The Dream that was Benazir Bhutto
“There was a dream that was Rome. You could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish, it was so fragile.”
- Marcus Aurelius
There was also a dream that was Benazir Bhutto. Picture - a young, seemingly articulate attractive woman defying a military, which had sent her father to the gallows. Educated at Harvard and Oxford, she spent years in house arrest and exile before becoming the youngest person, and the first woman, to head the government of a Muslim-majority state. She was initially swarmed by a deprived Pakistani population and was (and still is) adored by the western media and governments. I too was swept-up in that initial euphoria and as a budding political cartoonist remember drawing my first Bhutto-cartoon for Karachi’s evening paper, The Star, in 1988. The editorial cartoon depicted a young, attractive woman, headscarf fluttering in the wind, tiptoeing across a political minefield that was Pakistan.
Twenty-years later, Bhutto is now dead - depressing both in its predictability as in its brutality. My views towards this ex-Prime Minister had changed - becoming cynical soon after that first editorial cartoon. That first drawing stands unique in my Bhutto-cartoon-portfolio. Subsequent editorials, bar that first drawing, depict her with the virtues of an asp. That innocent, fluttering white headscarf that I had drawn some twenty years ago had now become a symbol of excess and corruption. A recent headline from October 2007 in the Telegraph struck a cord with me: “Benazir Bhutto - a kleptocrat in a Hermes headscarf.” When Bhutto was sworn in as Prime Minister in 1988 she very quickly began to flex her considerable hubris. Pakistan became her personal fiefdom, lorded by a feudal - with her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, a man known for his unashamed corruption, appointed as the national exchequer.
It was around the same time that I started cartooning for Newsline an investigative-style newsmagazine whose editor, Razia Bhatti, was a recipient of the international award, Courage in Journalism, in 1994. When Newsline published article’s about Prime Minister Bhutto’s indifference and complicity in the widespread rioting, extra-judicial killings, kidnapping and looting - which had become daily occurrences in the country - Bhutto responded by banning Newsline from all Pakistani International Airline (PIA) flights and had the Newsline office ransacked and its journalists threatened. I had drawn several scathing images of Bhutto that were used on several Newsline covers. On the day one of these issues was released on the newsstands Razia called me to say Bhutto’s press secretary had called. Along with threatening the various journalists she had taken serious offence to her spread-eagled cartoon pose on the Newsline cover. Razia told me to keep a low profile and stay away from the Newsline office for a few weeks. I remember, weeks later, Razia relating how Bhutto would send the police to harass her nightly at her residence in Karachi there after.
Bhutto’s heavy-handedness towards the press did not stop Newsline journalists from reporting on the flagrancies of her government. The magazine covered it all: Bhutto’s muddled foreign policy, rampant corruption, holding the press hostage, and a taxation system which permitted the wealthy to get away with paying little or no tax (the lower-middle class was expected to carry the entire tax burden). Bhutto was even implicated, when the Taliban took control of Kabul in 1996, in providing them with both financial and military support. She saw the Taliban as a steadying force in Afghanistan and they would facilitate bilateral relations between Pakistan and Central Asia. Bhutto provided a rich vein of drawing material for a cartoonist like myself. There was such a steady stream of political incongruities for me that she became one of the few people I could draw from memory - Gucci glasses, Hermes scarf and all.
Tragically this struggle between Bhutto and the Press did not bring about any change in Pakistan. Bhutto was, afterall, allowed to return on the 18th of October in 2007. She was never truly held accountable in Pakistan, the international community always backed her as she always looked the part (even though she never fit the part), and the Pakistani public truly forgot her excesses. Bhutto’s death is the latest script in Pakistan’s narrative of political and social dysfunction. Had there been some semblence of accountability in Pakistan Bhutto would not have been killed. Instead, Bhutto would have been serving time for corruption or at the very least still living in exile. But that is not the case. Instead we remember the dream that was Benazir Bhutto only to wake up now to a political minefield which has claimed yet another victim.
