freepalestine
19th March 2012, 07:05
Benazir Bhutto: The Cult
By As'ad AbuKhalil - Sat, 2012-03-17 23:46- Angry Corner
The documentary about Benazir Bhutto titled Bhutto is nothing short of a silly hagiography. It is only surprising that Tariq Ali agreed to be part of the charade, although his old friendship with her during her time in the UK explains (and justifies) the lapse. To be fair to Ali, he did not shy away from criticizing her second term in office.
The documentary comes clearly in response to a cult about Bhutto in Western capitals, especially Washington and London. Bhutto was not a remarkable politician and nor were her achievements in office (unless we count her achievements in terms of the damage she has caused in Pakistan and beyond). Western circles are always desperate for a royal family story, and the Bhuttos provide one.
The political history of the Bhutto family in Pakistan is an interesting, albeit tragic, story. Her father, Zulfikar Ali, rode a wave of Pakistani nationalism and was an effective and skilled orator. Benazir, on the other hand, was articulate in English but did not have oratorical skills. But the cult of Benazir in the West has to be investigated. When and how do Western people get uncharacteristically impressed with a man or woman from Arab or Muslim lands? There are some indicators. Any Arab who drinks whiskey impresses Westerners: they see them as defiant against what is now called alarmingly “Sharia law” (any one who uses the term “Sharia
law” clearly does not know what Sharia is and does not know Arabic).
Furthermore, Westerners are easily impressed with a Muslim woman who dresses in Western clothes, even when abroad. Of course, a “prestigious” Western education – a privilege of rich families worldwide – also impresses. Furthermore, as silly as it sounds, one notices that people in the US are very impressed with an English accent: if one reads from the phone book in an English accent, he or she can command the attention of an American audience. In other words, there are no rational reasons as to why Westerners should be impressed or enamored with Benazir Bhutto. The reasons are political and patronizing: Westerners have such a low opinion of Muslim women and they so strictly cling to stereotypes about Muslim women, that if they encounter one who does not drool when speaking, they are very impressed.
From a professional point of view, the documentary fails miserably. Only fans and friends of Benazir are featured: only her niece is permitted to provide a counter point of view but she is rather mocked in the footage and portrayed as acting out of jealousy. Those friends (mostly if not exclusively American and British to the extent that one wonders if Benazir had any Pakistani friend whatsoever) provide the most fawning reviews of Benazir’s performance. These reports are more than a bit patronizing, albeit expected from the White Man when talking about the natives who happen to be unusually smart by his standards.
One friend of hers says that Benazir would never ever shed a tear in public, but the documentary shows several scenes in which she is crying in crowds. Could not the director notice such a contradiction? And Western fans of Benazir continue to regard her as a feminist icon despite the fact that, as one professor at Rutgers said rather timidly (perhaps knowing that she would disappoint her Western fans), Benazir was never considered a feminist and she never regard herself as a feminist (not in her personal nor public life). This is like Western liberal adoration for former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, who was a declared enemy of feminism and feminists.
The movie traces the life of Benazir and presents her time in office as Utopian. It is rarely mentioned that she gave shelter and diplomatic cover for the Taliban, and even that is justified as a way to deal with them to deflect their danger presumably. Her subservience to the military-intelligence apparatus in Pakistan is also not investigated.
Bizarrely, the movie also wants to deny the corruption charges against Benazir and her husband. Even the New York Times report which documented the long corruption record of the couple is dismissed. By whom, you may ask, by none other than her husband Asif Ali Zardari’s man in Washington, DC.
Benazir Bhutto was a woman enslaved by Western political fascination. After September 11, she took the Gulf route: she wanted to get to the heart of Washington DC by going through the Zionist establishment in the city. She relied on PR firms in Washington, DC and she injected empty words of “freedom” and “democracy” into her speeches. She marketed herself as a better servant of Bush’s doctrine than General Musharraf - that was her selling point. It was never about the people of Pakistan.
The movie fails at every level. One wonders about the selection of guests. Condoleezza Rice, for example, recounts the meeting between Richard Armitage and Musharraf after September 11 and praises Armitage for “convincing” the general to agree to cooperate with the American administration in its “war on terror.” Yet, the film does not contrast Rice’s account with Musharraf’s in his book where he detailed the threats that Armitage made to him and to the country of Pakistan. It is not clear why Reza Aslan was chosen: he provided one of the funniest definitions of Sharia law that I have ever heard. Tariq Ali is interesting and critical as he always is, but his friendship with Benazir must have affected his view.
The Bhutto family, influenced by the Hariri family, wanted an international court to deal with the assassination of Benazir. But the Bush administration would not allow that. They alone decide when an international court is required (for political and not judicial reasons). The Bhutto political dynasty will continue to provide political leadership but that is no reason for celebration. One should look forward to a time when political candidates (echoing Pericles’ definition of Greek democracy) don’t enjoy the advantage of wealth and family names, and when poor candidates are not disfavored for their poverty.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/angry-corner/benazir-bhutto-cult
By As'ad AbuKhalil - Sat, 2012-03-17 23:46- Angry Corner
The documentary about Benazir Bhutto titled Bhutto is nothing short of a silly hagiography. It is only surprising that Tariq Ali agreed to be part of the charade, although his old friendship with her during her time in the UK explains (and justifies) the lapse. To be fair to Ali, he did not shy away from criticizing her second term in office.
The documentary comes clearly in response to a cult about Bhutto in Western capitals, especially Washington and London. Bhutto was not a remarkable politician and nor were her achievements in office (unless we count her achievements in terms of the damage she has caused in Pakistan and beyond). Western circles are always desperate for a royal family story, and the Bhuttos provide one.
The political history of the Bhutto family in Pakistan is an interesting, albeit tragic, story. Her father, Zulfikar Ali, rode a wave of Pakistani nationalism and was an effective and skilled orator. Benazir, on the other hand, was articulate in English but did not have oratorical skills. But the cult of Benazir in the West has to be investigated. When and how do Western people get uncharacteristically impressed with a man or woman from Arab or Muslim lands? There are some indicators. Any Arab who drinks whiskey impresses Westerners: they see them as defiant against what is now called alarmingly “Sharia law” (any one who uses the term “Sharia
law” clearly does not know what Sharia is and does not know Arabic).
Furthermore, Westerners are easily impressed with a Muslim woman who dresses in Western clothes, even when abroad. Of course, a “prestigious” Western education – a privilege of rich families worldwide – also impresses. Furthermore, as silly as it sounds, one notices that people in the US are very impressed with an English accent: if one reads from the phone book in an English accent, he or she can command the attention of an American audience. In other words, there are no rational reasons as to why Westerners should be impressed or enamored with Benazir Bhutto. The reasons are political and patronizing: Westerners have such a low opinion of Muslim women and they so strictly cling to stereotypes about Muslim women, that if they encounter one who does not drool when speaking, they are very impressed.
From a professional point of view, the documentary fails miserably. Only fans and friends of Benazir are featured: only her niece is permitted to provide a counter point of view but she is rather mocked in the footage and portrayed as acting out of jealousy. Those friends (mostly if not exclusively American and British to the extent that one wonders if Benazir had any Pakistani friend whatsoever) provide the most fawning reviews of Benazir’s performance. These reports are more than a bit patronizing, albeit expected from the White Man when talking about the natives who happen to be unusually smart by his standards.
One friend of hers says that Benazir would never ever shed a tear in public, but the documentary shows several scenes in which she is crying in crowds. Could not the director notice such a contradiction? And Western fans of Benazir continue to regard her as a feminist icon despite the fact that, as one professor at Rutgers said rather timidly (perhaps knowing that she would disappoint her Western fans), Benazir was never considered a feminist and she never regard herself as a feminist (not in her personal nor public life). This is like Western liberal adoration for former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, who was a declared enemy of feminism and feminists.
The movie traces the life of Benazir and presents her time in office as Utopian. It is rarely mentioned that she gave shelter and diplomatic cover for the Taliban, and even that is justified as a way to deal with them to deflect their danger presumably. Her subservience to the military-intelligence apparatus in Pakistan is also not investigated.
Bizarrely, the movie also wants to deny the corruption charges against Benazir and her husband. Even the New York Times report which documented the long corruption record of the couple is dismissed. By whom, you may ask, by none other than her husband Asif Ali Zardari’s man in Washington, DC.
Benazir Bhutto was a woman enslaved by Western political fascination. After September 11, she took the Gulf route: she wanted to get to the heart of Washington DC by going through the Zionist establishment in the city. She relied on PR firms in Washington, DC and she injected empty words of “freedom” and “democracy” into her speeches. She marketed herself as a better servant of Bush’s doctrine than General Musharraf - that was her selling point. It was never about the people of Pakistan.
The movie fails at every level. One wonders about the selection of guests. Condoleezza Rice, for example, recounts the meeting between Richard Armitage and Musharraf after September 11 and praises Armitage for “convincing” the general to agree to cooperate with the American administration in its “war on terror.” Yet, the film does not contrast Rice’s account with Musharraf’s in his book where he detailed the threats that Armitage made to him and to the country of Pakistan. It is not clear why Reza Aslan was chosen: he provided one of the funniest definitions of Sharia law that I have ever heard. Tariq Ali is interesting and critical as he always is, but his friendship with Benazir must have affected his view.
The Bhutto family, influenced by the Hariri family, wanted an international court to deal with the assassination of Benazir. But the Bush administration would not allow that. They alone decide when an international court is required (for political and not judicial reasons). The Bhutto political dynasty will continue to provide political leadership but that is no reason for celebration. One should look forward to a time when political candidates (echoing Pericles’ definition of Greek democracy) don’t enjoy the advantage of wealth and family names, and when poor candidates are not disfavored for their poverty.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/angry-corner/benazir-bhutto-cult