those who had once crossed him, or who he thought had crossed him. Even minor incidents, sometimes quite innocent, he found hard to overlook or let go. That was his great failing. When I mentioned this once to Maulana Kausar Niazi, he took a deep breath and replied philosophically that the failings of great men were also often great.

Benazir was forgiving. She had an amazing capacity to take personal abuse – and that was one count on which she was never to want. She would shrug her shoulders and move on. She preferred to concentrate on the essentials of her relationships with people, not the trivia that often gets to define them. She was by nature a generous person. She did not harbour a grudge; but being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, both cut in the middle, one by the renegade Farooq Leghari, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not to settle any. I went back with her a long way. A week after ZAB took office in the dying days of that catastrophic year of 1971, he sent for me and asked me to work for him. Until then, the press officer to the president – which ZAB then was – was called a public relations officer, which I thought was more appropriate to someone selling soap. I said that much to ZAB and suggested that I should be his press secretary. “Fine,” he said, “but not the kind they have in America.” Benazir was in school in the US by then. She came home for a visit around then and that is when I first spoke to her. From amongst ZAB’s children, my rapport was with the precocious Shahnawaz who had a sharp mind and on whose face I always saw a smile full of mischief. But I’ll leave that story for another day.

As I sit here in faraway Washington trying to write this, my mind goes to and fro over the vast stretch of years that divide then from now. Let me cite one example of Benazir’s ability, her gift I would say, to refuse to take offence where most others would. Some years ago, in a long memoir I wrote of her father, I described an incident involving the teenager Benazir in New York in 1971 when ZAB had come to the United Nations to try to retrieve what he could of his disintegrating country’s honour. This was what I wrote, “My friend Hayat Mehdi, who was deputy permanent representative at Pakistan’s UN Mission, Agha Shahi being the permanent representative, told me that as he went to Bhutto’s room to pick up some papers that he wanted, he nearly fell to the floor with shock when he heard the teenage Benazir, who had come from her school in the East to be with her father, chattering away on the phone to a friend telling her what her father was going to do the next day at the UN and that she should not miss it on television. I am not sure if Mehdi snatched the phone from her hand or put his hand on her mouth as she was giving away the best-kept secret of the day. Next day, Bhutto entered the Security Council looking grim and made the most emotional, though well-prepared, speech of his career. It was in that speech that he said, ‘I have not come here to accept abject surrender. If the Security Council wants me to be a party of the legalisation of abject surrender, then I say that under no circumstances, shall it be so. The United Nations resembles those fashion houses which hide ugly realities by draping ungainly figures in alluring apparel’.”

I never sent Benazir the book that included my Bhutto memoir for fear that some of what I had written might offend her. A few years ago, on one of her visits to Washington, she told me that she had read the book and liked it. “But there is one thing that you got wrong,” she added. When I asked her what it was, she replied that the 1971 incident I had described had never taken place. “I am sorry,” I said, “but I wrote what Hayat Mehdi had told me, word for word.” “Then that is not your fault, but of the person who told you,” she said. Having worked with her father and been in situations where he took umbrage at something written about him, I could never imagine him just dropping the matter and moving on. She was like that. She was not bitter and she had this tremendous capacity to go on, no matter what the odds and how difficult the situation in which she found herself. When she came to America on one of her lecture tours, she always found time to meet her party workers, her friends, whose number always remained large, and even those who merely wanted to meet her because she was Benazir Bhutto. Some of them had no interest in politics or in her as such. I suppose they met her in order to be able to let drop casually at a later social evening that they had spent time with her the other day. Her brow never furrowed when in company that could not possibly have been the source of any pleasure or benefit to her. Like her father, she remembered names, especially of her party workers.

Benazir did not attend the all parties conference organised by Nawaz Sharif in London last summer. While she sent three members of the party, including what I described in a piece as “the fragrant Sherry Rehman,” she herself went off to Paris, though she remained connected to what was going on - laptop to laptop. I wrote about it tongue in cheek but she was not offended. When she came to the US this year after the living arrangement with Musharraf had been successfully brokered by the Americans and the British, she stayed in New York for more than two weeks. Once again, she was not offended by what I had written, which was, “The Musharraf-Bhutto arrangement is viewed as one best equipped to deal with the ‘spectre of terrorism and extremism’ – as the mantra has it. To that end, high-gloss exposure of Ms. Bhutto, the acceptable face of the Musharraf regime, has been facilitated. There is the long arm of the government and then there is the well-financed and well-connected, high-powered public relations and lobbying network to which the United States is home. Selling, be it soap or politicians, local or foreign, has been perfected to an art form in this country. Ms. Bhutto stands sold.” She phoned to say before she left New York that she was finally returning home. When I asked her if journalists would be going with her, she asked me to come along. The next day, I received a mail from Farhatullah Babar asking for passport number and the rest. As it was, I did not go, having had things to do here requiring my presence.

She had a puckish sense of humour and there was a glint in her eye and a childlike expression of mischief on her face when she wanted to tease someone. Her loyal follower, former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who would not leave her side whenever she came to the US – and she let him do that because she obviously must have liked him – was and remains a good friend of mine. Writing about her last visit to Washington, I took a gentle dig at Akbar Khawaja when I wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was in town for three days, but had it been left to former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who followed her like a shadow and never let her out of his sight till such time as he would be told to go home and grab some shut-eye, we would never have known she was here. That being so, if there is a prize for keeping secrets, Akbar Khawaja should get it.” Akbar told me later that in Karachi, where he had gone with her from London, she turned around and found him standing behind her. That was at Bilawal House. She said, “Oh! it is you. I am going to tell Khalid.”

She also told him once, “Khalid is family.” I think one reason she always treated me with great affection and much respect was because I had never asked her for anything when by any measure, I should have been at least accorded what I had voluntarily turned my back on after the July 1977 coup. I was a member of the Pakistan Foreign Service and posted at London – by ZAB personally – and I resigned rather than serve the military government or, in Lillian Hellmann’s words, “cut my conscience to suit today’s fashion.” The only time I broached the subject with her was when I asked her several years later what I should say to those who ask me why I alone of all the Bhutto people had been left out of the camp of victory. She did not answer that but I could see from her expression that she was sensitive to what I had said. Once someone who knew about such things and how they work, told me that she had tried both times she was in office to find me a position to suit my wishes and my experience but both times it was the ISI that had shot it down. One day, I am going to ask the ISI – to quote Gen. Yahya Khan – at what point did I inadvertently “untie its tethered goat.”

