This family history of the Bhuttos is written in impeccably beautiful prose which would have been a joy to read if it had not been a gruesome tale of intrigue, treachery, treason, violence and cold-blooded murders. It is one long nightmare which will disturb the reader’s sleep for a long time and, like the characters of the story, make him an insomniac. It is the political lives of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his progeny of two daughters and two sons. The author, Fatima Bhutto, is his granddaughter from his elder son, Mir Murtaza Bhutto.
The Bhuttos, Sindh’s biggest and most prosperous landowners, were based in their ancestral home in Garhi Khuda Baksh in district Larkana. They were Vaderos—big people. They lived in palatial houses with hordes of servants and armed guards. They had second homes in Karachi’s posh residential area Clifton overlooking the Arabian Sea. They sent their children to the most renowned schools and colleges in America and England: Radcliffe, Harvard and Oxford. They thought nothing of flying across continents to join the family to celebrate a birthday. And all of them were deeply involved in the politics of Pakistan.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was the son of Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, Dewan of Junagadh. Zulfikar went to school and college in Bombay. In 1947, when the Nawab of Junagadh, as advised by his Dewan, tried to opt for Pakistan but failed, the family went back to Sindh. Zulfikar developed a distrust of all Indians, especially Hindus. He proceeded to Harvard for further studies, read Das Kapital and turned Marxist. His Marxism grew deeper while he was in Oxford. He was determined to turn Pakistan from a feudal to a socialist state.
Back home, he fought an election and won. He was inducted into the state cabinet and became the youngest minister in General Ayub Khan’s government. The dictator-general had made Pakistan subservient to the American policy of drawing a cordon sanitaire round Communist China and the Soviet Union. As foreign minister, Bhutto turned that around under the very nose of his boss. He opened negotiations with China. The Chinese responded by giving more generous aid than the Americans and became Pakistan’s principal ally in its confrontations with India. Bhutto then proceeded to fix ceilings on landholdings, nationalised banks and many vital industries. The only thing he did not touch was the Muslim clergy as he wanted them to support him. He pandered to their archaic laws, even banning consumption of liquor and declaring Ahmedias to be non-Muslims.
Fatima Bhutto has a worshipful attitude towards her grandfather and father Mir Murtaza Bhutto. Neither of them could possibly do anything wrong. There was another side to her grandfather she totally ignores. I had the opportunity of meeting him a few times and read what his critics said about him. I first met him in Manzur Qadir’s house in Lahore, which had been my home till Partition. Manzur was Ayub Khan’s foreign minister. He was receiving visitors; I happened to be alone in his study when a handsome, dapperly-dressed young man walked in. I assumed he was a college student. Manzur came in and said: “I see you have introduced yourselves.” When I said we had not, Manzur told me that Zulfikar was the youngest minister in the cabinet. I left the room for them to talk in private. It was Bhutto who betrayed Manzur’s friendship by denouncing him as a free thinker and not a good Muslim. Manzur was dropped from the cabinet. He resumed legal practice and retired as chief justice of the Punjab High Court. A more honest and upright man I have yet to meet.
Bhutto invited me to Pakistan. Our first meeting was in Karachi. We had drinks on his lawn. Two days later, I spent another evening with him in Islamabad and had a second round of drinks. He gave me a message to convey to Indira Gandhi to the effect that he was anxious to be on friendly terms with India. The next morning I was invited to watch the proceedings of the Parliament. Questions were raised about the slow pace of development. Bhutto walked across to the opposition carrying a bottle of fluid and presented it with a flourish to the leader of the opposition. It was petrol—Pakistan had struck oil. It was a flamboyant display of confidence.
I returned to Delhi and sought an appointment with Mrs Gandhi. I conveyed Bhutto’s message of goodwill to her. She gave her answer in one sentence: “He is a damned liar.”
At one time Bhutto wanted to create an active youth wing of his Pakistan People’s Party. The name of a young Pakistani journalist based in London was mentioned. Bhutto countered it by saying: “I don’t think he likes me very much. He knows I f...d his mother.”
At another time he asked his cabinet ministers to dine with him. They arrived punctually and were served fruit juice while Bhutto sahib was in another room enjoying his Scotch with his cronies. The cabinet waited for him for two hours. The oldest among them could take it no more and went home. When Bhutto finally joined them and heard that the oldest fellow had gone home, he was furious. He sent his men to the fellow’s home and had him roughed up. The next day the poor fellow fled Pakistan.
All this has been written about and is common knowledge. It finds no mention in Fatima Bhutto’s hagiography.
Fatima Bhutto writes of the nation-wide protest against the execution of her grandfather. I happened to be in Islamabad for an interview with Gen Zia-ul-Haq. I was staying in a posh hotel largely occupied by foreign journalists. They had bribed the prison staff and got news of the steps being taken to execute Bhutto the very next day. My appointment with the president was a ruse to mislead the foreign media: he would not grant an interview to an Indian after hanging Bhutto, would he? They were not fooled. Next morning I looked out of my window and saw the hotel surrounded by tanks and armoured cars. I rang up our ambassador Shankar Bajpai and told him. “I’ll get back to you in a few minutes,” he said. He rang back and said, “They have done the deed.” I went down to the restaurant to have breakfast. The waiters clustered round me and asked in Punjabi, “Sardar saheb, eh khabar sach hai? (Is this news correct?)” I replied: “Ji, sach hai.” The response was: “Bahut zulm hoya (It is grave injustice).”
A little later I went to Rawalpindi, which is adjacent to Islamabad, to see how the common people were reacting. All shops were closed and groups of people huddled here and there, talking in whispers. In the afternoon a procession led by burqa-clad women went through the Meena Bazar. The police let them march on. There were prayers performed for the missing dead.
A week later, I was back in Islamabad to interview Gen Zia. His house had only a few sentries at the gate. He received me with great courtesy and introduced me to his portly begum and mentally retarded daughter. My first question was, “General sahib, was it necessary to hang Bhutto? Could you not have pardoned him?” He replied: “He was convicted of murder, for which the punishment is death. Forgiveness is not in man’s hands, it can only be given by Allah.”
I share Fatima Bhutto’s low opinion of her aunt Benazir and her husband, now President, Asif Zardari. Benazir had two terms of office as head of state without introducing any legislation to improve the living conditions of common people. Instead, she acquired vast amounts of real estate in England, France, the US and Switzerland. This was brought out in detail by the New York Times. Her husband went further and got a suspended jail term in Switzerland for indulging in shady deals. He is still known as ‘Mister Ten Per Cent’ for taking brokerage for deals with the government. He is also uncouth and foul-mouthed.
I did not have the privilege of knowing Fatima Bhutto’s father Mir Murtaza, for whom she has unbounded admiration. Apparently he was as good a man as he was handsome. He was shot dead along with his five bodyguards near the entrance gate of their home in Clifton.
Fatima Bhutto’s life has been a long series of tragedies. She refuses to keep quiet about them. In the last pages of her book, she bluntly accuses Zardari of having committed four murders and “getting” a subservient judiciary of absolving him of all crimes. She is beautiful, highly gifted and gutsy. And she continues to live in Karachi. I pray for her long life.
Khushwant Singh’s review of Fatima Bhutto’s book made enjoyable reading (Books, Apr 26), but he missed the fact that apart from the omission of the pernicious doings of grandfather Bhutto in the book, even father (Murtaza) Bhutto was not all milk and honey. He may have been a wonderful dad, but he, too, was erratic in behaviour.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT