Pakistan government on December 28 issued the following transcript of what it claimed was telephonic conversation between al Qaeda-linked Taliban commander Baitullah Mahsud and his aide, an unnamed Maulvi sahib, on the of former prime Benazir Bhutto. Interior Ministry spokesperson Brigadier (R) Javed Iqbal Cheema claimed the phone call was intercepted by the intelligence agencies at about 9 am on December 28, a day after the killing of Ms Bhutto. Cheema claimed the conversation was in Pushto language and the government issued an Urdu translation of the .
For our readers we are translating the transcript into English language from Urdu without any change.
Transcript
Maulvi Sahib: Asalam o Alaikum.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Walaikum Asalam.
Maulvi Sahib: Ameer sahib, how are you?
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): All right.
Maulvi Sahib: Congratulations. I just came back tonight.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Congratulations to you too. They were our people?
Maulvi Sahib: They were our people there.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Who was there?
Maulvi Sahib: Saeed. Second was Bilal of Badar and Ikramullah was also there.
Ameer Sahib(Baitullah Mehsud): Did all three do it?
Maulvi Sahib: Ikramullah and Bilal did it.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Then congratulations to you.
Maulvi Sahib: Where are you? I want to meet you.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): I am in Makeen. Come. I am at Anwar Shah's house.
Maulvi Sahib: Okay. I am coming.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): For now, don't inform at their homes.
Maulvi Sahib: Okay.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Fantastic job. Very brave boys who killed her.
Maulvi Sahib: Ma’shallah. When I come, I will inform with details.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): I am waiting for you. Congratulations, once again congratulations.
Maulvi Sahib: Congratulations to you too.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Anything I can do for you?
Maulvi Sahib: Thank you very much.
Ameer Sahib (Baitullah Mehsud): Asalam o Alaikum.
Maulvi Sahib: Walaikum Asalam.
Conclusions
This is the complete transcript of the alleged conversation and although Maulvi Omer, a spokesman for Mahsud, has denied that his organisation or people have anything to do with Bhutto’s killing, the government insists that it was job done by Mahsud’s people.
Pakistan People’s Party has rejected the government claim that Mahsud was behind Bhutto’s killing saying that it was trying to divert the investigations. People of Pakistan in general also doubt this government claim. The reason for this claim lacking credibility may be for the following reasons:
Loopholes
1: In the transcript provided by the government, the two persons talking to each other on the phone refer to ‘Ameer sahib’ and `Maulvi sahib.’ What evidence is there in this transcript to prove that the `Ameer sahib’ on the phone is Baitullah Mahsud because during the entire conversation they don’t call each other by names. The government has assumed that `Ameer sahib’ in the conversation is Baitullah Mashud. Or the government says they have matched the voice of `Ameer sahib’ on the phone with the recorded voice of Mahsud. Is this voice-match sufficient evidence?
2: Throughout the conversation between `Ameer sahib’ and `Maulvi sahib,’ neither of the unnamed persons ever mention what was the job done? Whether they are talking about the job of assassinating Bhutto or something else? Whether the sentence by `maulvi sahib’ that “they were our people there” means that their people were at Bhutto’s rally? Once again the government has assumed that this sentence means that Mahsud’s men have carried out the suicide attack. Is this sufficient evidence?
3: Nowhere in the conversation between them they talk about suicide bombing or gun fire. `Maulvi sahib’ says, “Ikramullah and Bilal did it.” The question is what did Ikramullah and Bilal do? Did they blow themselves up? Did they shoot from the gun? Whether what they did was that they killed Bhutto? From the sentence by `Maulvi sahib’ that “Ikramullah and Bilal did it,” the government has assumed that they blew up the place. Is this sufficient evidence?
4: If the government was able to intercept the telephonic conversation between Mahsud and his aide, why weren’t the intelligence agencies able to accurately pinpoint the location, raid and arrest them? The local mobile phone companies have equipment to trace the general location from where a call is made. The intelligence agencies have more sophisticated equipment to track down the exact place from where the call is made.
Cheema during his press conference said that Mahsud is smart enough to keep moving from one place to another so that he is not tracked down from phone calls he makes. This raises the question that is Mahsud so silly not to take appropriate measure so that his phone calls are not traced?
These are just a few of the many loopholes in the government claim that Baitullah Mahsud was behind Bhutto’s murder. There must be many more, a close account of the transcript would reveal. Soon after the government released the transcript, several government and security officials, in off-the-record talk, said the government moved in haste. They should have taken more time and thoroughly investigated before reaching a conclusion. Since it was being blamed for not providing enough security to Bhutto, the decision makers in the government jumped to conclusions.