Shahid Mahmood grew up in Pakistan. He was the editorial cartoonist for the national newspaper in Pakistan, Dawn. His work has appeared in numerous International publications. Shahid’s work was viewed by world leaders at the 1997 APEC Conference, enjoyed by John F. Kennedy Jr., and managed to continuously enrage Benazir Bhutto. Shahid is internationally syndicated with the New York Times Syndicate and has work archived at the Museum of Contemporary History in Paris. His web page is: http://drawnconclusions.com
I’m wondering if there isn’t a bit of “blame the victim” in this.
Politics in that part of the world are not like they are in the west. Without excusing any of her excesses, can anyone show that the huntas that twice threw Bhutto’s democratically-elected government out have been any better?
See, that’s the thing about democracy: if you claim you’re for it, you don’t get to choose the ones you like.
Hugo Chavez is also routinely smeared by western press. But like it or not, the people of Venezuela elected him. It was the same with Bhutto. Which is more than folks can say of the current US regime…
the dream was the same as all the dreams of the elite and malefic(i.e. BUSH SR.) royalists=a nightmare and a manipulative,complex SET-UP !
I don’t see a “blame the victim” slant in the essay, not unless we assume that Ms. Bhutto was as innocent and light-hearted as her PR implied–which, I’m sorry to say, she was not. She was determined to hang on to the Bhuttos’ position in Pakistan (as her son and husband are trying to do now) as the country’s premier warlords and fief-holders, meaning that the Bhuttos, like most warlords anywhere, regarded poor Pakistan as their personal property. I will be interested to see whether her son, properly named Zarhari (his father’s surname), gradually shifts to calling himself Bhutto.
You’re right, however, that Pakistan did indeed elect the juntas (not “h”untas, btw; it’s a Spanish word, not an English one) that succeeded her, and that the West must gulp hard and swallow the fact that elections don’t always go the way we would like them to. (Just ask the U.S. about 2000!)
But let’s not sentimentalize the pretty lady in the headscarf too far. Hardvard- and Oxford-educated shge may have been, but she was a Paki warlord’s daughter first.
I don’t see a “blame the victim” slant in the essay, not unless we assume that Ms. Bhutto was as innocent and light-hearted as her PR implied–which, I’m sorry to say, she was not. She was determined to hang on to the Bhuttos’ position in Pakistan (as her son and husband are trying to do now) as the country’s premier warlords and fief-holders, meaning that the Bhuttos, like most warlords anywhere, regarded poor Pakistan as their personal property. I will be interested to see whether her son, properly named Zarhari (his father’s surname), gradually shifts to calling himself Bhutto.
You’re right, however, that Pakistan did indeed elect the juntas (not “h”untas, btw; it’s a Spanish word, not an English one) that succeeded her, and that the West must gulp hard and swallow the fact that elections don’t always go the way we would like them to. (Just ask the U.S. about 2000!)
But let’s not sentimentalize the pretty lady in the headscarf too far. Harvard- and Oxford-educated shge may have been, but she was a Paki warlord’s daughter *first* (and, sorry to say, last).
In Pakistan, the real leaders are the Muslim fundies that the US and Europe proudly support and have always done so. It doesn’t matter if the leader is Mushraf, Bhutto, Sharif, etc … They’re nothing but puppets for terrorists just like the White House and Congress are simply puppets for the corporatists and the Military Industrial Complex.
No wonder the state department (part of the Oil Crime Family of Bush) backed her and convinced her to return and . She was as corrupt and bloodthirsty as they are. She was quoted as saying she envied the super-rich billionares of Europe while she was in exile.
She returned for one reason only: to slurp up the war/oil company millions that she double-dipped into while she was prime minister building the CIA funded Taliban and Al Queda.
So now there’s now one less Havard Robber Baroness/ Cheney puppet in the world to worry about.
Good riddance.