In 2001, while I was rifling through some old papers, I came across a photograph of Benazir, sent to her father and mother from school in the United States with a long, loving note scribbled to them on the back. She must have been around seventeen then. I mailed it to her in London, saying it belonged to her. She wrote back to say how time had passed and how wistful one felt thinking of those young and early years. In Simla, Benazir who had accompanied her father because Begum Bhutto was ill at the time in Karachi, was put under my charge, so to speak. She had barely turned 19 and was a big hit with the Indian media. I remember one headline that ran, “Benazir is benazir.” Everybody wanted to interview her but I was under instructions from ZAB himself to say no to all such requests. The only exception made – after due permission from the President – was a meeting with the late Indian journalist Dilip Mukerjee who had published a hurriedly written biography of Bhutto. He told me that more than him, it was his daughter, also Benazir’s age, who had her heart set on meeting her. When I asked ZAB if an exception could be made in this case, he told me to go ahead as long as I remained present at the meeting. Mukerjee was thrilled when I told him that he could come along with his daughter to the Vice Regal Lodge where we were staying. The two came but Benazir paid little attention to the starry-eyed girl, instead going hammer and tongs after Mukerjee, whom she faulted for having got several facts about her father wrong. Mukerjee, one of India’s most respected journalists, and a great Bengali gentleman of the old school, spent the meeting fending off Benazir’s blows. At one point I asked her if we had not had enough of that and if we could perhaps move on to other things. She reluctantly let go and Mukerjee heaved a sigh of relief. She then turned to the girl and spoke to her for quite some time to put her at ease. The Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah, a “Muslim social” as the Bombay film industry classifies such productions. ZAB was not interested but felt that it would be rude to say no and asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall, which I did. We later took a walk and also visited a bookshop where I bought many books for ZAB that he had asked me to do.

Except for the last year and a half or so, I kept a steady to and fro email correspondence with Benazir. She was a great email sender, though the last time we spoke I said to her that for long we had not exchanged emails, whereas I often ran into people who bragged about getting emails from her all the time. “Not emails, but SMS,” she replied. I was not into SMS – one gadget less to fiddle with – but I had decided to SMS her from now on. But that was not to be. I have more pictures of Benazir than anyone I know – all my own work. Several of them are appearing in this special TFT issue. Off and on, while rifling through my piles of photographs, I would pick up some of hers and email them to her. I have a message from her dated December 3 2003 which says, “Dear Khalid bhai, Thank you for sending me the pictures taken at Dr. Javed’s House (Dr Javed Manzur, Washington PPP president at whose house she always met journalists and party workers). Your picture collection is phenomenal, covering many a decade and many an era. Bibi.” Another mail dated January 3 2004 says, “Such beautiful pictures you have. Thank you for sending it to me. It brought back many memories of a happier time.” A birthday greeting I sent her in 2002 brought back this response: “I am writing to thank you for the greetings on the occasion of my birthday on June 21, 2002. It was kind of you to remember the occasion. I appreciate the prayers and the good wishes. It is such gestures which give me strength to work for the restoration of a democratic process in our country Pakistan.”

A set of pictures I took of her in 1992, when she was living in a rented house in Islamabad’s F-8 sector, I sent to her in early August 2003. She wrote on August 22, “Thank you for the photos which I received. I was thin and wish I could be so again. It is too much effort. Nice to know about Nadira becoming Lady Naipaul.” (When I took the pictures, Nadira was interviewing her along with Roshan Dhunjibhoy for a German TV channel.) When a scandal involving Pakistan’s UN ambassador striking his woman friend broke in New York four years ago, the PPP issued a formal condemnation. I wrote to Bibi about it, reminding her that Munir Akram was Pakistan’s most brilliant ambassador and one of the few Sindhis in the foreign service. She replied on January 14 2003, “Dear Khalid bhai, Munir is a woman beater and PPP feels strongly about the rights of women. A man who beats a woman is unfit, to my mind, to represent Pakistan.” She wrote to me on May 31 2003, in response to my early birthday message, “It is kind of you to remember my birthday so early on. Thank you for the good wishes for the occasion. I am going to be half a century old and that makes for reflection. I have written a poem called Banazir’s Story inspired by Marvi of Malir, written by Shah Latif. Marvi was in exile from her land and pined for it as I do too. I was moved when I read it and adapted it to the present circumstances.” Daily Times published the entire poem.

When Ijaz Batalvi died, I wrote a column on his passing in these TFT pages. I stated that he was never the same after ZAB’s execution and in later years and in private regretted his role in the case. Rao Rashid wrote a letter to TFT castigating Batalvi’s role. Benazir who saw the column wrote to me, “Dear KH, I saw this article. It made me think the better of Rao for taking exception to the obituary on Batalvi. It also cooled the heart to know that Batalvi was never the same again and in private regretted it. Wish it could have been at a public level. Batalvi would have had so much knowledge about what went on behind the scenes. I firmly believe that someone has to come forward to tell the truth, someone who was part of the fray and knew exactly what went on with the assurance that what is wanted is an end to perversion of justice and not retribution. This is why I keep calling for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission knowing how many were tortured and how justice was shredded in the name of justice itself. Bibi.”

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather than Italy.” In 2002, certain stories were planted in the press by the regime or its friends that Benazir was not a graduate of Radcliffe. I got in touch with Radcliffe, which confirmed that she was not only a graduate but had passed with honours in 1973. Daily Times printed my story on July 13 2002. When Benazir saw it on July 16, she wrote, “Khalid bhai, Got the message upon my return. The regime began the wrong propaganda and I was to nail them on the day of filing the nomination. They seized my papers previously and now thought they could do ‘dada-giri’. However, I was alerted when FL (Farooq Leghari) dismissed the government and argued that I was never a graduate. Thank you for working to defending my reputation in the face of the manifold lies of the regime. Insha Allah, all their lies will be caught. Bibi.”

Yusuf Buch, who worked for several years as ZAB’s special assistant for information, told me that ZAB wanted Benazir to be spared the rough and tumble of politics. Instead, he wanted her to go into foreign service, get married to a nice young man and raise a family. I mentioned this in a column, which Benazir saw. She wrote to me, “I am surprised Yusuf Buch told you that all my father wanted me to do was to join the Foreign Service and get married and have children. Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics. It was I who wanted to join the Foreign Service. In fact, mother contested in 1977 to pave the way for me to enter parliament when I turned twenty-five. When my father was imprisoned, destiny took hold of my life and I followed the path that he had chosen for me. He was proud of my having done that. The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to his expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do. Bibi.”

Benazir was a beautiful person. But she was not free of faults. Once she said to me – it was her first term as prime minister – that she was always judged harshly. I replied that she was judged harshly because much was expected of her. The never-to-go-away charges of corruption that hovered over her head bothered me deeply, as they did all those who admired her and wished her well. Although she kept denying them, the fact is that she was not pure as driven snow. Was it Asif Zardari who led her to that path? Or was it something innate to her? She told me in Casablanca in 1995 – if I have the year right – where she had gone for the Islamic Summit, that when she was ejected out of 70 Clifton, all she had on her were the clothes she was wearing, She told me that had her husband not had “some money,” they would have been on their own.

