AS the sorrow and the fury over Benazir Bhutto’s murder subsides to a dull throb, many questions are being raised over the circumstances of her death.

One controversy that just won’t go away arises from the conflicting accounts of the event. The official version has attempted to deflect the cause of the slain leader’s death towards Al Qaeda/Taliban operatives. But the opposition insists that what killed her was at least one bullet fired by an assassin who is visible with a raised pistol in a video clip.

Normally, the precise nature of her death would have been irrelevant, since both the blast and the bullets were part of the same plot. But in the macabre calculus of political assassinations, death caused by a bullet could well be the handiwork of an officially sanctioned hit squad. A suicide bomb, on the other hand, bears the unmistakable signature of Islamic extremists.

While investigating a crime, one of the first things a detective does is to ask the question ‘cui bono’? Who benefits or gains from the crime? In this case, BB’s return was after lengthy secret negotiations with the government that culminated with the much-criticised National Reconciliation Ordinance. Having agreed to allow Ms Bhutto back into active politics shortly before the elections, I find it hard to believe that Musharraf would authorise an attempt against her life.

This is not to say that rogue elements within the intelligence apparatus might not have had a hand in the attack. Indeed, the sight of Musharraf paying tribute to the murdered PPP leader was a sign of his desperation: after years of badmouthing her at every opportunity, to have to now backtrack must have been a humiliating experience.

In the midst of our anger over such a tragedy, we should not lose sight of the real foe. As BB herself said so many times during her lifetime, the real enemies are the extremists who seek to destabilise Pakistan. They are the ones who have struck against the state and innocent victims time and again.

What I do blame Musharraf for is for failing to provide adequate security for her, especially after the murderous attack on Oct 18 that took 150 lives. Indeed, the government to this day has not come up with any clues or suspects. After that attempt, Musharraf contemptuously turned down her request for forensic help from the FBI or Scotland Yard.The reason given for rejecting this perfectly reasonable request was that Pakistan has sufficient expertise to carry out an investigation? Really? Where are these trained sleuths and state-of-the-art forensic labs? Our police investigation is based on the centuries-old technique of torture, or ‘chithrol’ as it is known to the Punjab police. But it is difficult to apply the third degree when you don’t have any suspects.

And if notions of national sovereignty prevented the government from seeking outside help, why has the FBI been so actively involved in hunting down Al Qaeda elements in Pakistan? American agents have been instrumental in providing our intelligence services with phone and email intercepts that have allowed them to make many arrests since 9/11. So why not ask for help after the Oct 18 attack? Had this been done, it is entirely possible that those behind the Dec 27 assassination might have been apprehended before they killed Ms Bhutto.

The fact that the killers were allowed to approach within a few feet of the ex-PM shows how pathetic the security arrangements were. Anybody who has seen the tight safety measures adopted for Musharraf or Shaukat Aziz would know that the government showed criminal negligence in ignoring a clear and present danger to a national leader.

When BB wrote a letter naming three people she suspected of plotting against her life, her fears were rejected out of hand. No attempt was made to check her sources or the reality of the threat. Indeed, Musharraf took this letter as an opening salvo fired by BB against his government on the eve of her return.

From events that have unfolded over much of the past year, we could safely infer that all our intelligence resources, and the might of the state, are in place to ward off any political or security threats to the establishment. Of course we never assumed that ordinary citizens were eligible for any protection; but somehow, we had thought that major political leaders with an international profile would be better looked after than Benazir Bhutto was.Over the years, Pakistan’s intelligence services have received untold billions through secret and unaudited accounts. The ISI, Military Intelligence and the Intelligence Bureau have tens of thousands working for them, with us footing the bill as well as bearing the brunt of their activities. But when there is a demonstrable threat against a prominent citizen, these spooks sit on their hands and are totally ineffective.

So if the Sindhis are especially furious, they have every right to be. With growing bitterness over the years, they have witnessed the Bhuttos killed off one by one. Asif Zardari, for all his sins, real and presumed, has done more jail time than any other well-known politician. And yet, other politicians are let off much more lightly. Nawaz Sharif, although found guilty of hijacking and sentenced to life imprisonment — albeit after a fixed trial — was sent off into comfortable exile. Many politicians who had corruption charges filed against them by NAB were prominent members of Musharraf’s cabinet. The Chaudhries, in particular, have prospered mightily despite a financial track record that makes Zardari look like an amateur.

So while we should not be fixated with conspiracy theories, we cannot forget that for over eight years it is Musharraf who has been in charge. And in this period, terrorism and Islamic militancy have grown exponentially. With all the massive resources at his command, Musharraf has been unable to control this deadly menace. For this failure alone, he should have offered his resignation, especially after the security fiasco surrounding Benazir Bhutto’s murder.

Much has been made by her detractors of her refusal to maintain a lower profile, and desist from risking her life time and again. But that’s the kind of politician she was, and she paid the ultimate price for her courage. However, we cannot fail to note that the leaders of the PML-Q have not been threatened in any way by the extremists. Clearly, these killers recognise kindred spirits.

I think it was President Truman who had a small sign on his desk saying, ‘The buck stops here’. In Musharraf’s case, we find him pointing towards Baitullah Mehsud and his gang of killers and saying, ‘The buck stops there.’