Larry Chin on Bhutto: Anglo-American Ambitions behind Assassination


2008-01-01

Richard Moore

Original source URL:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7699

Anglo-American Ambitions behind the Assassination of Benazir Bhutto and the 
Destabilization of Pakistan

By Larry Chin

Global Research, December 29, 2007

It has been known for months that the Bush-Cheney administration and its allies 
have been manuevering to strengthen their political control of Pakistan, paving 
the way for the expansion and deepening of the ³war on terrorism² across the 
region. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto does not change this agenda. In 
fact, it simplifies Bush-Cheney¹s options.

Seeding chaos with a pretext

³Delivering democracy to the Muslim world² has been the Orwellian rhetoric used 
to mask Bush-Cheney¹s application of pressure and force, its dramatic attempt at
reshaping of the Pakistani government (into a joint Bhutto/Sharif-Musharraf) 
coalition, and backdoor plans for a military intervention. Various American 
destabilization plans, known for months by officials and analysts, proposed the 
toppling of Pakistan's military.

The assassination of Bhutto appears to have been anticipated. There were even 
reports of ³chatter² among US officials about the possible assassinations of 
either Pervez Musharraf or Benazir Bhutto, well before the actual attempts took 
place.

As succinctly summarized in Jeremy Page¹s article, "Who Killed Benazir Bhutto? 
The Main Suspects", the main suspects are 1) ³Pakistani and foreign Islamist 
militants who saw her as a heretic and an American stooge², and 2) the 
Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, a virtual branch of the CIA. Bhutto¹s 
husband Asif Ali Zardari directly accused the ISI of being involved in the 
October attack.

The assassination of Bhutto has predictably been blamed on ³Al-Qaeda², without 
mention of fact that Al-Qaeda itself is an Anglo-American military-intelligence 
operation.

Page¹s piece was one of the first to name the man who has now been tagged as the
main suspect: Baitullah Mehsud, a purported Taliban militant fighting the 
Pakistani army out of Waziristan. Conflicting reports link Mehsud to ³Al-Qaeda²,
the Afghan Taliban, and Mullah Omar (also see here). Other analysis links him to
the terrorist A.Q. Khan.

Mehsud¹s profile, and the reporting of it, echoes the propaganda treatment of 
all post-9/11 ³terrorists². This in turn raises familiar questions about 
Anglo-American intelligence agency propaganda involvement. Is Mehsud connected 
to the ISI or the CIA? What did the ISI and the CIA know about Mehsud? More 
importantly, does Mehsud, or the manipulation of the propaganda surrounding him 
provide Bush-Cheney with a pretext for future aggression in the region?

Classic ³war on terrorism² propaganda

While details on the Bhutto assassination continue to unfold, what is clear is 
that it was a political hit, along the lines of US agent Rafik Harriri in 
Lebanon. Like the highly suspicious Harriri hit, the Bhutto assassination has 
been depicted by corporate media as the martyring of a great messenger of 
western-style ³democracy². Meanwhile, the US government¹s ruthless actions 
behind the scenes have received scant attention.

The December 28, 2007 New York Times coverage of the Bhutto assassination offers
the perfect example of mainstream Orwellian media distortion that hides the 
truth about Bush/Cheney agenda behind blatant propaganda smoke. This piece 
echoes White House rhetoric proclaiming that Bush¹s main objectives are to 
³bring democracy to the Muslim world² and ³force out Islamist militants².

In fact, the openly criminal Bush-Cheney administration has only supported and 
promoted the antithesis of democracy: chaos, fascism, and the installation of 
Anglo-American-friendly puppet regimes.

In fact, the central and consistent geostrategy of Bush-Cheney, and their elite 
counterparts around the world, is the continued imposition and expansion of the 
manufactured ³war on terrorism²; the continuation of war across the Eurasian 
subcontinent, with events triggered by false flag operations and manufactured 
pretexts.

In fact, the main tools used in the ³war on terrorism² remain Islamist 
militants, working on behalf of Anglo-American military intelligence 
agencies---among them, ³Al-Qaeda², and Pakistan¹s Inter-Services Intelligence, 
the ISI. Mehsud fits this the same profile.