I recall walking on a Casablanca road, having just filed my report to my Lahore newspaper from the telegraph office, when Benazir’s prime ministerial cavalcade with sirens blaring passed me by. She saw me and had her car and the rest of the motorcade come to a stop. Khalid Shafi, then chief of protocol and ZAB’s ADC when I was his press secretary, jumped out of the car and said, “The prime minister says get Khalid in the car and bring him over.” I spent that entire afternoon with her, talking about old times and about ZAB whom we both adored. Not always was she the best judge of people, however. In her first term, it was people like Happy Minwala who roosted around and pretended as if the sun rose every morning not from the east but from some orifice on their person. When she fell, they abandoned her without wasting a minute. I also could not understand how she could come close to people like Gulzar Chaudhry (a dismissed patwari) who because of her munificence became a millionaire. It always bothered me that she would stay at his residence when in Lahore. That someone like Rehman Malik, a policeman of dubious reputation, became such a close companion of hers, I never quite understood. He christened himself as her chief security adviser and yet he failed to protect her, first in Karachi, where she was lucky to have survived, and then in Rawalpindi, where she wasn’t. He has not even had the decency to offer an apology to the nation and confess that he failed in the task he had assigned to himself or that had been assigned to him. But let all that is now laid to rest with her in the eternal earth of her beloved Sindh. She is one with Marvi with whom she had once compared herself. She is gone and as the Quran says, speak only well of the dead.

I asked three people – Husain Haqqani, fellow correspondent and friend Iftikhar Ali in New York, and VOA broadcaster Murtaza Solangi - to share with me briefly their memories of Benazir. Let me end this long, rambling piece with their words. Husain Haqqani, who came very close to her in her last years and did a lot of work on her behalf in Washington and with the US media, wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was the most amazing, loving and lovable person I have ever known. For those who only saw her as a distant political figure, her human dimension clearly did not matter. For everyone whose life she touched, her humanity transcended the politics. Most powerful figures in Pakistan know how to turn friends into enemies, but Benazir Bhutto had the capacity to turn critics into admirers. When I first met her, I worked for her opponent but she won me over by her charm and persuasion, leading to fifteen years of close relations and my absolute personal loyalty to her. She was told many things about me but she never believed any and on more than one occasion put her appreciation or praise in writing. ‘I know something about vilification, Haqqani Saab’ she would say.

“The day after Farooq Leghari dismissed her second government I showed up to meet Bibi who was under house arrest at the Prime Minister’s House. She turned to someone present there and said, ‘See, I told you Haqqani Saab will remain with us. He is not like (and then she named someone who had joined Leghari’s cabinet even though he was a PPP senator after working as her spokesman earlier). We disagreed vehemently once when I was Information Secretary and she asked me to suggest a way of “keeping our friendship while relocating you from here.” She asked why I did not consider electoral politics in Karachi, which led me to move back to Karachi and engage in direct politics for a while. Our relationship became much closer after my marriage to Farahnaz Ispahani. Bibi sent a gift from Dubai she said she had chosen herself and invited the two of us to visit her. She said she knew this was the beginning of personal happiness for me. When Farah and I moved to Washington in 2002, Bibi called us and arranged a meeting every time she visited the US. I told her I did not have a home big enough to entertain, unlike some of her rich doctor and Pakistani businessmen supporters. She said she would be happy to meet me in my office. Everyone at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was surprised when Benazir Bhutto arrived unannounced at the reception one morning and spent the entire day in my small cubicle. She spoke on the phone to Asif Zardari, who was still in prison and being advised by the then head of ISI’s Internal Wing to break with her and find happiness. I heard her side of the conversation and she filled me in on what was said from the other side. Then she told me, ‘You will now understand why Asif remains so precious to me.’

“For the next five years, I assisted Bibi as she tried to convince a sceptical Washington of the merits of democracy in Pakistan. Hundreds of emails and text messages were exchanged between us. She went over every word that was written on her behalf and wrote significant portions of her own statements and articles. I was always elated by emails that said ‘Excellent’ or ‘I will share these points with the party’ in response to some article of mine. After I became a professor at Boston University she introduced me to her American friends as ‘my favourite professor.’ I probably wasn’t but she said it anyway and it made me feel good. She had the capacity to make people feel good, which is the most important attribute of a politician – something cold-blooded analysts and technocrats cannot understand. Yesterday, I printed out one of her recent emails and framed it alongside her portrait in my office. It read, ‘Ur judgement is invariably correct haqqani sahib. So nice to work with someone with such a good mind. Bibi.’ Even if she wrote it just to make me feel good, I would rather believe that than the news that she is not there any longer to lead the fight against the butchery of nihilists and the arrogance of Pakistan’s authoritarian state machinery.”

Iftikhar Ali, who was APP correspondent at the United Nations in 1971, wrote, “I first saw Benazir in November of 1971 when she came from Boston to join her father in New York who had come to fight Pakistan’s case at the United Nations – a losing battle with Pakistani troops failing to defend the country’s frontiers in what was East Pakistan. Mr. Bhutto stayed at Pierre Hotel on Central Park. She appeared to be Mr. Bhutto’s secretary as she picked up the phone virtually every time I called. Mr. Bhutto had asked me to keep him informed about the developments on the war front at any time of the day or night. He was not the type who would rely on the information providedby the Pakistan Mission. Whenever I called Mr. Bhutto’s hotel room, she would invariably ask me, ‘Anything big?’ And I would tell her. Reuters had given me access to their UN office and I would pick up the news from the ticker and read out to him. When Mr. Bhutto was not in his room, she would ask me to tell her the news and she would listen with great attention.

“But she stayed in New York just over a week before returning to her college. During that time, she came to the UN with her father a couple of times, dressed in pantsuits. As far as I know, she never sat on the official meetings which her father was having with diplomats at the UN. She always waited outside talking to Mission officials. Whenever she spotted me, she would ask me, ‘What’s the news on your net?’ She was remarkably thin, in fact, skinny in those days. She could get along with everyone, and never behaved like the daughter of a Deputy Prime Minister. Subsequently, I met her a couple of times at Ambassador Iqbal Akhund’s residence where she stayed during her holiday breaks at the college. She was into American politics, especially as the race for 1972 presidential election was picking up. My impression was that she was inclined towards Democrats – her preferred candidate seemed to be Edmund Muskie, a liberal, who subsequently couldn’t get the Democratic nomination. The party nominated George McGovern, who lost to Richard Nixon badly. She was up-to-date on American politics and generally dominated dinner conversations. And like most young people in those days, she was against US involvement in the Vietnam War.

“I never saw her until she was released from jail and was allowed to travel out of Pakistan. In New York, she addressed a number of highly emotional meetings of Pakistani supporters of Mr. Bhutto and organised her party - Shabbir and Zulfiqar were her lieutenants. Because of the news clampdown during Zia days, not many people knew about the Bhutto case and she worked hard to apprise not only the Pakistanis but also opinion leaders here. She lived very simply here mostly with family friends, especially Shama Haider, Mrs. Bhutto’s secretary. There were no parties or eating out in fancy restaurants. Shama always drove her around; sometimes she also used PPP workers’ cars. She developed close relations with her party workers, visited their homes and even knew the name of their wives and children. During her Oct. visit, she was in the big league. While she was invited to top class events in think-tanks and other forums, she held two press conferences in the homes of her workers who lived in such obscure places in New York that even taxi drivers have difficulty getting there. There was hardly any place to sit in those homes with dozens of reporters chasing her. I never had her direct phone number but whenever I called Shama and told her that I wished to speak to herabout some matter, she would call back within hours. She was a very decent and charming person. May she rest in peace!”

Murtaza Solangi, who is from Sindh, became close to her in the last three years of her life, exchanging emails with her and speaking to her on the phone with great frequency. He wrote, “She was the leader of the next century who had completely changed her lifestyle to meet the political demands of this age. No Pakistani politician has harnessed the Internet to political advantage as she did. If she thought anybody would help advance her cause, she was in instantaneous contact with that person. She traveled a lot in the last eight years, but no matter what part of the world she was in, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her “sent by blackberry device” emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would find a way to handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful. Like her father, she had an amazing memory. She would always call you by your name. I think she had realised that this could be her last trip to the US. She came here many times in 2007. And every time she came, she was on every network, every radio station, in every newspaper, at every think tank and forum in order to advance her cause. The difference between 2006 and 2007 was that Musharraf was here all over the place in 2006. In 2007, Benazir had conquered every American institution and every American media outlet. She knew that she was running out of time. She had to speak her mind before life quit on her.”

I would like to close this tribute to that gentle lady whose like we will not see again with something my friend Ziauddin wrote for Dawn from London where he now lives: “She listened, defended and argued but never for a moment did I find her losing her patience or her cool. I had gone to (one) meeting after hearing many stories about her arrogance, hot temper and short fuse. But the Benazir I met was a person one could communicate, enter into heated debate and argue with. After this meeting I had several longish debates with her mostly in the company of the late H.K. Burki. On these occasions, I would listen mostly to the monologue of Mr Burki who would dissect her policies and actions like a surgeon without mincing words. She would listen attentively and would never make even the slightest unpleasant response to the most unpleasant and uncharitable criticism of Mr Burki. He was perhaps the first person to tell her on her face that her choice of Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari as the president was wrong and he even went on to predict that Mr Leghari would betray her. In my discussions with her, I found her to have a deep understanding of economic issues. She was very well versed in the subject and could stand her ground in a debate on economic issues even with the experts.”

– This is a regular column by TFT’s Washington correspondent. He can be reached at khasan2@cox.net

 

 

 

Remembering Benazir Bhutto

 

 

Khalid Hasan
recounts, in words and in pictures, an association spanning a lifetime

 

 



Adjust Font Size 

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto in Islamabad, 1992

 

 

 

 

Khalid Hasan with Begum Bhutto, Kriesky Award visit, Austria 1987

 

 

 

 

Being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not
to settle any

 

 

 

 

 

At the Kriesky Award
ceremony, 1987

 

 

 

 

BB at her Barbican flat,
1984 or 1985

 

 

 

 

In Simla, the Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah. ZAB was not interested but felt it would be rude to say no, so he asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall … we later went to a bookshop where I bought lots of books for ZAB

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir and Begum Bhutto at the Kreisky Award ceremony

 

 

 

 

At a party meeting, London 2005

 

 

 

 

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather
than Italy”

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University, Washington 1995

 

 

 

 

“Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics … The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to my father’s expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do”

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir with Bilawal on the cover of Paris Match

 

 

 

 

BB with Khalid Hasan (middle) and Shaheen Sehbai,
Washington, 2004/5

 

 

 

 

BB at party meeting in London 2005 with Akbar Khawaja (L) and Shah Mehmood Qureshi

 

 

 

 

No matter where she was, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her ‘sent by blackberry device’ emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful

 

 

 

 

 

Benazir Bhutto’s last photograph

 

 

 

 

A family picture sent as a
 New Year card

If Benazir Bhutto was to be summed up in one word, that word would be kind. Indomitable though her will was, and extraordinary the courage she was gifted with, behind her sometimes steely exterior lay a deeply humane woman who felt for the poor and the deprived, a quality she had inherited from her father. In many respects, she resembled him, but in several ways she was quite different from him. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto found it hard to forgive those who had once crossed him, or who he thought had crossed him. Even minor incidents, sometimes quite innocent, he found hard to overlook or let go. That was his great failing. When I mentioned this once to Maulana Kausar Niazi, he took a deep breath and replied philosophically that the failings of great men were also often great.

Benazir was forgiving. She had an amazing capacity to take personal abuse – and that was one count on which she was never to want. She would shrug her shoulders and move on. She preferred to concentrate on the essentials of her relationships with people, not the trivia that often gets to define them. She was by nature a generous person. She did not harbour a grudge; but being a Bhutto, she was born with a photographic memory. She remembered but she did not settle scores. During her two stints in office, both cut in the middle, one by the renegade Farooq Leghari, she who had a lot of scores to settle had the grace not to settle any. I went back with her a long way. A week after ZAB took office in the dying days of that catastrophic year of 1971, he sent for me and asked me to work for him. Until then, the press officer to the president – which ZAB then was – was called a public relations officer, which I thought was more appropriate to someone selling soap. I said that much to ZAB and suggested that I should be his press secretary. “Fine,” he said, “but not the kind they have in America.” Benazir was in school in the US by then. She came home for a visit around then and that is when I first spoke to her. From amongst ZAB’s children, my rapport was with the precocious Shahnawaz who had a sharp mind and on whose face I always saw a smile full of mischief. But I’ll leave that story for another day.

As I sit here in faraway Washington trying to write this, my mind goes to and fro over the vast stretch of years that divide then from now. Let me cite one example of Benazir’s ability, her gift I would say, to refuse to take offence where most others would. Some years ago, in a long memoir I wrote of her father, I described an incident involving the teenager Benazir in New York in 1971 when ZAB had come to the United Nations to try to retrieve what he could of his disintegrating country’s honour. This was what I wrote, “My friend Hayat Mehdi, who was deputy permanent representative at Pakistan’s UN Mission, Agha Shahi being the permanent representative, told me that as he went to Bhutto’s room to pick up some papers that he wanted, he nearly fell to the floor with shock when he heard the teenage Benazir, who had come from her school in the East to be with her father, chattering away on the phone to a friend telling her what her father was going to do the next day at the UN and that she should not miss it on television. I am not sure if Mehdi snatched the phone from her hand or put his hand on her mouth as she was giving away the best-kept secret of the day. Next day, Bhutto entered the Security Council looking grim and made the most emotional, though well-prepared, speech of his career. It was in that speech that he said, ‘I have not come here to accept abject surrender. If the Security Council wants me to be a party of the legalisation of abject surrender, then I say that under no circumstances, shall it be so. The United Nations resembles those fashion houses which hide ugly realities by draping ungainly figures in alluring apparel’.”