I’m afraid that I must agree with Jan Steinman here. As a leftist I have been pretty alarmed at the level of schadenfreude that all too many leftist commenters and bloggers have exhibited after the horrendous events in Rawalpindi. The fearless, charismatic woman leader of a center-left party, the Pakistan People’s Party, was about to lead her people to a crushing triumph against the despotic fascist Musharraf, and instead of mourning her killing, people here are practically gloating (ha-ha, we told you so! She’s a stooge of Musharraf-of Bush-of the Taliban! She was too pushy! Too conniving! She should have played nicer with Musharraf and the Taliban! She was Corrupt!). Part of the problem, as you see, is the wildly contradictory nature of the smears. As for all the corruption hugger-mugger, since when has a drum-head tribunal against Benazir (and Zulfiqar)Bhutto by the U.S.-backed putschist Zia-ul-Haq met the standards of any sort of fair trial? But really–if you’re going to adopt the stance that all corrupt politicians oughta be whacked–well, why not begin at home, the land of Abramoff, Delay etc.? Besides, if it was just a matter of Ms. Bhutto’s alleged misdeeds, why wipe out 20 other people in the process? Just ‘collateral damage?’ How’s this reasoning any more humane than Bush’s shock & awe strategy in Iraq.
No, Ms. Bhutto would not have been a U.S. lapdog, as Bush, Cheney, et al. would have soon found out.
I hang my head in sadness for the people of Pakistan, and in shame for the callousness and shallowness of the reactions of so many americans to their grievous plight.
“I hang my head in sadness for the people of Pakistan, and in shame for the callousness and shallowness of the reactions of so many americans to their grievous plight.”
Absolutely right. We choose to forget that an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis actually voted for her. She is no saint but you cannot convince me that she dove into this firestorm risking death just so she can make more millions. I doubt any latte sipping liberal or snivelling academic can doubt Bhuttos recent actions as anything other than an attempt to serve her country.
GYPTIAN - wipe those rosy glasses! Bhutto was a reptile - a very pretty reptile, but reptile she was, descended from a long line of self-serving feudal reptile warlords. Serving her country was completely out of the question - she knew how to sling the populist cliches, but that was just to get the crowd on her side - demagoguery, is all. The Pakistanis voted for her and that’s enough, though they should have remembered her track record better. Fortunately her election wasn’t a problem for the US, as she was one of their pets. It was her overblown ego that caused her to miscalculate her safety.
As usual astounded and confounded. To Jan Steinman, John S. and sadly the gyptian- have we NOT seen world wide- the inducement for people to re-accept monarchy- the elevation of stature of a kindergarden school teacher who recieved her PhD in dating rich men and showing up for useful charities that did nothing - like Princess Di- murdered ironically for being in love with the wrong kind.
The adulation for kinships of the aristocracy :
Bill Gates a MORON - who bought DOS from a CHINESE programmer - and we think that they just COPY stuff -HA , stole Windows from Apple , STOLE xbox 360 from Sony, stole Yahoo Messenger , stole yahoo with his MSN - yet we proclaim him a GENIUS- the irony of all irony is HE IS TALKING ABOUT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION. A man - who invented nothing, stole everything and used his connections to make him a multi-billionaire. But hey he is ole skool money - and BOTH of his parents were PRESIDENTS of BANKS -back in the days when banks actually had money and not fraudulent debt based on LOANS -which they CLASSIFIED as assets!!!!
Our country GIVES away tax payer funded patents on the GUI, mouse, telecommunications etc ad NAUSEUM to a bunch of connected talentless priveldged bums who have the GALL to quote Ayn Rand (because they know she WAS an aristocratic SERVANT). Tell me how does John Gualt make any ENGINES- with out the rest of society providing him milk, food, security, and the opportunity to learn in a stable society - YET - John Gault for all HIS genius fails to see the fundamental fact- that a motor can not be built with out the foundation of magnetism and elecricity that preceded him and that all invention is based on an the populance strving to GIVE ( yes GIIVE) him conditions to be allowed to invent. Show me an inventor that invents - with out him being a parasite of that society and i will show you you a CHARLATAN!!
George W. Bush as well as George H Bush - men who have defied the meaning of intellect , have defined the meaning of servility and corruption. Constantly are the rich and their brethren -re-invented - as self - made millionaires - to KEEP the dream alive.