Saving Bush-Cheney¹s Pakistan

In an amusing quote from the same New York Times piece, Wendy Chamberlain, 
former US ambassador to Pakistan (and a central figure behind multinational 
efforts to build a trans-Afghan pipeline, connected to 9/11), proudly states: 
³We are a player in the Pakistani political system².

Not only has the US continued to be a ³player², but one of its top managers for 
decades.

Each successive Pakistani leader since the early 1990s---Bhutto, Sharif and 
Musharraf---have bowed to Western interests. The ISI is a virtual branch of the 
CIA.

While Musharraf has been, and remains, a strongman for Bush-Cheney, questions 
about his ³reliability², and control---both his regime¹s control over the 
populace and growing popular unrest, and elite control over his regime---have 
driven Bush-Cheney attempts to force a clumsy (pro-US, Iraq-style) power-sharing
government. As noted by Robert Scheer, Bush-Cheney has been playing ³Russian 
roulette² with Musharraf, Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif---each of whom have been 
deeply corrupt, willing fronts for the US.

The return of both Bhutto and the other former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has 
merely been an attempt by the US to hedge its regional power bets.

What exactly were John Negroponte and Condoleeza Rice really setting up the past
few months?

Who benefits from Bhutto¹s murder?

The ³war on terrorism² geostrategy and propaganda milieu, the blueprint that has
been used by elite interests since 9/11 to impose a continuing world war, is the
clear beneficiary of the Bhutto assassination. Bush/Cheney and their equally 
complicit pro-war/pro-occupation counterparts in the Democratic Party 
enthusiastically support the routine use of ³terror² pretexts to impose 
continued war policies.

True to form, fear, ³terrorism², ³security² and military force, are once again, 
the focuses of Washington political rhetoric, and the around-the-clock media 
barrage.

The 2008 US presidential candidates and their elite campaign advisers, all but a
few of whom enthusiastically support the ³war on terrorism², have taken turns 
pushing their respective versions of ³we must stop the terrorists² rhetoric for 
brain-addled supporters. The candidates whose polls have slipped, led by 9/11 
participant and opportunist Rudy Guiliani, and hawkish neoliberal Hillary 
Clinton, have already benefited from a new round of mass fear.

Musharraf benefits from the removal of a bitter rival, but now must find a way 
to re-establish order. Musharraf now has an ideal justification to crack down on
³terrorists² and impose full martial law, with Bush-Cheney working from the 
shadows behind Musharraf---and continuing to manipulate or remove his apparatus,
if Musharraf proves too unreliable or broken to suit Anglo-American plans.

The likely involvement of the ISI behind the Bhutto hit cannot be overstated. 
ISI¹s role behind every major act of ³terrorism² since 9/11 remains the central 
unspoken truth behind current geopolitical realities. Bhutto, but not Sharif or 
Musharraf would have threatened the ISI¹s agendas.

Bhutto, militant Islam, and the pipelines

Now that she has been martyred, many unflattering historical facts about Benazir
Bhutto will be hidden or forgotten.

Bhutto herself was intimately involved in the creation of the very ³terror² 
milieu purportedly responsible for her assassination. Across her political 
career, she supported militant Islamists, the Taliban, the ISI, and the 
ambitions of Western governments.

As noted by Michel Chossudovsky in America¹s ³War on Terrorism², it was during 
Bhutto¹s second term that Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) and the Taliban rose to 
prominence, welcomed into Bhutto¹s coalition government. It was at that point 
that ties between the JUI, the Army and the ISI were established.

While Bhutto¹s relationship with both the ISI and the Taliban were marked by 
turmoil, it is clear that Bhutto, when in power, supported both---and 
enthusiastically supported Anglo-American interventions.

In his two landmark books, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in 
Central Asia and Jihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia, Ahmed Rashid
richly details the Bhutto regime¹s connections to the ISI, the Taliban, 
³militant Islam², multinational oil interests, and Anglo-American officials and 
intelligence proxies.