I never sent Benazir the book that included my Bhutto memoir for fear that some of what I had written might offend her. A few years ago, on one of her visits to Washington, she told me that she had read the book and liked it. “But there is one thing that you got wrong,” she added. When I asked her what it was, she replied that the 1971 incident I had described had never taken place. “I am sorry,” I said, “but I wrote what Hayat Mehdi had told me, word for word.” “Then that is not your fault, but of the person who told you,” she said. Having worked with her father and been in situations where he took umbrage at something written about him, I could never imagine him just dropping the matter and moving on. She was like that. She was not bitter and she had this tremendous capacity to go on, no matter what the odds and how difficult the situation in which she found herself. When she came to America on one of her lecture tours, she always found time to meet her party workers, her friends, whose number always remained large, and even those who merely wanted to meet her because she was Benazir Bhutto. Some of them had no interest in politics or in her as such. I suppose they met her in order to be able to let drop casually at a later social evening that they had spent time with her the other day. Her brow never furrowed when in company that could not possibly have been the source of any pleasure or benefit to her. Like her father, she remembered names, especially of her party workers.

Benazir did not attend the all parties conference organised by Nawaz Sharif in London last summer. While she sent three members of the party, including what I described in a piece as “the fragrant Sherry Rehman,” she herself went off to Paris, though she remained connected to what was going on - laptop to laptop. I wrote about it tongue in cheek but she was not offended. When she came to the US this year after the living arrangement with Musharraf had been successfully brokered by the Americans and the British, she stayed in New York for more than two weeks. Once again, she was not offended by what I had written, which was, “The Musharraf-Bhutto arrangement is viewed as one best equipped to deal with the ‘spectre of terrorism and extremism’ – as the mantra has it. To that end, high-gloss exposure of Ms. Bhutto, the acceptable face of the Musharraf regime, has been facilitated. There is the long arm of the government and then there is the well-financed and well-connected, high-powered public relations and lobbying network to which the United States is home. Selling, be it soap or politicians, local or foreign, has been perfected to an art form in this country. Ms. Bhutto stands sold.” She phoned to say before she left New York that she was finally returning home. When I asked her if journalists would be going with her, she asked me to come along. The next day, I received a mail from Farhatullah Babar asking for passport number and the rest. As it was, I did not go, having had things to do here requiring my presence.

She had a puckish sense of humour and there was a glint in her eye and a childlike expression of mischief on her face when she wanted to tease someone. Her loyal follower, former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who would not leave her side whenever she came to the US – and she let him do that because she obviously must have liked him – was and remains a good friend of mine. Writing about her last visit to Washington, I took a gentle dig at Akbar Khawaja when I wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was in town for three days, but had it been left to former Senator Akbar Khawaja, who followed her like a shadow and never let her out of his sight till such time as he would be told to go home and grab some shut-eye, we would never have known she was here. That being so, if there is a prize for keeping secrets, Akbar Khawaja should get it.” Akbar told me later that in Karachi, where he had gone with her from London, she turned around and found him standing behind her. That was at Bilawal House. She said, “Oh! it is you. I am going to tell Khalid.”

She also told him once, “Khalid is family.” I think one reason she always treated me with great affection and much respect was because I had never asked her for anything when by any measure, I should have been at least accorded what I had voluntarily turned my back on after the July 1977 coup. I was a member of the Pakistan Foreign Service and posted at London – by ZAB personally – and I resigned rather than serve the military government or, in Lillian Hellmann’s words, “cut my conscience to suit today’s fashion.” The only time I broached the subject with her was when I asked her several years later what I should say to those who ask me why I alone of all the Bhutto people had been left out of the camp of victory. She did not answer that but I could see from her expression that she was sensitive to what I had said. Once someone who knew about such things and how they work, told me that she had tried both times she was in office to find me a position to suit my wishes and my experience but both times it was the ISI that had shot it down. One day, I am going to ask the ISI – to quote Gen. Yahya Khan – at what point did I inadvertently “untie its tethered goat.”

In 2001, while I was rifling through some old papers, I came across a photograph of Benazir, sent to her father and mother from school in the United States with a long, loving note scribbled to them on the back. She must have been around seventeen then. I mailed it to her in London, saying it belonged to her. She wrote back to say how time had passed and how wistful one felt thinking of those young and early years. In Simla, Benazir who had accompanied her father because Begum Bhutto was ill at the time in Karachi, was put under my charge, so to speak. She had barely turned 19 and was a big hit with the Indian media. I remember one headline that ran, “Benazir is benazir.” Everybody wanted to interview her but I was under instructions from ZAB himself to say no to all such requests. The only exception made – after due permission from the President – was a meeting with the late Indian journalist Dilip Mukerjee who had published a hurriedly written biography of Bhutto. He told me that more than him, it was his daughter, also Benazir’s age, who had her heart set on meeting her. When I asked ZAB if an exception could be made in this case, he told me to go ahead as long as I remained present at the meeting. Mukerjee was thrilled when I told him that he could come along with his daughter to the Vice Regal Lodge where we were staying. The two came but Benazir paid little attention to the starry-eyed girl, instead going hammer and tongs after Mukerjee, whom she faulted for having got several facts about her father wrong. Mukerjee, one of India’s most respected journalists, and a great Bengali gentleman of the old school, spent the meeting fending off Benazir’s blows. At one point I asked her if we had not had enough of that and if we could perhaps move on to other things. She reluctantly let go and Mukerjee heaved a sigh of relief. She then turned to the girl and spoke to her for quite some time to put her at ease. The Indians wanted ZAB to see Pakeezah, a “Muslim social” as the Bombay film industry classifies such productions. ZAB was not interested but felt that it would be rude to say no and asked me to escort Benazir to the cinema on Simla’s fabled Mall, which I did. We later took a walk and also visited a bookshop where I bought many books for ZAB that he had asked me to do.

Except for the last year and a half or so, I kept a steady to and fro email correspondence with Benazir. She was a great email sender, though the last time we spoke I said to her that for long we had not exchanged emails, whereas I often ran into people who bragged about getting emails from her all the time. “Not emails, but SMS,” she replied. I was not into SMS – one gadget less to fiddle with – but I had decided to SMS her from now on. But that was not to be. I have more pictures of Benazir than anyone I know – all my own work. Several of them are appearing in this special TFT issue. Off and on, while rifling through my piles of photographs, I would pick up some of hers and email them to her. I have a message from her dated December 3 2003 which says, “Dear Khalid bhai, Thank you for sending me the pictures taken at Dr. Javed’s House (Dr Javed Manzur, Washington PPP president at whose house she always met journalists and party workers). Your picture collection is phenomenal, covering many a decade and many an era. Bibi.” Another mail dated January 3 2004 says, “Such beautiful pictures you have. Thank you for sending it to me. It brought back many memories of a happier time.” A birthday greeting I sent her in 2002 brought back this response: “I am writing to thank you for the greetings on the occasion of my birthday on June 21, 2002. It was kind of you to remember the occasion. I appreciate the prayers and the good wishes. It is such gestures which give me strength to work for the restoration of a democratic process in our country Pakistan.”

