To Islamabad via Washington

In her address to a select gathering of Washington's power elite at the Middle East Institute, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto said what her audience wanted to hear, though much of it amounted to treading on public sensitivities back home in Pakistan.
Answering a question if she would allow the US or other Western countries to interrogate Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan for his role in the alleged nuclear proliferation activities, she said that under her rule "the International Atomic Energy Agency would have the right to question A.Q. Khan." Giving access to the IAEA, she went on, would satisfy the international community desiring to know more about the network of nuclear proliferators he is accused of heading.
She also said that if her party returned to power, parliamentary hearings will be held to determine if Dr A.Q. Khan alone was responsible for selling Pakistan's nuclear secrets to foreign countries or some other elements were also involved. So far as the issue of nuclear proliferation is concerned, no sane person can defend it. And without question, Pakistan must do all it can to ensure the problem never recurs.
Yet reopening the issue for outside scrutiny is undesirable for at least two good reasons. First and most importantly, a confession was made and a pardon granted by the government. Second, Dr Khan had confessed to violating a domestic law that prevented him from sharing Pakistan's nuclear secrets with other countries. The issue, therefore, needed to be dealt with inside the country, which has been done.
It is hard to imagine any other country in a similar situation allowing outsiders to question its top nuclear scientist. As to the PPP leader's assertion that she would allow only IAEA, not some Western interrogators, to question Dr Khan, the fact of the matter is that the US and its European allies have no problem getting on the IAEA panels of inspectors and investigators if and when they so desire.
Furthermore, Pakistan's nuclear programme is a source of great national pride and Dr Khan remains its founding hero. Hence any revocation of the pardon granted him earlier is likely to generate a huge furore countrywide, which will create unnecessary trouble. That, though, does not mean the questions IAEA might have about proliferation should remain unanswered. These can be routed, as has been the practice, through local sources.
What Bhutto said about holding parliamentary hearings to determine whether the scientist acted alone or had other collaborators, is important indeed, and must be pursued in all seriousness. Pakistan must act as a responsible member of the nuclear club not only to protect its international reputation but also in the greater interest of humanity. Nuclear know-how, after all, tends to tempt people more to exploit its destructive potential than its peaceful applications.
The PPP leader made plain her belief that the path to the seat of power in Islamabad passes through Washington, barely disguising her hopes of serving as a better alternative in the US fight against radical elements in Pakistan's tribal belt. She presented a picture of desperation and contradictions as she talked of lack of response from General Pervez Musharraf to her three-point power sharing formula (backed by the US and Britain), and characterised the US support for him as a "strategic miscalculation."
Repeating a commonly voiced accusation that General Musharraf tries to convince the world that only he stands in the way of extremists hoping to overrun nuclear armed Pakistan, she said she was returning home to "coalesce the forces of moderation against extremism." Civilian governments, of course, are better equipped to deal with situations such as the one prevailing in our tribal areas.
But contrary to what is expected of a politician of her standing and experience, Bhutto seems to be too willing to go along with whatever the West fancies, irrespective of its repercussions for this society. She has been critical of the government approach to make peace deals with the militants and loudly supportive of the heavy-handed manner in which it dealt with the Lal Masjid situation. That operation may have pleased the US but it has aggravated matters within this country.
Countless innocent people have since been killed in the ensuing madness that shows no sign of abating. The violence having escalated to the level it has, even government spokesmen find it convenient to use the threat of suicide bombings to ban Opposition protest rallies. What the country needs at this point in time is not the use of state force or threats of violence, but good faith efforts to promote a political process aimed at national reconciliation.