Pakistan and the World
An Interview with Benazir Bhutto
SJIR: If you were in power in today’s Pakistan, would you do anything differently with respect to Pakistani foreign policy?
Bhutto: Well, the general parameters I think I would agree on, which would be to join the international coalition against terror. Terror is a threat to the United States but it is also a very real threat for us in Pakistan. The rise of the extremist groups in Pakistan has left unguarded militias, and has led to the proliferation of weapons and to the killing of many Pakistanis. So I think its important for us to have joined that battle. As for the details, obviously Id bring my own experience as the regime brings its own experience. While I may have handled things differently, as prime minister I wouldn’t like them breathing down my neck, so Id like to avoid breathing down their necks.
SJIR: There is clear evidence that the 1999 Kargil crisis involved the implicit cooperation of the Pakistani military with known terrorist organizations, and there is speculation that that cooperation continues today. How will the relationship between Pakistan and radical Kashmiri elements change with Musharraf’s highly public stance on cooperating with Americas global antiterrorism campaign?Bhutto: You see, I propose that there should be a world summit on terrorism to define what is terrorism. Of course, with what happened in New York and Washington, everyone has agreed that that is terrorism. But terrorism is one thing, and national aspirations of oppressed people is another. We need to make that distinction. Kashmir is a dispute which is recognized by the United Nations in Security Council resolution after another. So as far as Kashmir is concerned, we must recognize it within its context. Now in Kashmir, two developments are taking place: one is the battle of the indigenous Kashmiri people, and that battle was largely against military targets, not civilians. On the other hand, there is a new phenomenon that has come about, which is of non-Kashmiris, or what is called the Al-Qaeda group, which is going and fighting wars in different countries, which has a global reach, which has a lack of a direct nexus with the national aspirations of a particular region and their people.æ As Prime Minister of Pakistan I was offered their good services to help with the Kashmir movement, and I said that must never be allowed because it would damage the Kashmiri movement. I said it then and I say it now because even though there was no such thing as global terrorism then, I could see that getting unrelated people involved in a regional dispute would have serious consequences.
SJIR: Do you think that if there is an international conference on terrorism that it might face the same fate as the conference on racism in Durban? There are so many different definitions of what terrorism is, and there are so many people who make different claims about terrorism, that it might just end up producing nothing.Bhutto: Well, it might end up producing nothing or it could produce something. The important aspect is for people to get together to hear another point of view rather than fail to meet, or even fail to hear a debate. Conclusion comes after many debates and many discussions. So I think a first step needs to be taken in establishing that world summit to define what terrorism is. Second, I was very pleased to note that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have both talked about the Palestinians. And by sending Colin Powell to the region, statements on Kashmir have also been made by the Bush administration which are very important ones. So I hope that after the immediate goals of breaking up the Al-Qaeda network and ensuring that Pakistan is not used to harbor terrorists, then attention can be given to the underlying causes of tension. The Muslim community is really at a crossroads, and most of the regional conflicts that we face today happen to be in the Muslim world rather than elsewhere. These do need addressing, and America did the right thing and so did Europe in going in to stop the civil war in Bosnia and Kosovo. Some Muslims say that the West has done nothing, but I think that the West, when its informed about something, can act. But we also need to lobby hard and work hard to get the message across as to what our grievances are and where we need attention.
SJIR: General Musharraf has promoted economic reforms and has made substantial bilateral overtures with India, and has made a promise to hold elections next October. How appropriate is the term military government for the current situation?Bhutto: Well, it is a military government. It came into being by suspending the constitution, ending the assemblies, banning political activities, and establishing a judiciary that functions outside of the universal norms of justice and human rights. So he is a military dictator. The facts that have been narrated are also disputed, with regard to how far he has turned the economy around and how far he has been able to achieve success with India. I think the Agra summit ended without a joint statement. So we do think that he is a military dictator, but if his heart is in the right place, he needs to ensure that those elections that he has promised are fair. We have concerns.æ The recent local elections gave us evidenceæ about 30 percent of the seats were rigged, and those happened to be seats that my party is strong in. So we would have gotten a much bigger majority if it hadn’t been for that, and we need to ensure that that doesn’t happen in the next elections. If General Musharraf wants fair elections I’m sure he’d like us to certify that they are fair. So wed like him to have negotiations with us on how there can be a smooth transition to democracy and on what constitutes fair elections.
SJIR: Is there any dialogue right now between his administration and your party?Bhutto: Yes, he is in contact with the vice-chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party, and some of his generals are in contact. They have been in contact for two years. Of course there’s a big gulf still between General Musharraf and ourselves, but now that some hardline generals have been removed, we hope that we can expect some more positive results.