In Jihad, Rashid wrote:

³Ironically it was not the ISI but Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the most 
liberal, secular leader in Pakistan¹s recent history, who delivered the coup de 
grace to a new relationship with Central Asia. Rather than support a wider peace
process in Afghanistan that would have opened up a wider peace process in 
Afghanistan, Bhutto backed the Taliban, in a rash and presumptuous policy to 
create a new western-oriented trade and pipeline route from Turkmenistan through
southern Afghanistan to Pakistan, from which the Taliban would provide security.
The ISI soon supported this policy because its Afghan protégé Gulbuddin 
Hekmatyar had made no headway in capturing Kabul, and the Taliban appeared to be
strong enough to do so.²

In Taliban, Rashid provided even more historical detail:

³When Bhutto was elected as Prime Minister in 1993, she was keen to open a route
to Central Asia. A new proposal emerged backed strongly by the frustrated 
Pakistani transport and smuggling mafia, the JUI and Pashtun military and 
political officials.²

³The Bhutto government fully backed the Taliban, but the ISI remained skeptical 
of their abilities, convinced that they would remain a useful but peripheral 
force in the south.²

³The US congress had authorized a covert $20 million budget for the CIA to 
destabilize Iran, and Tehran accused Washington of funneling some of these funds
to the Taliban---a charge that was always denied by Washington . Bhutto sent 
several emissaries to Washington to urge the US to intervene more publicly on 
the side of Pakistan and the Taliban.²

Bhutto¹s one mistake: she vehemently supported the pipeline proposed by 
Argentinian oil company Bridas, and opposed the pipeline by Unocal (favored by 
the US). This contributed to her ouster in 1996, and the return of Nawaz Sharif 
to power. As noted by Rashid:

³After the dismissal of the Bhutto government in 1996, the newly elected Prime 
Minister Nawaz Sharif, his oil minister Chaudry Nisar Ali Khan, the army and the
ISI fully backed Unocal. Pakistan wanted more direct US support for the Taliban 
and urged Unocal to start construction quickly in order to legitimize the 
Taliban. Basically the USA and Unocal accepted the ISI¹s analysis and 
aims---that a Taliban victory in Afghanistan would make Unocal¹s job much easier
and quicken US recognition.²

Her appealing and glamorous pro-Western image notwithstanding, Bhutto¹s true 
record is one of corruption and accommodation.

The ³war on terrorism² resparked

Every major Anglo-American geostrategic crime has been preceded by a convenient 
pretext, orchestrated and carried out by ³terror² proxies directly or indirectly
connected to US military-intelligence, or manipulated into performing as 
intelligence assets. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto is simply one more 
brutal example.

This was Pakistan¹s 9/11; Pakistan¹s JFK assassination, and its impact will 
resonate for years.

Contrary to mainstream corporate news reporting, chaos benefits Bush-Cheney¹s 
³war on terrorism². Calls for ³increased worldwide security² will pave the way 
for a muscular US reaction, US-led force and other forms of ³crack down² from 
Bush-Cheney across the region. In other words, the assassination helps ensure 
that the US will not only never leave, but also increase its presence.

The Pakistani election, if it takes place at all, is a simpler two-way choice: 
pro-US Musharraf or pro-US Sharif.

While the success of Bush-Cheney¹s 9/11 agenda has met with mixed results, and 
it has met with a wide array of resistance (³terroristic² as well as political),
there is no doubt that the propaganda foundation of the ³war on terrorism² has 
remained firm, unshaken and routinely reinforced.

As for Nawaz Sharif, who now emerges as the sole competitor for Musharraf, he, 
like Musharraf and Bhutto, is legendary for his accommodation to Anglo-American 
interests---pipelines, trade, and the continued US military presence. As 
Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie noted in the book Forbidden Truth, 
the October 1999 military coup led by Musharraf that originally toppled Sharif¹s
regime was sparked by animosity between the two camps, as well as ³Sharif¹s 
personal corruption and political megalomania², and ³concerns that Sharif was 
dancing too eagerly to Washington¹s tune on Kashmir and Afghanistan².

In other words, Bush-Cheney wins, no matter which asset winds up on the throne.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of 
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on 
Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on 
community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The 
source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global 
Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, 
contact: •••@••.•••

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not 
always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such 
material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an 
effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social 
issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair 
use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: •••@••.•••

© Copyright Larry Chin, Global Research, 2007

The url address of this article is: 
www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7699


© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
-- 

--------------------------------------------------------
Posting archives: 
http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/?lists=newslog

Escaping the Matrix website: http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website: http://cyberjournal.org

How We the People can change the world:
http://governourselves.blogspot.com/

Community Democracy Framework: 
http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html

Moderator: •••@••.•••  (comments welcome)