This is a really cool book. Imagine "the Devil and Daniel Webster," but set in Pakistan. I mean, the author convenes an imaginary court of classic Islamic thinkers from the last 1000 years to debate whether Islam allows a female political leader. (The answer is yes.) Fun and thought-provoking.

Benazir Bhutto's tale of her youth and political career in Pakistan is eloquent and engaging as a narrative, surprisingly readable, with an almost fictional quality. However, it is precisely these dream-like allusions that make a reader who is more knowledgeable about politics and social hierarchies in Pakistan wonder about the reliability and motives behind her portrayal of Pakistani leaders.

Recounting the personal tragedies and difficulties experienced by the Bhutto family, Benazir is stirring and emotive, inspiring empathy in her readers. But she paints a disturbingly naive and idealised picture of her own family. The Bhuttos appear as eternal victims of cruel and unrelenting dictators, who stifle the voice of the people, unwaveringly embodied in the form of a Bhutto (first her father, followed by her mother, and then Benazir herself). References to the fuedal landowning family's power, status, nobility and wealth are scattered throughout Benazir's text, and make one wonder if she wouldn't be better off using the argument of divine right, rather than popular mandate, to justify her family's claims to leadership of Pakistan.

On the whole, the book is worth reading but I recommend it be done with a pinch of salt. It is evident that Benazir Bhutto belongs to an elite amongst the various Pakistani elites. I find it more than a little paradoxical and hypocritical that she is able to combine her membership in one of South Asia's "ruling families" with so ardent a conviction that hers was the true and democratically determined voice of the Pakistani people.

With the benefit of hindsight, and the knowledge that Benazir did not live up to her political ambitions to serve the "masses" in either of her two terms as Prime Minister, the rhetoric of "Daughter of the East" seems a rather bitter pill to swallow.

BeNazir Bhutto is a former Prime Minister of Pakistan. Her father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was elected Prime Minister in early 1970's. The military dictator Gen. Zia, who ruled Pakistan until 1987 when his plane crashed, hanged him. Miss Bhutto coherently elucidates the events surrounding her father's unjust death and the struggle for reclaiming the government. I would suggest this book for the readers who want to have first hand accounts of Martial law on the country as whole and a family, which has lost most of its members in the unmerited war of politics.

Benazir Bhutto is a striking personality-she is both hated and loved in Pakistan, very much Indira Gandhi on a somewhat smaller scale. Her autobiography begins with her reaction to her father's death-Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was hanged by General Zia ul-Haq after a military coup and the pleadings of the world community. Throughout the book, Benazir paints Zia as the ultimate devil, the evil that consumed Pakistan and sent her family into prison or death. The book is extremely melodramatic in tone, but to me it was quite appealing-not as a portrayal of Mrs. Bhutto's personality but rather as another testament in the mixed reviews of her reign. The book ends with the votes about to be cast in her favor-and they did. Benazir was elected to two terms, but was dismissed by Pakistan's President and replaced by political rival Nawaz Sharif. She has been accused of financial laundering and at one time had an arrest warrant placed on her in Pakistan. Though her character is now under question, Benazir Bhutto still remains a well-spoken, articulate voice, and there is no better reflection of these qualities than in DAUGHTER OF DESTINY. She speaks without much bitterness-there is only moderate waxing of effluvium about the cruel fates her early destiny went through. Though, not having experienced life in Pakistan under her rule as Prime Minister, I cannot form any political or personal view towards Mrs. Bhutto, one thing is clear to me-she has the ability to make her voice heard. Whether or not she is 'defending' American airstrikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan or speaking of how she believes her brother's shooting death was related to a conspiracy to remove the 'Bhutto factor from Pakistani politics', Benazir has an articulate and clear voice. Now if only her morals and character were so lucid.

Exciting book, really interesting story. Just read this book as three different ways (always linked)to target to the power: Ms Bhutto riformist way, the mother's bureaucratic way, the brother's revolutionary. And read Rushdie's Shame before or immediately after.

Benazir Bhutto has acquired an eminent place in history of Muslim world. She is the first Muslim elected prime minister of any Muslim country in 1400-year history. This book, no doubt, is part of Pakistan's history now. She talks very eloquently about the atrocities that her family endured during long dictator ship of Asia's model dictator ZIA-UL-HAQUE, who overturned Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto's elected government in a military coup. Z.A. Bhutto had the courage to challenge the WHITE ELEPHANT, and subsequently loose his power and face assassination at hands of undemocratic and tyrant army supported by PNA (Pakistan National Alliance), a group of islamists backed by a foreign agency. Same religious group has gathered some political strength in Pakistan's political scenario, but has now been shunned by the same opportunist foreign agency. Benazir Bhutto talks a lot about the sufferings at hands of military but does not have same heart as ZA Bhutto to challenge her real enemies. This book is however a "must read" for those who are interested in the politics and history of this region. She has art to impress the reader and make her point clear.

Ms Lamb seems to have very little understanding of the complex melee that makes up Pakistan. Her observations are superficial and generally lacking great insight. She starts with preconcieved biases and nowhere in the book does she try and test these preconceptions. This is a truly disappointing book given the amount of time the correspondent has spent in the region.

The above review opinions and the contents of the book itself all prove the circumstances of Pakistan's reality. Its common people aren't worth the faeces they make: they allow tyrants to play around with them, their rights and their fate, and let them rob them openly. It is only when such people emigrate to Western societies that they manage to find some self-worth. This proves the hollowness of their claim to legitimacy, and tells us that they are an inert, spent culture fit for destruction only, since they can not manage to better their lot in their own societies and lands where they really belong, on their own. Anybody who has the guts to point out such basic realities in today's strayed-off-the-path world, promptly gets labelled as a "racist". These "immigrants" have the nerve to leave their own failing societies by hook or by crook and parasitically latch on to their Western host societies. When they find enough breath after recovering, they start extolling the virtues of Islam, and denigrating their hosts' culture. If they were so much in love with their own religion and culture, why did it need the "enemy" Western environment for them to be able to express their true sentiments? Instead why didn't they stay behind in their own country where such circumstances truly belong and freely prevail? (This basic discrepancy is often overlooked by Westerners due to "political correctness"). Such pestilent, deceitful types need to be eradicated. On the other hand, the Pakistani ruling classes are among the largest and the worst organised crime syndicates in the world (and America knows this very well). There are many who would like to fudge the truth about these matters for various reasons, but I am a Pakistani, well versed in the affairs of where I live, and nobody can contest the veracity of my assertions.

Though it does suffer the flaws of most modern (especislly english language) books written on such subjects, such as misspelling many place and people's names, this book, in my opinion, remains a "classic" narrative of events and trends at the particular, very critical time of Pakistan's history, when it was written. It illustrates very well the (my) contention that the bourgeois/middle class/modern cultures have long since supersded the state of affairs prevailing--and decaying--in Pakistan's society and culture today; and that this contorted "system" could not exist here without the active support of first the British and now America, which helps it live on artificially, and has confined bourgeois reality unfairly to the (feudal) minority elite of this social setup, whose people are inert, uneducated and passive (even if they were capable of overthrowing this setup, they could not replace it with anything but chaos. They need "help from above"). So the elites end up in enjoying "the best" of "both worlds", while the poor writhe on in their self inflicted wretchedness. Of course this doesn't mean that tension and explosive disintegration are not present. It is just that the "masses" don't know the right way to go about asserting themselves. They are more inclined to view things in the "two wrongs make a right" manner. Apart from all this, the basis for the existence of the reality of the Pakistani entity is nonsensical and ridiculous, being put together like something out of "Alice in Wonderland".The nature of its name reflects that.

Pakistan is an obvious case for the analyst of civil-military relations, not least because of the strikingly different post-independence roles played by its own armed forces and those of neighbouring India. Initially, the officer corps of both countries continued as virtual copies of British military traditions on the subcontinent, including a strict adherence to the ideal of an 'officer and gentleman' physically and socioeconomically apart from mainstream society and above the 'dirty' world of politics. In the past half-century of independence, Indian officers have remained resolutely in their barracks as obedient tools of their democratically elected civilian masters. In contrast, their former comrades in Pakistan plotted a coup d'état as early as 1951 before ruling the country at the head of military-bureaucratic regimes from 1958-71 and again from 1977-88. The government continues to suffer undue attention from the military and, as recently as September 1995, over 30 armed forces' officers were arrested on charges of allegedly plotting to eliminate the army's high command and top politicians, declare martial law and impose Islamic law in the country. What factors have contributed to Pakistan's affinity for military rule?

Saeed Shafqat's examination of the volatile nature of civil-military relations in Pakistan begins with an overview of developments from independence to the end of Ayub Khan's regime in 1969, concentrating on the ascendancy of the military-bureaucratic elite and its impact on the politics and economics of Pakistan. When the impressive economic growth of this period ended with the withdrawal of foreign aid following the disastrous 1965 Indo-Pak War, Ayub's administration was doomed. Yet the 'military hegemonic system' (p 49) remained in place to preside over the dismemberment of the country and the creation of Bangladesh until 'mass mobilization, regime confrontation and mass movement' (p 74) led by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto at the head of the Pakistan People's Party resulted in the installation of a civilian regime. Unfortunately, explains Shaqat, personal, ideological and regional centre-state conflicts combined with the government's failure to 'produce conditions conducive to politics of bargaining, compromise and accommodation' (p 157) to preclude the consolidation of the democratic process. Indeed, despite following a classic 'carrot-and-stick' course of attempting to control the armed forces by appeasing their corporate demands while constricting their institutional role and responsibilities, Zulfikar's 'strategies and tactics conveyed the impression that, more than just civilian control of the military, he wanted to establish personal hegemony' (p 185). By 1977, worried officers had replaced his civilian administration with a military regime led by General Zia ul Haq who carefully and very successfully consolidated his personal and the armed forces' institutional power over the next decade via the skillful manipulation of powerful interests and actors on both sides of the civil-military divide. His 1988 death left Pakistan with a 'polarized and divided' (p 219) polity and a seemingly permanent hegemonic role for the military in politics; legacies which the subsequent civilian administrations have been grappling with ever since. For Shafqat, these efforts have not been a success:

'in the past decade or so, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif...had an opportunity to build organizational structure of the party and possibly democratize the process of leadership selection...instead...While in power both used party as an instrument for extending patronage and ventured to establish the dominant party model to strengthen personal rule...Both contributed little in developing any consensual framework for government-opposition relationship; both allowed and encouraged political confrontation, polarization, intolerance and authoritarian style of governance. Resultantly, military hegemony in Pakistan's politics has continued to persist...' (p 251).

Overall, Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan is a straightforward and highly informative account of the country's civil-military machinations over the past 20 years or so. Shafqat's conclusion is damning: despite the repeated (if sporadic) return of elected civilian governments, the very nature, organisation and methods deployed by Pakistan's political elites and parties repeatedly have thwarted the replacement of authoritarian structures with true democratic alternatives. If, warns Shaqat, democratic norms and practices continue to fail to gain legitimacy, the military-bureaucratic regime will continue to be an alternative model of government.

One final note: While this Westview Press edition is handsomely bound and typeset, and offers quality endnotes, it suffers from remarkably poor copy-editing. This includes the repeated lack of definite articles, indeterminate punctuation, the absense of capitalisation at the beginning of some sentences and, incredibly, spelling the name of the prime minister as 'Zufikar' on the cover but as 'Zulfikar' throughout the text! Furthermore, Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan contains no index, surely not the normal practice for a book with academic ambitions.