The voices seeking an international probe into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto have swollen into a chorus. The new co-chairperson
of the PPP, Asif Ali Zardari, has called for a UN-led probe, along the lines of the international investigation carried out into the killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Hariri died in a massive car bombing in Beirut in February 2005. Suspicion of Syrian involvement was one of the factors that led Hariri’s family, and political leaders in Lebanon, to seek an impartial investigation.
As controversy over Benazir’s killing has grown, with the PPP angrily dismissing the version of events put forward by the government, in which it has been claimed Ms Bhutto died after hitting her head against the sunroof lever of her vehicle, two key US figures have also sought an international probe. Senator Hilary Rodham Clinton, currently running for leadership of the Democratic Party, has stated a probe under the Musharraf administration will “lack
credibility.” US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi has meanwhile taken a still harder line, and suggested that US aid to Pakistan be linked to Islamabad accepting and cooperating with international inquiry into Ms Bhutto’s assassination. She has noted that “troubling questions” about the Pakistan’s government’s probe into Benazir’s assassination and its cooperation in the war on terror needed to be answered. And, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan has also sought a UN-led investigation.
These demands, coming now from many quarters, make sense. It is now obvious that few believe the official version of events. Baitullah Mehsud, named by the interior ministry as being behind the assassination has denied any involvement — and while his word may lack credibility, the fact is that the levels of trust in the government’s proclamations are even lower. It is though worth keeping in mind that an international probe will almost certainly not offer any quick answers, or satisfy people whose grief has been added to by what seems to be some rather clumsy handling of the whole issue by the government. For instance, the question that what was the hurry in cleaning up the crime scene so soon after the tragedy — and in the process destroying perhaps valuable evidence. Furthermore, if three or more bullets were fired and if the government says that they didn’t hit Ms Bhutto then where are the empties and the bullets? What happened to the pistol used by the shooter and are the fingerprints being examined to give clues to his identity. Also, it may lay to rest the endless whirlpool of conspiracy theories doing the rounds and perhaps the best — or should one say worst — example of this is a report in a right-of-centre pro-Jewish daily newspaper based in New York which quotes an unnamed American intelligence official as saying that one possible theory about the assassination was that it was the work of “members of the SSG”.
The UN investigation in Hariri’s murder has still to be concluded, almost three years after his death. But the slow, cautious approach taken by the UN underscores the need to proceed with care, and meticulously examine evidence. This contrasts with the quick-fire strategy adopted by the Pakistan government, which within a day of the death, claimed to have identified those responsible and established the exact sequence in what is clearly a rather complicated chain of happenings. The questions raised by the media, by other observers and the fact that Asif Ali Zardari, the late Benazir’s spouse, obviously has no trust in the government makes it imperative that an international investigation begin without delay. The government’s objections to this, including claims that those from outside lack requisite language skills and that Pakistan’s own experts are capable of conducting an investigation hold no weight. After all, supplying translators should not be too arduous — while for all the expertise that doubtlessly exists, the fact is that no previous high-profile case of political murder, from that of Liaquat Ali Khan in the 1950s to that of Murtaza Bhutto in the 1990s, has been satisfactorily resolved. The calls for an international probe thus make immense sense. The government must heed the demands for this. Failing to do so will only add to the suspicions that it has something to hide, and this can in no way serve the interests of the country or its image in the international community.