How will Benazir Bhutto be remembered? Discussing Reconciliation on Radio 4’s Start the Week, the presenter Andrew Marr got so excited by her legacy and achievement that he said, “At the risk of straying across lines of neutrality, I think the more people that read this book, the better.” The book comes garlanded with acclaim from the likes of Senator Edward Kennedy and Madeleine Albright. But does the praise lavished on Benazir since her assassination bear any relation to what she actually did during her life?

Let me tell you about the former Pakistani prime minister, Mohammed Mohammed, an ugly man with a thick beard.

During his first term in office he failed to pass a single piece of legislation, and when he returned to government he and his family became extremely rich from kickbacks on official contracts. He bugged and harassed independent journalists. In the mid1990s, his paramilitary death squads eliminated activists from the rival MQM in Karachi and he was implicated in the murder of his own brother, as well as the deaths of three family retainers in his mother’s entourage. He funded a proxy war against India in Kashmir using Arab jihadis, and backed the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan; indeed, if he had not given cash, fuel, training and military spare parts to the Taliban, it would not have been able to rise to power.

Mohammed Mohammed never, of course, existed: I am talking here about Benazir Bhutto. She was brave, glamorous, feisty and articulate – and the midwife of the Taliban. To a western audience (which she always handled impeccably, flattering reporters with access) she came across as a secular democrat and a committed campaigner for women’s rights. On David Frost’s sofa, Benazir could change from cute to solemn in a moment. As the first woman elected to lead a Muslim country, she offered huge symbolic hope. Since her death, she has been praised extensively: a television anchor even wrote an article about introducing Benazir to the joys of buying lingerie from Victoria’s Secret. Ironically, it was left to the socialite Jemima Khan to puncture the balloon. Khan concluded from her own years of living in Pakistan – as the wife of Imran Khan, Benazir’s political rival – that Benazir was “as ruthless and conniving as they come — a kleptocrat in a Hermès headscarf”.

Related Internet Links

• Purchase books from Sunday Times Books First

Q&A: the murder of Benazir Bhutto

Times South Asia Correspondent asks who had most to gain from killing the Pakistan People's Party leader

Multimedia

• Video: Bhutto assassinated

• Bhutto: the background, legacy and life

• Pictures: death of Benazir Bhutto

BACKGROUND

• Pakistan in chaos as Benazir Bhutto assassinated

• Who killed Benazir Bhutto? Main suspects

• Obituary: Benazir Bhutto, 1953-2007

• Can democracy survive Bhutto killing?

Related Links

• Benazir Bhutto's last testament

Reconciliation is an odd book. It seems to have been put together by a variety of people. Parts of it are readable and well argued, and deserve to be remembered as Benazir’s last testament, a statement of the ideals she aspired to but did not always fulfil. Other bits are tendentious and irrelevant. The first chapter is vintage Benazir, written in the same tone as her autobiography, Daughter of the East. She describes her return to Pakistan from exile at the end of last year, and her triumphal homecoming procession: “I must confess I felt safe in the enormous sea of love and support that surrounded me,” she wrote.

It was obvious to anyone in Pakistan at the time that she would be targeted as an American stooge, but she went ahead with the procession. A suicide bomber struck, leaving nearly 200 people dead, but Benazir survived. She made much in the book of the fact that the dictator General Pervez Musharraf did not provide her with sufficient security, asserting: “Had the jammers worked, the bombs could not have gone off.” But suicide bombers use toggle switches, which are not blocked by jammers. Either way, another terrorist killed Benazir only weeks later on December 27, 2007.

The next section of Reconciliation deals with the internal disputes within Islam. It is frank about the sectarian splits between Sunnis and Shias, and about the failure of the leaders of some Muslim countries to face down the distortions of Osama Bin Laden. Benazir noted the lack of interest on Arab television channels in the genocide of a Muslim population in Darfur, and the “unwillingness within the Muslim world to look inward and to identify where we may be going wrong ourselves”.

Using verses from the Koran, she has made a careful and reasonable case for seeing the ideology of Al-Qaeda as a profound distortion of original Islam, and has presented an alternative argument for believing in a reformist, pluralistic and modern Islamic society, and seeing it as closer to the real wishes of most of the world’s Muslims.

At this point, the tone of the book changes again, and the reader is treated to a brisk and baffling examination of the history of assorted countries including Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia, Iran, Mali and Congo; even Kazakhstan is mentioned. India (the elephant in the room when it came to Benazir’s view of the world) gets only a brief mention. The history of Pakistan that follows is like something out of a primary-school textbook, crossed with a party political broadcast. The achievements of the Bhutto family are exaggerated and lauded and their mistakes and hypocrisies are ignored. Benazir’s grandfather, Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto, a feudal landowner and a pro-British politician of no great importance, is presented as a seminal figure in the creation of Pakistan in 1947. Benazir’s own backing of the Taliban is blamed on her successor, Nawaz Sharif.

The book ends with a prescription for a happier world, involving an equivalent of the Marshall Plan being applied to the poorer Muslim nations by rich countries, and a nuanced analysis of Samuel P Huntington’s The Clash of Civilisations, an essay published in 1993 in the journal Foreign Affairs.

What are we to make of this strange book? I contacted Mark Siegel, Benazir’s point man in Washington, who helped her to research and write it. I asked him how it had been created, and he said that Benazir had been troubled by the way that extremists had hijacked the message of Islam. “She wanted me to compile all the assertions of extremist clerics and terrorists on democracy, pluralism, tolerance . . . Then she wanted me to confer with Islamic scholars and compile the Koranic references to the same subjects and line them out in an array, almost a spreadsheet, against the extremists.” He did his job well, and Benazir wrote a draft of the narrative.

Benazir was, by all accounts, a devoted patriot, a loyal friend and a loving mother. As a young woman at Harvard and Oxford universities, she imbibed idealistic ideas about democracy and feminism. But during the early 1980s she was to be cruelly mistreated by the dictator General Zia, taken from prison to prison and held for a time in a cage at a desert jail in Sindh, where temperatures would reach above 50C. This — and her father’s judicial execution — formed her political personality. Benazir was duplicitous to the point of being delusional, playing a constant multiple game, saying one thing to her supporters, another to the Pakistani army, another to the intelligence services, another to London and Washington, and something else again to the western media. She was a complex and brave woman, but she was no Joan of Arc, let alone a Margaret Thatcher, an Indira Gandhi or a Golda Meir.

READ ON

websites: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article3101102.ece
Benazir Bhutto's obituary in The Times

RECONCILIATION: Islam, Democracy and the West by Benazir Bhutto
Simon & Schuster £17.99 pp328

Available at the Sunday Times Books First price of £16.19 (inc p&p) on 0870 165 8585

Times Recommends

• Superfreakonomics by Steven D Levitt and Stephen J Dubner
• The Times picks the 50 best paperbacks of 2009
• Vincent van Gogh’s letters show the soul of the artist