I commend the author - in showing that it was a dream - in the sense that it was illusory, transient and most of all - a projection of desires by a tortured unconcious of people who have been denied true liberty (in thought /analysis and most improtantly perspective).
The king must die so that the country can live.
Maximilien Robespierre
john s
I too would like to see Abramoff and a whole slew of Repug human garbage in prison but what does that have to do with Bhutto? She was a master criminal, managing to steal more than TWO BILLION dollars in her two terms as prime minister. The bizarre effort to canonize this thief is incredible.
Benazir and her husband’s appalling corruption aside, the dynasty has an even uglier skeleton in the closet. Z. A. Bhutto, her father, was Prime Minister in 1971 and presided over the massacre of 3 million people and the rape of 200,000 women in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. Hindus, who made up most of the intellectual and professional classes in those days, were slaughtered en masse and their bodies thrown into the rivers. If not quite in the league with Stalin, Mao and Hitler, her father was right up there with Pol Pot. Bush’s choice of this family as Musharraf’s political partners to deflect criticism and allow continued US meddling (and muddling) is typical of the Bush-Cheney-Rice incompetence and is sure to backfire.
Though I mourn anyone who is murdered, in Bhutto’s death I thought I saw the democracy emerging in a party without a de facto cult of personality leader. Perhaps the people would rise up and actually elect a real leader for their PPP.
But no. Bhutto showed her real colors with her post humous and presumptuous will, anointing her teenage son as her heir apparent.
Can someone tell me what this has to do with democracy?
Nothing, that’s what.
The Bhutto’s are feudal warlords, just hoping to maintain power so they can once again rape the riches of their country.
So though I mourn the passing of an individual who was murdered, I also say good riddance.
Hopefully the people in Pakistan will embrace the democratic process now that they have the chance, while rejecting this family of bogus posers of who dare claim to hold the mantle of democracy, but are no more than a clan of two bit dictators, intent on enriching their own coffers, and maintaining power.
correction to first sentence:
Though I mourn anyone who is murdered, in Bhutto’s death I thought I saw the POSSIBILITY OF democracy emerging in a party without a de facto cult of personality leader.
Whats really ironical is that I feel compelled to defend Bhutto ! Having lived in the sub-continnt in the past I am fully aware of Bhutto and dynastic rule at large. She played politics like a professional with hardly any attempt to conceal the insidious damage her family was committing. I agree with the author and can relate to exactly what he feels.
However, nobody seems to understand that Prime Ministers in Pakistan dont wield the clout or authority the Army does. The Army allows them to govern as a vassal in a greatly diminished capacity. They really have NO influence in foreign policy issues as was evident by the recent Kargil assault engineered by Musharraf while Nawaz Sharif was on a peace mission to Delhi. Even if Bhuttos father Z presided over the ‘71 war (massacre), it was engineered, dictated and committed by the Army.
Its a testament to Indira Gandhi’s fearlessness (she stood up to the U.S. Sixth Fleet, Nixon and Kissinger), defied them and in the absence of any support from the West (as usual american puppets) and helped create the State of Bangladesh. Z Bhutto was ofcourse forced to sign the Simla Agreement which in reality he was happy to as he was aware of the futility of Army rule in Pakistan. All the elected Prime Ministers of Pakistan have been very, very keen on peace with India and their neighbours, even though Benazir meddled with Afghan politics. The massacres in East Bengal (current day Bangladesh) in 1971 was committed by the Pakistani Army with direct support by the U.S. (Nixon, Kissinger, et al). You should read some of the more recent archival documents that astound you with its starkness and their contempt for life.
I do not look at Benazir Bhutto as a saint as I have repeatedly said in the past but I do believe she was driven by her love for Pakistan rather than an attempt to create even more moolah or power. And ofcourse if these pissy, whiny, genocidal motherfuckers in the Senate and Congress in our dear beloved country had an ounce of her courage we would be in a far better place.
Also medusa — “The Pakistanis voted for her and that’s enough, though they should have remembered her track record better.”
Considering the most developed (?) country in the world twice elected a murderous pig to office we need to cut the third world Pakistanis some slack !
On a different note, iamwityuiam (!!) i didnt realize Gates the sleazeball stole DOS from a Chinese programmer … what a prick.
every bad thing bloggers have said here,are true.hopefully, she made her peace before she died,because every negative observation made here,was the real truth. educated bloggers.
Oh, I get it now. The reason some posters are giddy over her death is that she was the ‘favorite’ of the west. Wow. If picking Europe and the US over the taliban and al-qaida is all it takes to make one a pariah to some people….
I for one am sad to see her die so tragically. However, Massud you should know she was one of the Taliban’s original sponsors.
See this paragraph below from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto
“Policy on Taliban
The Taliban took power in Kabul in September 1996. It was during Bhutto’s rule that the Taliban gained prominence in Afghanistan. She, like many leaders at the time, viewed the Taliban as a group that could stabilize Afghanistan and enable trade access to the Central Asian republics, according to author Stephen Coll.[12] He claims that like the U.S., her government provided military and financial support for the Taliban, even sending a small unit of the Pakistani army into Afghanistan.More recently, she took an anti-Taliban stance, and condemned terrorist acts allegedly committed by the Taliban and their supporters”.
No massud,
you don’t get it at all. You mourn a pretty face on T.V. We are grateful that a terrible crime family has departed the Earth. It has nothing to do with picking “favorites.” A thieving despot is…. a thieving despot.
Family
Benazir Bhutto’s father, former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was removed from office following a military coup in 1977 led by the then military chief General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who imposed martial law but promised to hold elections within three months. But later, instead of fulfilling the promise of holding general elections, General Zia charged Mr. Bhutto with conspiring to murder the father of dissident politician Ahmed Raza Kasuri. Mr. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was sentenced to death by the martial law court.
Despite the accusation being “widely doubted by the public”,[8] and despite many clemency appeals from foreign leaders, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was hanged on April 4, 1979. Appeals for clemency were dismissed by acting President General Zia. Benazir Bhutto and her mother were held in a “police camp” until the end of May, after the execution.[9]
In 1985, Benazir Bhutto’s brother Shahnawaz was killed under suspicious circumstances in France. The killing of another of her brothers, Mir Murtaza, in 1996, contributed to destabilizing her second term as Prime Minister.
Prime Minister
Bhutto on a visit to Washington, D.C. in 1988
Bhutto, who had returned to Pakistan after completing her studies, found herself placed under house arrest in the wake of her father’s imprisonment and subsequent execution. Having been allowed in 1984 to return to the United Kingdom, she became a leader in exile of the PPP, her father’s party, though she was unable to make her political presence felt in Pakistan until after the death of General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. She had succeeded her mother as leader of the PPP and the pro-democracy opposition to the Zia-ul-Haq regime.
On November 16, 1988, in the first open election in more than a decade, Bhutto’s PPP won the largest bloc of seats in the National Assembly. Bhutto was sworn in as Prime Minister of a coalition government on December 2, becoming at age 35 the youngest person — and the first woman — to head the government of a Muslim-majority state in modern times. In 1989, she was awarded the Prize For Freedom by the Liberal International. Bhutto accomplishments during this time were in initiatives for nationalist reform and modernization, that some conservatives characterized as Westernization. Bhutto’s government was dismissed in 1990 following charges of corruption, for which she never was tried. Zia’s protégé Nawaz Sharif subsequently came to power. Bhutto was re-elected in 1993 but was dismissed three years later amid various corruption scandals by then president Farooq Leghari, who used the Eighth Amendment discretionary powers to dissolve the government. The Supreme Court affirmed President Leghari’s dismissal in a 6-1 ruling.[10]
After being dismissed by the then-president of Pakistan on charges of corruption, her party lost the October elections. She served as leader of the opposition whilst Nawaz Sharif served as Prime Minister for the next three years.
Elections were held again in October 1993 and her PPP coalition was victorious, returning Bhutto to office. She continued with her reform initiatives. In 1996 her government was once again dismissed on corruption charges. Criticism against Bhutto came from the Punjabi elites and powerful landlord families who opposed Bhutto. She blamed this opposition for the destabilization of Pakistan. Irshad Manji judged her attempts to modernize Pakistan a failure.[11]
Policies for women
During the election campaigns the Bhutto government voiced its concern for women’s social and health issues, including the issue of discrimination against women. Bhutto announced plans to establish women’s police stations, courts, and women’s development banks. Despite these plans, Bhutto did not propose any legislation to improve welfare services for women. During her election campaigns, she promised to repeal controversial laws (such as Hudood and Zina ordinances) that curtail the rights of women in Pakistan, but the party did not fulfill these promises during her tenures as Prime Minister, due to immense pressure from the opposition.[citation needed]
After Bhutto’s stints as Prime Minister, during General Musharraf’s regime, her party did initiate legislation to repeal the Zina ordinance. These efforts were defeated by the right-wing religious parties that dominated the legislatures at the time.[citation needed]
Bhutto was an active and founding member of the Council of Women World Leaders, a network of current and former prime ministers and presidents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto
And it gets worse, including if I read it right, the possibility that she had her brother killed:
Charges of corruption
French, Polish, Spanish, and Swiss documents have fueled the charges of corruption against Bhutto and her husband. Bhutto and her husband faced a number of legal proceedings, including a charge of laundering money through Swiss banks. Her husband, Asif Ali Zardari, spent eight years in prison on similar corruption charges. Zardari, released from jail in 2004, has suggested that his time in prison involved torture; human rights groups have supported his claim that his rights were violated.[13]
A 1998 New York Times investigative report[14] indicates that Pakistani investigators have documents that uncover a network of bank accounts, all linked to the family’s lawyer in Switzerland, with Asif Zardari as the principal shareholder. According to the article, documents released by the French authorities indicated that Zardari offered exclusive rights to Dassault, a French aircraft manufacturer, to replace the air force’s fighter jets in exchange for a 5% commission to be paid to a Swiss corporation controlled by Zardari. The article also said a Dubai company received an exclusive license to import gold into Pakistan for which Asif Zardari received payments of more than $10 million into his Dubai-based Citibank accounts. The owner of the company denied that he had made payments to Zardari and claims the documents were forged. Bhutto maintained that the charges leveled against her and her husband were purely political.[15][16] An Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) report supports Bhutto’s claim. It presents information suggesting that Benazir Bhutto was ousted from power in 1990 as a result of a witch hunt approved by then-president Ghulam Ishaq Khan. The AGP report says Khan illegally paid legal advisers 28 million rupees to file 19 corruption cases against Bhutto and her husband in 1990-92.[17]
The assets held by Bhutto and her husband have been scrutinized. The prosecutors have alleged that their Swiss bank accounts contain £740 million.[18] Zardari also bought a neo-Tudor mansion and estate worth over £4 million in Surrey, England, UK.[19][20] The Pakistani investigations have tied other overseas properties to Zardari’s family. These include a $2.5 million manor in Normandy owned by Zardari’s parents, who had modest assets at the time of his marriage.[14] Bhutto denied holding substantive overseas assets.
Switzerland
On July 23, 1998, the Swiss Government handed over documents to the government of Pakistan which relate to corruption allegations against Benazir Bhutto and her husband.[21] The documents included a formal charge of money laundering by Swiss authorities against Zardari. The Pakistani government had been conducting a wide-ranging inquiry to account for more than $13.7 million frozen by Swiss authorities in 1997 that was allegedly stashed in banks by Bhutto and her husband. The Pakistani government recently filed criminal charges against Bhutto in an effort to track down an estimated $1.5 billion she and her husband are alleged to have received in a variety of criminal enterprises.[22] The documents suggest that the money Zardari was alleged to have laundered was accessible to Benazir Bhutto and had been used to buy a diamond necklace for over $175,000.[23] The PPP has responded by flatly denying the charges, suggesting that Swiss authorities have been misled by false evidence provided by Islamabad.