A set of pictures I took of her in 1992, when she was living in a rented house in Islamabad’s F-8 sector, I sent to her in early August 2003. She wrote on August 22, “Thank you for the photos which I received. I was thin and wish I could be so again. It is too much effort. Nice to know about Nadira becoming Lady Naipaul.” (When I took the pictures, Nadira was interviewing her along with Roshan Dhunjibhoy for a German TV channel.) When a scandal involving Pakistan’s UN ambassador striking his woman friend broke in New York four years ago, the PPP issued a formal condemnation. I wrote to Bibi about it, reminding her that Munir Akram was Pakistan’s most brilliant ambassador and one of the few Sindhis in the foreign service. She replied on January 14 2003, “Dear Khalid bhai, Munir is a woman beater and PPP feels strongly about the rights of women. A man who beats a woman is unfit, to my mind, to represent Pakistan.” She wrote to me on May 31 2003, in response to my early birthday message, “It is kind of you to remember my birthday so early on. Thank you for the good wishes for the occasion. I am going to be half a century old and that makes for reflection. I have written a poem called Banazir’s Story inspired by Marvi of Malir, written by Shah Latif. Marvi was in exile from her land and pined for it as I do too. I was moved when I read it and adapted it to the present circumstances.” Daily Times published the entire poem.

When Ijaz Batalvi died, I wrote a column on his passing in these TFT pages. I stated that he was never the same after ZAB’s execution and in later years and in private regretted his role in the case. Rao Rashid wrote a letter to TFT castigating Batalvi’s role. Benazir who saw the column wrote to me, “Dear KH, I saw this article. It made me think the better of Rao for taking exception to the obituary on Batalvi. It also cooled the heart to know that Batalvi was never the same again and in private regretted it. Wish it could have been at a public level. Batalvi would have had so much knowledge about what went on behind the scenes. I firmly believe that someone has to come forward to tell the truth, someone who was part of the fray and knew exactly what went on with the assurance that what is wanted is an end to perversion of justice and not retribution. This is why I keep calling for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission knowing how many were tortured and how justice was shredded in the name of justice itself. Bibi.”

When I passed on to her a suggestion someone had made asking her to become Pakistan’s Sonia Gandhi, she wrote, “Luckily, I come from a village in Larkana rather than Italy.” In 2002, certain stories were planted in the press by the regime or its friends that Benazir was not a graduate of Radcliffe. I got in touch with Radcliffe, which confirmed that she was not only a graduate but had passed with honours in 1973. Daily Times printed my story on July 13 2002. When Benazir saw it on July 16, she wrote, “Khalid bhai, Got the message upon my return. The regime began the wrong propaganda and I was to nail them on the day of filing the nomination. They seized my papers previously and now thought they could do ‘dada-giri’. However, I was alerted when FL (Farooq Leghari) dismissed the government and argued that I was never a graduate. Thank you for working to defending my reputation in the face of the manifold lies of the regime. Insha Allah, all their lies will be caught. Bibi.”

Yusuf Buch, who worked for several years as ZAB’s special assistant for information, told me that ZAB wanted Benazir to be spared the rough and tumble of politics. Instead, he wanted her to go into foreign service, get married to a nice young man and raise a family. I mentioned this in a column, which Benazir saw. She wrote to me, “I am surprised Yusuf Buch told you that all my father wanted me to do was to join the Foreign Service and get married and have children. Those close to my father all know that he wanted me to go into politics. It was I who wanted to join the Foreign Service. In fact, mother contested in 1977 to pave the way for me to enter parliament when I turned twenty-five. When my father was imprisoned, destiny took hold of my life and I followed the path that he had chosen for me. He was proud of my having done that. The greatest consolation I have is that I lived up to his expectations and faced each crisis with fortitude as (he) would have wanted me to do. Bibi.”

Benazir was a beautiful person. But she was not free of faults. Once she said to me – it was her first term as prime minister – that she was always judged harshly. I replied that she was judged harshly because much was expected of her. The never-to-go-away charges of corruption that hovered over her head bothered me deeply, as they did all those who admired her and wished her well. Although she kept denying them, the fact is that she was not pure as driven snow. Was it Asif Zardari who led her to that path? Or was it something innate to her? She told me in Casablanca in 1995 – if I have the year right – where she had gone for the Islamic Summit, that when she was ejected out of 70 Clifton, all she had on her were the clothes she was wearing, She told me that had her husband not had “some money,” they would have been on their own.

I recall walking on a Casablanca road, having just filed my report to my Lahore newspaper from the telegraph office, when Benazir’s prime ministerial cavalcade with sirens blaring passed me by. She saw me and had her car and the rest of the motorcade come to a stop. Khalid Shafi, then chief of protocol and ZAB’s ADC when I was his press secretary, jumped out of the car and said, “The prime minister says get Khalid in the car and bring him over.” I spent that entire afternoon with her, talking about old times and about ZAB whom we both adored. Not always was she the best judge of people, however. In her first term, it was people like Happy Minwala who roosted around and pretended as if the sun rose every morning not from the east but from some orifice on their person. When she fell, they abandoned her without wasting a minute. I also could not understand how she could come close to people like Gulzar Chaudhry (a dismissed patwari) who because of her munificence became a millionaire. It always bothered me that she would stay at his residence when in Lahore. That someone like Rehman Malik, a policeman of dubious reputation, became such a close companion of hers, I never quite understood. He christened himself as her chief security adviser and yet he failed to protect her, first in Karachi, where she was lucky to have survived, and then in Rawalpindi, where she wasn’t. He has not even had the decency to offer an apology to the nation and confess that he failed in the task he had assigned to himself or that had been assigned to him. But let all that is now laid to rest with her in the eternal earth of her beloved Sindh. She is one with Marvi with whom she had once compared herself. She is gone and as the Quran says, speak only well of the dead.

I asked three people – Husain Haqqani, fellow correspondent and friend Iftikhar Ali in New York, and VOA broadcaster Murtaza Solangi - to share with me briefly their memories of Benazir. Let me end this long, rambling piece with their words. Husain Haqqani, who came very close to her in her last years and did a lot of work on her behalf in Washington and with the US media, wrote, “Benazir Bhutto was the most amazing, loving and lovable person I have ever known. For those who only saw her as a distant political figure, her human dimension clearly did not matter. For everyone whose life she touched, her humanity transcended the politics. Most powerful figures in Pakistan know how to turn friends into enemies, but Benazir Bhutto had the capacity to turn critics into admirers. When I first met her, I worked for her opponent but she won me over by her charm and persuasion, leading to fifteen years of close relations and my absolute personal loyalty to her. She was told many things about me but she never believed any and on more than one occasion put her appreciation or praise in writing. ‘I know something about vilification, Haqqani Saab’ she would say.

“The day after Farooq Leghari dismissed her second government I showed up to meet Bibi who was under house arrest at the Prime Minister’s House. She turned to someone present there and said, ‘See, I told you Haqqani Saab will remain with us. He is not like (and then she named someone who had joined Leghari’s cabinet even though he was a PPP senator after working as her spokesman earlier). We disagreed vehemently once when I was Information Secretary and she asked me to suggest a way of “keeping our friendship while relocating you from here.” She asked why I did not consider electoral politics in Karachi, which led me to move back to Karachi and engage in direct politics for a while. Our relationship became much closer after my marriage to Farahnaz Ispahani. Bibi sent a gift from Dubai she said she had chosen herself and invited the two of us to visit her. She said she knew this was the beginning of personal happiness for me. When Farah and I moved to Washington in 2002, Bibi called us and arranged a meeting every time she visited the US. I told her I did not have a home big enough to entertain, unlike some of her rich doctor and Pakistani businessmen supporters. She said she would be happy to meet me in my office. Everyone at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was surprised when Benazir Bhutto arrived unannounced at the reception one morning and spent the entire day in my small cubicle. She spoke on the phone to Asif Zardari, who was still in prison and being advised by the then head of ISI’s Internal Wing to break with her and find happiness. I heard her side of the conversation and she filled me in on what was said from the other side. Then she told me, ‘You will now understand why Asif remains so precious to me.’

“For the next five years, I assisted Bibi as she tried to convince a sceptical Washington of the merits of democracy in Pakistan. Hundreds of emails and text messages were exchanged between us. She went over every word that was written on her behalf and wrote significant portions of her own statements and articles. I was always elated by emails that said ‘Excellent’ or ‘I will share these points with the party’ in response to some article of mine. After I became a professor at Boston University she introduced me to her American friends as ‘my favourite professor.’ I probably wasn’t but she said it anyway and it made me feel good. She had the capacity to make people feel good, which is the most important attribute of a politician – something cold-blooded analysts and technocrats cannot understand. Yesterday, I printed out one of her recent emails and framed it alongside her portrait in my office. It read, ‘Ur judgement is invariably correct haqqani sahib. So nice to work with someone with such a good mind. Bibi.’ Even if she wrote it just to make me feel good, I would rather believe that than the news that she is not there any longer to lead the fight against the butchery of nihilists and the arrogance of Pakistan’s authoritarian state machinery.”

Iftikhar Ali, who was APP correspondent at the United Nations in 1971, wrote, “I first saw Benazir in November of 1971 when she came from Boston to join her father in New York who had come to fight Pakistan’s case at the United Nations – a losing battle with Pakistani troops failing to defend the country’s frontiers in what was East Pakistan. Mr. Bhutto stayed at Pierre Hotel on Central Park. She appeared to be Mr. Bhutto’s secretary as she picked up the phone virtually every time I called. Mr. Bhutto had asked me to keep him informed about the developments on the war front at any time of the day or night. He was not the type who would rely on the information providedby the Pakistan Mission. Whenever I called Mr. Bhutto’s hotel room, she would invariably ask me, ‘Anything big?’ And I would tell her. Reuters had given me access to their UN office and I would pick up the news from the ticker and read out to him. When Mr. Bhutto was not in his room, she would ask me to tell her the news and she would listen with great attention.

“But she stayed in New York just over a week before returning to her college. During that time, she came to the UN with her father a couple of times, dressed in pantsuits. As far as I know, she never sat on the official meetings which her father was having with diplomats at the UN. She always waited outside talking to Mission officials. Whenever she spotted me, she would ask me, ‘What’s the news on your net?’ She was remarkably thin, in fact, skinny in those days. She could get along with everyone, and never behaved like the daughter of a Deputy Prime Minister. Subsequently, I met her a couple of times at Ambassador Iqbal Akhund’s residence where she stayed during her holiday breaks at the college. She was into American politics, especially as the race for 1972 presidential election was picking up. My impression was that she was inclined towards Democrats – her preferred candidate seemed to be Edmund Muskie, a liberal, who subsequently couldn’t get the Democratic nomination. The party nominated George McGovern, who lost to Richard Nixon badly. She was up-to-date on American politics and generally dominated dinner conversations. And like most young people in those days, she was against US involvement in the Vietnam War.

“I never saw her until she was released from jail and was allowed to travel out of Pakistan. In New York, she addressed a number of highly emotional meetings of Pakistani supporters of Mr. Bhutto and organised her party - Shabbir and Zulfiqar were her lieutenants. Because of the news clampdown during Zia days, not many people knew about the Bhutto case and she worked hard to apprise not only the Pakistanis but also opinion leaders here. She lived very simply here mostly with family friends, especially Shama Haider, Mrs. Bhutto’s secretary. There were no parties or eating out in fancy restaurants. Shama always drove her around; sometimes she also used PPP workers’ cars. She developed close relations with her party workers, visited their homes and even knew the name of their wives and children. During her Oct. visit, she was in the big league. While she was invited to top class events in think-tanks and other forums, she held two press conferences in the homes of her workers who lived in such obscure places in New York that even taxi drivers have difficulty getting there. There was hardly any place to sit in those homes with dozens of reporters chasing her. I never had her direct phone number but whenever I called Shama and told her that I wished to speak to herabout some matter, she would call back within hours. She was a very decent and charming person. May she rest in peace!”

Murtaza Solangi, who is from Sindh, became close to her in the last three years of her life, exchanging emails with her and speaking to her on the phone with great frequency. He wrote, “She was the leader of the next century who had completely changed her lifestyle to meet the political demands of this age. No Pakistani politician has harnessed the Internet to political advantage as she did. If she thought anybody would help advance her cause, she was in instantaneous contact with that person. She traveled a lot in the last eight years, but no matter what part of the world she was in, she was accessible to those she wanted to stay in touch with. I have seen her “sent by blackberry device” emails replied within two minutes of being received. No matter how critical a question asked of her, she would find a way to handle it with a cool answer. No matter what she thought of you, she was always respectful. Like her father, she had an amazing memory. She would always call you by your name. I think she had realised that this could be her last trip to the US. She came here many times in 2007. And every time she came, she was on every network, every radio station, in every newspaper, at every think tank and forum in order to advance her cause. The difference between 2006 and 2007 was that Musharraf was here all over the place in 2006. In 2007, Benazir had conquered every American institution and every American media outlet. She knew that she was running out of time. She had to speak her mind before life quit on her.”

I would like to close this tribute to that gentle lady whose like we will not see again with something my friend Ziauddin wrote for Dawn from London where he now lives: “She listened, defended and argued but never for a moment did I find her losing her patience or her cool. I had gone to (one) meeting after hearing many stories about her arrogance, hot temper and short fuse. But the Benazir I met was a person one could communicate, enter into heated debate and argue with. After this meeting I had several longish debates with her mostly in the company of the late H.K. Burki. On these occasions, I would listen mostly to the monologue of Mr Burki who would dissect her policies and actions like a surgeon without mincing words. She would listen attentively and would never make even the slightest unpleasant response to the most unpleasant and uncharitable criticism of Mr Burki. He was perhaps the first person to tell her on her face that her choice of Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari as the president was wrong and he even went on to predict that Mr Leghari would betray her. In my discussions with her, I found her to have a deep understanding of economic issues. She was very well versed in the subject and could stand her ground in a debate on economic issues even with the experts.”

– This is a regular column by TFT’s Washington correspondent. He can be reached at khasan2@cox.net

 

 

 

Benazir’s passing is being mourned by many in this country. She made friends easily and she had the gift of keeping them. She spent her teenage years as a student in America and she retained the links dating back to those halcyon days. There is much that has been said and written about her since her death and much will be said and written about her in the years to come. She has been praised for her courage, her intelligence, her sophistication, her determination and her beauty. There have also been those who have chosen the occasion of her death to attack her.

Some of the attacks have come from those whom she considered not acquaintances but friends of many years. She is no longer around to answer her detractors and she would have perhaps chosen to say nothing had she been alive, as she tended to do when attacked. But it does make you wonder.

For some it is difficult to distinguish between the political and the human. Politics always has a human dimension. People are not naïve. They know the failings, the foibles and the weaknesses of their leaders, but they overlook them because they can take a larger view of what their leaders stand for. When the American people wept at the assassination of John F Kennedy, it was not they were unaware of his personal failings, including his profligacy. And yet at that moment of supreme sorrow and unspeakable loss, they chose to leave all that aside. Perhaps history does not really care about, much less record, the compromises great public figures make or the errors of judgement they commit. What lives on is what they have accomplished and what they have left behind.

Take Benazir’s father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. To this day, there are those who want him to be remembered for the fact that he drank. That was the general platform they chose to attack him from during the 1977 elections and the mysteriously-backed PNA protests. Those on the left did not wish to forgive Bhutto his deviation from what they viewed as the true path of socialism. Those on the right considered him the very epitome of the devil. But how many people in Pakistan’s villages really care about that part of ZAB’s life? Nearly thirty years after his death, he remains a living symbol of the rights of the poor and the dignity of the deprived and exploited. In the minds of the people of Pakistan, he remains a martyr unjustly hanged by a brutal military dictator.

Benazir has been dead less than a week and she is already under attack. My friend Shuja Nawaz said to me, “I do not like the sudden spate of churlish pieces that have begun appearing about her. None of us is fault-free. She lived larger than life for Pakistan and she died for Pakistan.” I am sad to see some who were known to be close friends of her and whose counsel she sought at various stages of her life, declaring open season on her. I suppose never having had to deal with the harsh realities of politics, they can afford to sit in judgement on those who have.

Some of the things written about her are downright libellous. I cannot help recalling that when Musharraf overthrew the Nawaz Sharif government, there were quite a few in the writing tribe who thought the General to be the best thing to have happened to Pakistan. One of them suggested in a newspaper article that this time the army should clean up the mess created by politicians by working with civil society, completely bypassing politicians.

A New York tabloid carried a particularly scurrilous piece about Benazir in which she was described as “a splendid con, persuading otherwise cynical Western politicians and ‘hard-headed journalists that she was not only a brave woman crusading in the Islamic wilderness, but also a thoroughbred democrat”.

The writer whose name I had not heard before and do not wish to hear in the future, went on to call Benazir a “frivolously wealthy feudal landlord amid bleak poverty”. She was further castigated as “the scion of a thieving political dynasty,” more concerned with power than with the well-being of the average Pakistani. Her programme, he went on to declaim “remained one of old-school patronage, not increased productivity or social decency”.

Not long ago, this writer called upon the US government to change the map of the Muslim world, for “stability” by dividing Iraq, creating an independent Kurdistan, breaking up Pakistan, creating an independent Balochistan and handing over the NWFP to Afghanistan. Clearly his vision of Pakistan does not coincide with Benazir Bhutto’s. I would like to add that many Pakistanis have been circulating this rubbish on the Internet.

New Delhi-based William Darlymple’s diatribe called Bhutto’s Deadly Legacy, carried both in London and New York, is not much different from John F Burns’ derisory obituary in the New York Times. Can it be that a former colonial looks upon popular leaders from the old lands of the Raj differently from the way we see them? After all, millions of Pakistanis continue to adore Benazir, so there must be a reason for it. Why should Western readers be denied the ability to see Benazir through Pakistani eyes?

Darlymple concedes that he met the lady only once. That one meeting he has used with variations to hawk in various articles. Like the legacy of all historic figures, Benazir’s legacy will also be a mixed one, but it should be presented in the context of Pakistan’s realities, not without them. Neither the Burns’ obituary nor Darlymple’s piece explained the real battle fought by Benazir on behalf of Pakistan’s civil society against the country’s domineering military and its intrusive intelligence services. In his 1994 piece on Benazir, Darlymple made fun of her Urdu accent and found it strange that she should have liked a certain make of ice cream, which to him was proof enough that she was a feudal princess?

Then there are Western commentators with connections to the innards of their governments, including intelligence services. They are a class apart. Take Arnaud de Borchgrave for one, who consistently berates Pakistan, predicting its disintegration every other week. He met Benazir Bhutto in Washington many times and he has been spicing his articles with quotes from unnamed sources claiming that Osama bin Laden lives in Hayatabad, Peshawar. He has never explained why he has so far failed to collect the $50 million reward riding on Osama’s head.

After a succession of nasty pieces about Musharraf, the military and the ISI, this week he chose to attack Asif Zardari in a column called “Absurdistan” (which is what he thinks of Pakistan). Some idea of Count de Borchgrave’s political judgement can be had from his extolling of Farooq Leghari as “Mr Clean” and the great white hope for Pakistan’s future. The Count’s bottom line remains unchanged. Just as Pakistan was doomed under Musharraf, it will remain doomed because its largest political party has chosen Zardari as leader.

I should add that one of the Count’s oft-acknowledged sources in Pakistan is Gen Hamid Gul. Need more be said? Perhaps we should listen to him and anoint Sardar Muhammad Farooq Khan Leghari as our present and future president and confer the title of Duke of Chotti on him as well.

Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent

Comments