Not this way

By Cyril Almeida
THE UN’s Benazir commission is Asif Zardari’s idea. It is one of his worst. If there was any doubt about the former, Ban Ki-moon’s visit dispelled it.At the secretary general’s press conference with PM Gilani the commission was really the only subject anybody cared about. But when neither mentioned it, a reporter was left to ask, what about the UN investigation? Wait until I meet the president, Ban Ki-moon replied. In Asif Zardari’s Pakistan, everyone knows who really runs the show.Why is a UN commission a bad idea?Start with the importance of finding Benazir’s killers quickly. Whoever or whatever follows this PPP government, this much is certain: the next government will have minimal interest in pursuing any investigation into BB’s death. And since continuity in government isn’t one of the things we do best here, history suggests that the PPP government has only a small window of opportunity to fully investigate her death.But can the UN deliver on Pakistan’s abbreviated political timeline? Not if the Rafik Hariri investigation is anything to go by.Hariri was assassinated on Feb 14, 2005. On Feb 15, the UN Security Council issued a statement that called on the secretary general to “report urgently on the circumstances, causes and consequences of this terrorist act.” By Feb 25 the Kofi Annan-appointed Mission of Inquiry into the Circumstances, Causes and Consequences of the 14 February Beirut Bombing arrived in Lebanon.On March 24, Peter Fitzgerald, head of the fact-finding mission and a former Irish deputy police commissioner, submitted his report. Paragraph 62 of the Fitzgerald report states:“The Lebanese investigation process suffered from serious flaws. Whether caused by lack of capabilities or commitment, this process is unlikely to reach a satisfactory conclusion … It is therefore the Mission’s view that an international independent investigation would be necessary to uncover the truth.”Onwards to UN Security Council Resolution 1595 of April 7, 2005, which set up the “international independent investigation Commission based in Lebanon” that was to “assist the Lebanese authorities in their investigation of all aspects of this terrorist act, including to help identify its perpetrators, sponsors, organisers and accomplices.”Don’t be misled by the promptness. It may have taken less than two months to set up the Hariri commission, but, four years on, the investigation continues. In the meantime, 11 reports have been submitted by the commission and five more resolutions have been passed by the UNSC.The commission’s last report in December 2008 stated: “The Commission has acquired new information that may allow it to link additional individuals to the network that carried out the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The Commission also made further findings that help to identify the possible geographic origin of the suicide bomber.”But was it willing to name names? “Progress has been made. However, to describe particular aspects of such progress would also be to publicise the identity of persons who may have information relevant to the investigation and to put their lives in jeopardy.”The commission’s mandate expires on Feb 28 and on March 1 a Special Tribunal for Lebanon in The Hague will be activated. Does that mean someone will finally be indicted?From the Hariri commission’s last report: “The launch of the Tribunal does not mean that the investigation has been completed. While extensive work has been done on the investigation, the Commission, and the Office of the Prosecutor, once it begins to operate, must continue to gather evidence that would support an indictment before the Tribunal.”So nearly four years since Hariri’s death, the 12 published UN reports have identified a total of zero suspects and led to the indictment of no one. This is not necessarily a bad thing; international law and investigations proceed slowly, for they must be thorough.But that’s the point — the PPP government doesn’t have the luxury of that kind of time. Four or five years hence they may or may not be in power and with them will go any real chance of finding BB’s killers. And a six-month deadline isn’t going to produce anything other than vague theories.The UN isn’t in the business of fingering persons it can’t substantiate its allegations against.But even if Zardari knows something we don’t, is it a good idea to be inviting the UN in at all? No.An indication of the powers the Benazir Bhutto commission will enjoy is in UNSC Resolution 1595: “To ensure the Commission’s effectiveness in the discharge of its duties, the Commission shall … Enjoy freedom of movement throughout the Lebanese territory, including access to all sites and facilities that the Commission deems relevant to the inquiry.”What this means is that we will give legal sanction — and set a precedent — for foreigners to stamp around the country. BB was killed. She wasn’t very popular with the army, let’s subpoena some retired generals and ask them stuff about stuff. And she probably wasn’t on A.Q. Khan’s Eid card list either; let’s call him in.Frankly, I would love as much as the next person to see some of Pakistan’s sacred cows hauled over the coals. If they’re bad, they deserve what they get; and if we can’t do it, then let others.But that is naïve. Pakistan’s failure to ensure its internal sovereignty has brought it to the cusp of the outside world intervening here in ways unimaginable. The Bush presidency may have convinced some that laws and precedents are irrelevant when the big guys want to get their way but the fact is the world doesn’t usually operate that way.States like some sort of legal cover, however tenuous. If another Mumbai or 9/11 or 7/7 or Madrid train bombing or worse occurs, the PPP government may well have handed the international community a tool it can use to prise open the state and force all sorts of change. If that sounds far-fetched, it probably is. For now. A few years ago drone attacks in Fata were unimaginable. Until Mumbai, international demands for an investigation weren’t on our radar either. The basic rule of international relations: don’t invite others in when they’re already itching to snoop around.And finally, a UN investigation is an emasculation of the PPP itself. When Musharraf was in charge, even the most uncharitable of PPP’s critics questioned whether an impartial credible investigation was possible. But now that the PPP is in charge?The government has put itself in the odd position of arguing that it is capable of finding and punishing the Mumbai collaborators, but can’t pursue those involved in the murder of its own party chief. Doesn’t the same nexus of militants and shadowy quasi-state actors have a role in both?Zardari’s PPP has no credible answer. Worse, a do-nothing UN commission which leads nowhere throws up a damning question: is the PPP trying to gain political mileage from its leader’s death at the expense of finding her killers?