On August 6, 2003, Swiss magistrates found Bhutto and her husband guilty of money laundering.[24] They were given six-month suspended jail terms, fined $50,000 each and were ordered to pay $11 million to the Pakistani government. The six-year trial concluded that Bhutto and Zardari deposited in Swiss accounts $10 million given to them by a Swiss company in exchange for a contract in Pakistan. The couple said they would appeal. The Pakistani investigators say Zardari opened a Citibank account in Geneva in 1995 through which they say he passed some $40 million of the $100 million he received in payoffs from foreign companies doing business in Pakistan.[25] In October 2007, Daniel Zappelli, chief prosecutor of the canton of Geneva, said he received the conclusions of a money laundering investigation against former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto on October 29, but it was unclear whether there would be any further legal action against her in Switzerland.[26]
Poland
The Polish Government has given Pakistan 500 pages of documentation relating to corruption allegations against Benazir Bhutto and her husband. These charges are in regard to the purchase of 8,000 tractors in a 1997 deal.[27][28] According to Pakistani officials, the Polish papers contain details of illegal commissions paid by the tractor company in return for agreeing to their contract.[29] It was alleged that the arrangement “skimmed” Rs 103 mn rupees ($2 million) in kickbacks.[30] “The documentary evidence received from Poland confirms the scheme of kickbacks laid out by Asif Zardari and Benazir Bhutto in the name of (the) launching of Awami tractor scheme,” APP said. Bhutto and Asif Ali Zardari allegedly received a 7.15% commission on the purchase through their front men, Jens Schlegelmilch and Didier Plantin of Dargal S.A., who received about $1.969 million for supplying 5,900 Ursus tractors.[31]
France
Potentially the most lucrative deal alleged in the documents involved the effort by Dassault Aviation, a French military contractor. French authorities indicated in 1998 that Bhutto’s husband, Zardari, offered exclusive rights to Dassault to replace the air force’s fighter jets in exchange for a five percent commission to be paid to a corporation in Switzerland controlled by Zardari.[32]
At the time, French corruption laws forbade bribery of French officials but permitted payoffs to foreign officials, and even made the payoffs tax-deductible in France. However, France changed this law in 2000.[33]
Western Asia
In the largest single payment investigators have uncovered, a gold bullion dealer in Western Asia was alleged to have deposited at least $10 million into one of Zardari’s accounts after the Bhutto government gave him a monopoly on gold imports that sustained Pakistan’s jewelery industry. The money was allegedly deposited into Zardari’s Citibank account in Dubai. Pakistan’s Arabian Sea coast, stretching from Karachi to the border with Iran, has long been a gold smugglers’ haven. Until the beginning of Bhutto’s second term, the trade, running into hundreds of millions of dollars a year, was unregulated, with slivers of gold called biscuits, and larger weights in bullion, carried on planes and boats that travel between the Persian Gulf and the largely unguarded Pakistani coast.
Shortly after Bhutto returned as prime minister in 1993, a Pakistani bullion trader in Dubai, Abdul Razzak Yaqub, proposed a deal: in return for the exclusive right to import gold, Razzak would help the government regularize the trade. In November 1994, Pakistan’s Commerce Ministry wrote to Razzak informing him that he had been granted a license that made him, for at least the next two years, Pakistan’s sole authorized gold importer. In an interview in his office in Dubai, Razzak acknowledged that he had used the license to import more than $500 million in gold into Pakistan, and that he had travelled to Islamabad several times to meet with Bhutto and Zardari. But he denied that there had been any corruption or secret deals. “I have not paid a single cent to Zardari,” he said. Razzak claims that someone in Pakistan who wished to destroy his reputation had contrived to have his company wrongly identified as the depositor. “Somebody in the bank has cooperated with my enemies to make false documents,” he said.[34][35][36][37]
Bhutto’s niece and others have publicly accused Bhutto of complicity in the killing of her brother Murtaza Bhutto in 1996 by uniformed police officers whilst she was Prime Minister.[38]