|
Benazir
Bhutto was not universally loved. Seen as a democratic champion
of the downtrodden to some, she was a sly and corrupt opportunist
to others. But everyone agrees on one thing: she had ambition and
courage in spades.
In
Reconciliation: Islam, Democracy and the West, both of these personal
characteristics shine through - right from the very beginning. Her
opening chapter, describing her eventful return to Pakistan on October
18, 2007, oozes both ambition and courage in the story itself and
how she presents it. Retelling her powerful second homecoming allows
her to not only talk about her enduring popularity and bravery,
it also provides Bhutto the opportunity to show the world that at
the heart of Pakistan there is the desire and demand for democracy.
Further, the story of a celebration-turned-battlefield in Pakistan,
a country at the centre of global terror, allows Bhutto to segue
into her thesis: despite appearances, Islam is not antithetical
to democracy and pluralism, and as such the clash of civilisations
can be avoided through the expansion of democracy in the Muslim
world. In fact, the biggest clash, she claims, is taking place within
Islam between moderates and fanatics. When that tension is resolved,
the others will be too.
It
is easy to see that the scope of her project is also both ambitious
and courageous. Debunking myths about Islam, analysing 100 years
of western political domination over Islamic nations and their effect
on democracy, refuting the clash of civilisations theory and then
offering a way out of the current geo-political morass is no easy
task. Bhutto struggles in her attempt. Her book is often too academic,
slow, frustrating, repetitive, disjointed and vindictive.
But
she tries. And for that the world should be thankful. Because while
Reconciliation is not gripping from cover to cover, its message
is necessary. Bhutto has produced a thoughtful book for everyone,
whether in the East or West, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, who wants
to see an end to terrorism. She believes it can be accomplished
and she points to a way out that doesn't involve war. Hers is a
constructive manifesto of hope.
Bhutto
builds her argument in a very slow, methodical manner. Her book
has strong scholarly tones and the research assembled is impressive.
It is here where her friend and collaborator, Mark Siegel, proved
to be invaluable. "She wanted me to compile all the assertions
of extremist clerics and terrorists on democracy, pluralism, tolerance,"
Siegel told the UK's The Times. "Then she wanted me to confer
with Islamic scholars and compile the Quranic references to the
same subjects and line them out in an array, almost a spreadsheet,
against the extremists." Siegel's contribution is evident when
Bhutto asserts the true nature of Islam: a peaceful, tolerant, equitable
religion that denounces killing and suicide and favours knowledge
and reason. Dozens of quotes from Islamic scholars and passages
from the Quran are amassed here, building on one another to form
the foundation of Bhutto's argument: the values of democracy and
peace are inherent in Islam, and extremists who oppress and kill
in the name of religion have hijacked and politicised Islam. Since
9/11, discussions on Islam and jihad have been ubiquitous. But in
the din of constant suicide bombings and sectarian violence, the
peaceful image of Islam has made little headway. So while Bhutto's
message is not new, it works here because it desperately needs repeating.
With
the first building block of her thesis in place, Bhutto examines
the inability of democracy to take hold in the Muslim world despite
Islam's innate democratic principles. She hops between Muslim countries,
dissecting their modern political histories to show that while democratic
governance may be lacking, it is only because democratic institutions
have not been allowed to develop and become part of the essential
fabric of society. The democratic ideals of citizens and the religion
that guides them have been "crushed by colonial power or its
proxy" over and over again, writes Bhutto. The point is clear
and believable. But the chapter is a doozy. Seventy-five pages of
truncated, case-by-case national histories do not make a page-turner.
She could have made her point with five or six strong examples.
Twenty-three is unnecessary.
At
this point, Pakistan takes centre stage. And like Newsweek before
her, Bhutto calls Pakistan the most dangerous place in the world.
A detailed version of Pakistan's history is served up to show the
bumpy 60-year ride the country has had travelling between democracy
and dictatorship. But her narrative is frustrating. Continuing a
theme that rears its ugly head throughout the tome, Bhutto lets
anger, posturing and self-promotion get in the way of an honest
account of the truth. Zia-ul-Haq, Nawaz Sharif and President Pervez
Musharraf form an evil troika in her version of history. While Bhutto's
constant digs (that smack of festering hatred) at General Zia are
understandable, they are disappointing. They don't add credibility
to her arguments, and like her repeated exaggerations that three
million people showed up to greet her in Karachi last year (most
estimates were under 500,000) and her attempt to diminish the economic
growth of the past six years under President Musharraf, they only
detract. Unsurprisingly, in her narrative, her father, Zulfikar
Ali Bhutto, and she make up the forces of good. Her father's record
in office is painted as flawless and so is hers. Even her grandfather,
Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, is promoted to near-divine status and given
a place of importance next to Mohammad Ali Jinnah in the independence
of Pakistan. Extremism was controlled under her watch, claims Bhutto,
even though she was prime minister from 1993 to 1996 when the Taliban
rose to power. Even last year's power-sharing deal with Musharraf,
which resulted in the National Reconciliation Ordinance, is dismissed
by Bhutto as nothing underhanded, nothing undemocratic. Her point
to her Pakistan chapter? This is how Pakistan became so messed up,
but it is not the Bhutto family's fault.
Still,
these failures only detract from her book, they do not negate the
positive power within it. For when Bhutto gets past laying the foundation
for her treatise and starts unravelling the theory that a clash
of civilisations is inevitable, it is not just intellectually sound,
but enthralling and inspiring. The sad part is that it has taken
232 pages to get here. By bringing together the ideas of many international
thinkers, she shows that while civilisational ties remain between
countries, self-interest remains the primary force that drives nations.
In fact, the clash theory is a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy.
"The more we believe it and make it a basis for action, the
more likely it is to come true."
This
is an important conclusion, for it provides clarity and gives hope.
It says that the problems behind Islamic extremism are big, but
they need not be catastrophic. They are, like most conflicts around
the world, caused by internal, factional tensions. And these can
be solved.
She refers to Islamic scholars who unanimously agree that much work
needs to be done by Muslims themselves, including looking beyond
tradition and reviving ijtihad (independent judgment or reason)
and tolerance in a constantly evolving world. Bhutto goes on to
discuss how to develop democracy in the Muslim world. Her suggestions
are logical (promote equality, strengthen civil society groups)
but not so easy (build a middle class and offer good education for
all). But it is her suggestion of creating a Muslim Investment Fund
with contributions from oil-producing Muslim countries and a Marshall
Plan-type programme, funded by key powerhouse nations, to help economically
reconstruct and develop many poor Muslim nations that is both creative
and controversial - and somewhat naïve: her vision of a democratic,
tolerant and pluralistic Islam is not necessarily shared by oil-rich
regimes like Saudi Arabia. And with finite and dwindling oil reserves,
giving more money away is probably not high on their agenda. Nonetheless,
Bhutto allocates 40-solid pages to solutions. This is not a book
of empty rhetoric.
It is unclear how much of Reconciliation Benazir Bhutto actually
wrote herself. But in the end, it doesn't really matter. In fact,
it wouldn't even matter if the message were not entirely hers -
because she believed in it. And at this point in Pakistan's and
the world's history, she is the perfect spokeswoman for it.
But
who will truly pick up her mantle to see this message through? Who
has her ambition and courage to do that? 
|