In the same press conference, Cheema came out with an astonishing, rather bizarre, explanation regarding the cause of Bhutto’s death. He said that no bullet hit Bhutto and neither the death was caused by shrapnel of the bomb. He said the death was caused from a wound inflicted by the lever of car’s sunroof, which pierced her temple when she ducked soon after the explosion. Cheema arranged for a video footage that was shown at the press conference recorded from the last moments of Bhutto showing her standing out from the car’s sunroof and waving at her supporters outside the Liaquat Bagh. It showed a handgun, close to Bhutto and three shots were fired at her before the explosion. Cheema claimed none of the bullet from that handgun hit Bhutto, as she ducked into the car before the bomb explosion and after the gunshots. Again, the investigators jumped to conclusion.
First of all, it is hard to believe that the vehicle’s lever could cause such a fatal wound. The amount of blood that spilled out of Bhutto’s body belies this claim. The lever couldn’t have hit Bhutto’s temple so hard that it caused such a damaging blow. Secondly, the Toyota car company also countered this claim by saying that the car levers can’t cause fatal injuries. Moreover, a few days after her tragic death, news channel got hold of different video footages of her last moments. Dawn News channel showed a footage where the alleged terrorist pointing gun at Bhutto and a second probably suicide bomber are both shown and they are standing so close to Bhutto that it raises questions that where was Bhutto’s security and how did they manage to get so close to her. Cheema had also claimed the press conference that the government had provided four police cars and at least 24 police officials to protect her. In the video footage shown by Dawn News channel, these police vehicles are seen standing at quite a distance from Bhutto leaving enough room for anyone to sneak in between.
Another foreign news channel also got hold of a different footage, which it played on December 31, it showed Bhutto falling into her car soon after the gunshots were fired and before the explosion, indicating that she fell after a bullet hit her.
On December 31, caretaker Prime Minister Mohammedmian Soomro met senior newspaper editors and reportedly apologized for the `blunder’ by Cheema in claiming that Bhutto’s death was accidental. There appears to be lack of coordination among the government departments, as one would presume that surely Cheema would have consulted the caretaker government before making such a claim. It appears from Soomro’s statement that he didn’t. He used his own judgment and information from the intelligence agencies for making such a claim.
Bhutto is dead and she has been buried. That’s the final word. She won’t come back but her memories and the cause of her tragic death will haunt Pakistan and its people for generations to come. That is why there is consistent blame game going on. Sherry Rehman, who bathed her after her death, said she is sure that Bhutto had a bullet wound that went right through her head. She said Bhutto had bled profusely. The doctors who operated upon her at Rawalpindi General Hospital in an attempt to revive her breath said she was hit by a hard object but they couldn’t find any foreign object inside her head.
Controversy
The government is consistently rejecting a demand by the PPP that foreign investigators may be allowed to hold an investigation into Bhutto’s killing. The PPP is demanding that the United Nations should order an inquiry into Bhutto’s killing similar to the one held in case of Lebanese leader Rafiq Harriri’s assassination. The PPP is also insisting that Bhutto’s letter to her American friend Mark Siegel, which was meant for CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer, be regarded as her dying statement and be used as evidence in the probe. In that letter, published by Dawn newspaper, Bhutto on October 26, a week after an attack on her in Karachi, had written that in account of her death President Pervez Musharraf be held responsible. She had already sent a letter to Musharraf naming three people whom she feared were trying to kill her. The government took no action on Bhutto’s letter to Musharraf and neither the Pakistani investigators are looking into her charge that Musharraf be held responsible for her death.
Another controversy regarding the government ordered judicial inquiry is that nobody will accept the judge appointed by Musharraf regime as credible. The entire independent judiciary was sacked by Musharraf on November 3 and the judges appointed thereafter were all handpicked and controversial. The sitting judges lack credibility and nobody is ready to accept the outcome of the probe by them.
Without any doubt Bhutto’s murder is the biggest tragedy (barring the natural calamity of 2005 earthquake) to hit Pakistan since the hanging of her father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in 1979. It has changed the course of Pakistan’s politics. Questions are being raised whether in her death; Bhutto has saved Pakistan or thrown the country further into uncertainty. The local and foreign news channels have started debating the future of Pakistan with greater emphasis on how to deal with a troubled Islamic country possessing nuclear weapons.
The issue most worrying for the Musharraf regime and his backers in the military will be: India has also gone through such tragic times as Indira Gandhi and then her son Rajiv Gandhi were assassinated in the decades of 1980s and 1990s, respectively. The world community did not question India’s ability to handle the situation. In Pakistan’s case the world community is consistently doubting the nation’s ability to appear as a responsible country. The reason is that India has a long history of democratic norms, respect for its constitution and the strength of its institutions where the will of the people reigns supreme. In case of Pakistan, the country has a long history of dictatorships, abrogation of the constitution, weak institutions and no respect for rule of law where the wishes of the people are trampled under the boots of dictators. Pakistan’s combination of civil-military establishment is to be blamed for the reason that the world community sees the two nations of India and Pakistan differently.
