Benazir Bhutto’s assassination is probably one of the most serious events that has happened since the attacks of September 11, 2001. She represented a move toward a Pakistan governed by political process and away from government by military rule. Truth be told, the only true stabilizing force in Pakistan is its military.
It is for this reason that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was so reluctant to relinquish his military commission, a move he made in deference to his exclusively civilian role. To be sure, Bhutto was no angel but she was certainly a more attractive choice in an unattractive field.
We Americans have an extremely bad habit of looking at other nations and foreign cultures through a uniquely American understanding. We see a Pakistani military and comprehend it using the knowledge we have of our own military. We know our military to be separate from our political structure where it comes to government. We realize that the US military is extremely well disciplined and trained to a superior level. We have come to accept that when our armed forces are tasked with a mission – and when we are bright enough to keep politicians from interfering with that mission – the US military can be counted on to be successful 100% of the time. This, although a truth for the United States military, cannot be said for all militaries around the world.
In Pakistan the military is embedded into the governmental process. It has been this way ever since the country’s creation in the independence of India from Britain. While there have been democratically elected leaders in Pakistan there have also been military coups. Pervez Musharraf was brought to power by military coup and has, since, tried to walk a fine line between military rule and political rule.
More...
Frank Salvato also serves as the managing editor for The New Media Journal. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention.
