Murtaza?s death has undoubtedly been a traumatic experience for Benazir, whose government is even otherwise besieged by much anxiety on account of the severe economic and political problems facing Pakistan. In a series of statements in the midst of her mourning, she has spoken of plots and conspiracies to eliminate her. She seems convinced that her brother was targeted and shot and does not believe that Murtaza was simply caught in the crossfire. But she has refrained from pointing fingers.

As to the motive behind the killing, it could be mere personal vengeance. There were two bomb blasts in Karachi a couple of days before and the police had detained a close aide of Murtaza?who with some party activists then raided two police stations and roughed up some police officials. Observers have noted with horror the rise of what is commonly described as the "Kalashnikov culture" in Karachi and the collapse of discipline in the police force. The latter, on its part, has had a free hand in dealing with what the authorities regard as a mini-insurgency instigated by the Mohajir Qaumi Movement (MQM). There have been frequent reports of people being killed in stage-managed "police encounters" and of detainees being killed in custody.

A section of the law enforcement agencies believes that Murtaza Butto had at one time been involved in terroristic acts; and that in the days of his rebellion against the Zia-ul-Haq regime his Al-Zulfiqar Organisation (AZO) received training and support from India?s RAW. When Murtaza returned to Pakistan after several years of self-exile, there were reportedly as many as 80 charges pending against him with the police. While Murtaza announced the winding up of AZO some time ago, his style of political campaigning must have rattled even his sister. But saying that she may have "sanctioned" the police action on that fateful Friday evening, even if she believes that all disruptive element must be treated even-handedly under the law, would be stretching it a bit far. Murtaza had been unsparing in his criticism of Benazir?s PPP regime and actively campaigned against it, even joining hands with some of the opposition leaders in staging anti-government demonstrations.

There is no doubt that even though there has been much violence in Pakistan, for political, sectarian and factional reasons, the country has been utterly and severely shocked by what happened to Murtaza. It is even possible that Benazir may have for a while felt that her government was under serious threat of being destabilised or even toppled. However, on the whole, she has maintained a stout composure. The fact she has stuck to her original schedule of leaving for New York at the end of the month to meet IMF officials and address the UN General Assembly would also suggest that she feels fairly confident of her position. That at the time of Murtaza?s burial she and President Farooq Leghari faced a certain amount of hostility from a section of people in Larkana (the Bhuttos? ancestral home town) and Garhi Khuda Bux (where the burial took place) should be seen as a momentary display of anguish and anger. The common Sindhi holds the male heirs of a family in a great deal of affection and reverence and he could understandly have felt greatly agitated at Murtaza?s killing, unable to understand for himself how the ruling establishment could not prevent it from happening. In Larkana, as in Karachi and Islama-bad, large crowds of people belonging to all classes turned up to condole with the Bhutto family.

Nawaz Sharif?s meeting with Leghari on Spetember 26 was obviously an attempt to exploit the situation to his advantage at a time when, in his perception, Benazir?s government may have been somewhat in a state of disarray. His expectation that the president should use his special powers under the Constitution smacked of opportunism and showed an unfortunate lack of concern for democratic norms. The president?s reported response?that while the points raised by Sharif were of crucial national concern, they should have been debated and resolved in the Parliament?can only be seen as a polite snub. In response to Sharif?s expression of concern for the country?s economy and his allegations of massive corruption against the govenrment, the president reportedly counselled him to work for a bipartisan approach and consensus on major national issues in the effort to find a solution to the problems facing the country.

Judging from the press reports of the meeting, there is nothing to suggest that?despite his reference to the Supreme Court about the extent of his power for the appointment of judges and his letter to the National Assembly on accountability of national leaders and public servants?there is any lack of cohesion between the president and the prime minister. There have been insinuations to this effect in the recent past among a section of the intelligentsia and some people may have even believed that the prime minister?s personal bereavement may be an opportunity to sow seeds of mistrust. Traditionally, although not formally, it is said that Pakistan is governed by a ?troika? comprising the president, the prime minister and the army chief. Nothing has happened to suggest that fissures may be developing in this system of governance. This could well be because of a stronger commitment to democracy on the part of all concerned.?

The writer is a columnist for the Dawn, Karachi