SJIR: What do you think Musharraf’s prospects are for retaining control of the military given that he fired four of his top military officials? And what is his potential to even retain the support of the Pakistani population for what he is doing?Bhutto: This is a difficult question to answer because there are problems, and we are unsure as to how it will turn out. General Musharraf is the chief of army staff. Our army has traditionally been very disciplined, and therefore there is no precedent of a coup succeeding to date against an army chief. They have succeeded against civilians, but not against an army chief. General Musharraf, by sidelining certain generals has secured his position within the army. Now the question that bothers many of us is, if the agitation picks up and the army is called upon to confront the agitators, then the army may decline. It may do so, or it may decline. So that’s what’s bothering us. Wed like to see the army stable and united, but its discipline will be strained if it is called upon to take on the agitators.
SJIR: As the agitation potentially grows, do you think Islamic radicals within the country will pose a threat to the administration, or is there a way Musharraf can control that?Bhutto: Well, so far the agitation has remained confined to those areas where there are strong Afghan populations. You know that many of the refugees from the Taliban are living in Peshawar and Quetar, and there is a very large Afghan refugee presence also in the city of Karachi. This is primarily where the demonstrations have been. So I think as long as the demonstrations remain confined there is less danger. But there is a clear tension within Pakistan and no one knows how this will play out. There is tension because one wonders about civilian casualties and the capacity of the people of Pakistan to absorb such civilian casualties. So we just have to watch the situation and see how it emerges. Its very difficult to say. However, the political parties have given our support unconditionally to General Musharraf, and what we have said is that there should be a broad-based national unity government to demonstrate a public mobilization to counter the militants.
SJIR: To your knowledge, what is the state of the safety of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal at this point? And what are the chances of it being used in the wrong way by someone in the military if command and control is lost?Bhutto: When I was Prime Minister of Pakistan, our policy was to avoid putting together a device until it was necessary. We had the components, but we avoided putting it together. Other prime ministers followed in our footsteps. There were many other who came, and they all followed in our footsteps. But after the second overthrow, a situation arose when India detonated five nuclear devices and Pakistan followed suit with six. After that I am unaware of what happenedæ whether they built more bombs or whether they decided to make other components. I am unaware of the command and control structures, so I am unable to say whether they are safe or aren’t safe. However, I would assume that the machinery of government would have evolved to a stage where they would have the maximum security. So while the possibility of the fundamentalists taking control of the nuclear weapons is there, the probability is not. However, Pakistan needs to engage with the international community on this issue to see what can be done to give confidence while maintaining Pakistan’s security and addressing the concerns of the international community.
SJIR: What role do you think Pakistan should play in the reconstruction of Afghanistan?Bhutto: For the first phase, which is the formation of a broad-based government, I think Pakistan needs to stop having favorites and leave it to the Afghan people to choose who they want. I think Pakistan needs to decide that a stable Afghanistan is more important than a country driven by civil war which is run by a favorite.
Secondly, I think that Islamabad needs to work with the international community for the return of the 1.5 million refugees who are on our soil. These people will not go back while there is fighting, while there are landmines and while their entire irrigation system is decimated. So I think really we need a kind of Marshall Plan. And I am also glad to hear President Bush talk about compassion. He talks about politics but he also talks about compassion. He talks about the bombardment, which is necessary, but he also drops food. I think that dual message is important. I used to fight against the Vietnam War, and I feel very uneasy about the bombardment, but I also wonder what else can be done other than a military solution if the Taliban refuses to turn over one individual and prefers that the whole country be bombed.
SJIR: Also, you spoke in your speech about support for insurgent groups during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Do you think there may be a parallel situation to that with the Northern Alliance today, with the possibility of perpetuating more terror?Bhutto: Well, all of them have pretty rough edges, but then all of them have led pretty rough lives. These are people who are 18 and 19. They’ve lived with war and bloodshed. Maybe your and my idea about the situation is a little more than what we see. We need to work with what is there in Afghanistanæ we need to work with people who are relatively more moderate than the Taliban. I would say that we need to see who will keep Afghanistan for the Afghan people without making it a recruiting and training center.
SJIR: If you and your party come to power in the next Pakistani election, what is the first thing you would do to help economic reform in Pakistan?Bhutto: The first thing the economy needs is confidence. It is confidence that makes people invest in businesses. So I would really concentrate on that. But along with confidence, I would work with the world community in seeking some type of debt retirement for Pakistan. Pakistan is playing an important role in the coming conflict, and I think our people need to see that if Pakistan stands up for freedom, that Pakistan’s contribution is appreciated. Most importantly, we, the Pakistanis, have to stand on our own feet, and the best way we can do that is by moving towards decentralization, devolution, and deregulation. Id like to be able to contribute further to that process.