Feminism and international relations in Benazir Bhutto's leadership

Benazir Bhutto

What I found most interesting and surprising about the documentary Bhutto (2010) about Benazir Bhutto was the statement she made about her nation\'s security: \"I think the biggest protection comes from God, and God-willing all will go well.\" From a feminist perspective, it is difficult to rationalize Bhutto\'s public faith in the context of a modern feminist IR perspective. However, what I found most useful about the documentary was the fact that Bhutto\'s faith was something that animated her life as a public leader and as a follower in her father\'s footsteps. Faith for Bhutto was not something that she viewed as subjugating her or oppressing her in a patriarchal system -- and even though she consented to an arranged marriage (after having been educated in the West) it is possible to see in Bhutto a complex arrangement of feminism and traditionalism -- and a profound respect for both -- in such a way that a new approach to the relationship of feminism with International Relationships should be explored. This paper will attempt to explore that relationship as it discusses the documentary Bhutto in conjunction with J. Ann Tickner\'s (1997) article \"You Just Don\'t Understand: Troubled Engagements between Feminists and IR Theorists.\"

As Tickner (1997) notes \"feminist scholars, as well as a few IR theorists, have called for conversations and dialogue across paradigms\" (p. 611). What this means to me is that perspectives in the modern -- especially if they are born of political, social or cultural ideologies -- must converge at some point in order for actual IR to develop. In a world where feminist leadership is more and more prevalent (Merkel in Germany, Clinton in the U.S., Bhutto herself in Pakistan), it is easy to forget that simple labels do not always define a person\'s actions or beliefs -- and that underneath an ethnic label or an ideological label is a personality that can maintain complex worldviews and ideas that others may find it difficult to relate to. In the case of Bhutto, what I found refreshing about her was her ability to navigate two worlds and to still promote her beliefs in a way that she and her supporters saw to be effective.

Moreover, what was interesting about her was the fact that her life and political career were not free from accusations of scandal and corruption. Such accusations are hurled in many directions in today\'s world, especially when a geopolitical advantage may be gained by the opposition if the target\'s reputation is hurt -- but the fact that they are hurled at all indicates that the target is prominent enough to receive attention at a high level. What this says to me about Bhutto is that she did not shy from the spotlight or try to hide herself behind a patriarchal culture that clearly wanted her out of the way. She stood before the world, not just as a feminist or as a national leader -- but rather as a world leader -- a person of a specific culture and ethnicity, with one foot in the West and one foot in the Middle East -- reaching out with both arms in two different directions in an attempt to unite these two worlds. This to me was the most striking image of Bhutto that I received while watching the documentary.

The documentary emphasizes the misunderstanding between feminists and International Relations theorists as discussed by Ann Tickner in the sense that Bhutto does not appear to the world quite as the Western-educated feminist that Westerners would envision for themselves when they think of such a label. In many ways, Bhutto projects an image of traditional Pakistan values, in her dress, in her private actions (marriage), and in her ideas about culture. On the other hand she promotes women\'s rights and education and other issues that are similar to what feminists promote in the West. So there is a complexity in the image that she projects and a superficial reading of that projected image can lead to misunderstandings in international relations. For IR theorists, a deeper understanding of the complex character of individuals like Bhutto, who represent contrasting ideologies, can be difficult -- but it is absolutely necessary to obtain this deeper understanding so that misunderstandings are cleared up. As Tickner (1997) points out, paradigms have to be crossed: staying within one paradigm and refusing to step out and enter into another one is to remain isolated and to a certain extent ignorant of the realities of the world all around us. There is much more going on the world that insulated ideologies. Traditions and organic movements as well as familial and cultural issues all shape people and leaders and theorists, and the perspectives that are formed are often an amalgamation of all these experiences.