ON Nov 9, 2001, Musharraf`s assurance to side with the US prevented Pakistan from being taken to the stone age but six years down the road it may be leading the county to an implosion.
After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto no one knows where we are heading. The nation is stunned and the question everyone is asking is, `What next?`

The tragedy can perhaps be viewed from two perspectives, internal and external. Internally, the PPP is one of the two mainstream parties in Pakistan and there can be no argument that national political parties are essential to keep the country together. With the departure of Benazir, the existence of the PPP as one party may be at stake.The weakening of a major national party, or its splintering, is not only bad for the party itself but a bad omen for national unity. Added to it is a sense of deprivation among rural Sindhis, whether correct or perceived. It can only get worse when their main hope in the person of Benazir is no more. The circumstances of her death — a leader of Sindhi origin killed in Punjab — can become a provocative issue. No wonder the first concern of most on hearing the news of Benazir`s death was the unity of the country. The continuation of the PPP as a national party without splintering is most important for the unity of the country.

Another issue that can rankle in the minds of her supporters is the pre-emptive letter she wrote to the government immediately before her return in October, warning against certain members of the establishment and casting doubts on the intentions of the government. The controversy over whether she died of a bullet wound or a skull fracture after hitting her head against the sunroof of the Land Cruiser she was riding can only fuel conspiracy theories, as the use of bullets by sharpshooters is not a pattern usually associated with Islamic extremists.

Then there is the international angle. Benazir`s positioning of the PPP as a moderate forward-looking party with the agenda of crushing extremism is a stance supported by a majority of Pakistanis. But what made her task difficult was her public identification with the US for achieving this objective. While most Pakistanis want to quell extremism in the country, they want to do it for themselves and not for the Americans. This close identification with the US is the red rag for the extremists, which she could have done without considering that fighting extremism is not an easy task in the best of circumstances.

A viewing of CNN and Fox News shows how their prominent analysts identified the US with Benazir as their main weapon in fighting extremism in Pakistan. One of them pointed out in a talk show, in the first person, that “we” committed two mistakes. Firstly we did not insist on fair and free elections and secondly “we” did not insist on the protection that Benazir demanded and Musharraf denied. The demise of Benazir and the future of Pakistan are of such concern for the US that it has even become a major issue in the US elections. While US concern for Pakistan is understandable, considering its strategic location with reference to the on terror and the West`s phobia of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of extremists, it is important for Pakistan to seem to be its own master, rather than a lackey of the US, in order to give itself a reasonable chance of fighting Talibanisation.

The burning and looting after such a tragic event, though reprehensible, are the normal forms of expression of anger, grief and helplessness and have to be expected and handled as best as possible. The important thing, however, is correct decisions by the government from here on, actions that are genuinely based on the slogan `Pakistan first`, which are popular with our government and do not confuse Pakistan with any individual.

The usual knee-jerk reaction to a worsening law and order situation, which is expected after such tragedy, is to induct more troops, use more force and ultimately impose another martial law/emergency. But as the Nov 3 decision indicated, these unconstitutional options, though they offer a quick fix, do not really resolve problems. What is still the best option is a free and genuinely fair election that could assuage feelings, provided it is not held with the present judiciary, interim government, Election Commission and the local bodies in place.

Bush`s `advice` in his condolence speech on the demise of Benazir, asking Pakistan to continue with the democratic process, need not be `complied` with literally but would be more useful for both parties if it were complied with in spirit.