Friday, January 04, 2008


William Dalrymple, that fine observer of Indian history, reflects realistically in the New York Times on some of Bhutto's deeds:
Benazir Bhutto was certainly a brave and secular-minded woman. But the obituaries painting her as dying to save democracy distort history. Instead, she was a natural autocrat who did little for human rights, a calculating politician who was complicit in Pakistan’s becoming the region’s principal jihadi paymaster while she also ramped up an insurgency in Kashmir that has brought two nuclear powers to the brink of war.


Anonymous sumeet said...

hey off-topic comment, but I read your piece in the latest pragati. well-written!
how are you doing?

7:34 AM  
Blogger Ashutosh said...

thanks! i am doing well. right now on vacation in india. how are you? and how's married life?!

7:49 PM  
Blogger Nikhil K said...

Doesn't death often lead to an undeserved glorification of the person?

10:41 AM  
Blogger Hirak said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

2:34 PM  
Blogger Hirak said...

@nikhil: especially, a violent one.
Another telling piece was published in (Time
)about her 19-yr son who is now the head of the party. There can be little democracy in the face of dynastic rule.

He cannot hold office till he is 25 as per the Pakistani constitution. A document that has not really bothered anyone so far.

2:37 PM  
Anonymous sumeet said...

I doing fine too. things have not changed much actually. we have a weekend marriage since our jobs separate us by 300 km. that's likely to persist for a few more months.
anyway.. have a good time in india!

11:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home