A portrait of Pakistan opposition leader, Benazir Bhutto, is seen amongst flowers at a table for a condolence book at the Pakistan Embassy in Washington, Dec. 27, 2007. Bhutto was assassinated that morning in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, by an attacker who shot her after a campaign rally and then blew himself up. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

With Pakistan’s upcoming elections less than two weeks away and the prospect that Benazir Bhutto stood a good chance of becoming prime minister, the country's political future may have appeared rosier than it had in a long time.

However, with Bhutto’s assassination comes the depressing reality the country will continue to experience the same unrest that has plagued it since it gained independence 60 years ago.

With this latest act of violence this week, it seems increasingly evident Pakistan’s political turmoil may simply be too much for the country to solve on its own, despite assertions by Mahmud Ali Durrani — Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S. — that Pakistanis are a toughened lot, have survived much turmoil and upheaval in their history, and "will get past this."

Not so optimistic

Other experts on the region said it’s time world powers stepped in to guide the country through this turbulent period, but any involvement must be conducted carefully.

"This assassination is an attack on Pakistan itself," said Carleton University Prof. Elliot Tepper, a specialist in Asian studies. "Because the region is so vital to world peace, it’s time the friends of Pakistan rallied. Those who have not had as cordial a relationship with Pakistan also need to consider their position seriously."

That means countries like the United States, Britain, China and even Canada need to step up to the plate. "The United States is the biggest single player in this whole scenario," Tepper added. "Its engagement with Pakistan, Afghanistan and India, as well being the only superpower at the moment in the global war on terror, gives it a unique position."

That doesn’t mean military intervention, but rather a strong statement from the government supporting democratic elections.

"The United States should insist any elections held be free and fair," said Prof. Sumit Ganguly, director of the India studies program at Indiana University. "The military cannot be allowed to compromise them. So far, the U.S. hasn’t been willing to do that. [U.S.] President [George W.] Bush needs to spell out unequivocally that the parties participating in the election should not be crippled by regulations which the military unfairly imposes on them."

Britain should also be applying pressure on democratic elections, Ganguly added.

U.S. aid rethink

As recently as last week, the U.S. Congress was imposing new restrictions on the country's assistance to Pakistan. The restrictions included tying $50 million in military aid to State Department assurances that Pakistan make "concerted efforts" to prevent terrorists from operating inside its borders.

Although the White House has said it is up to Pakistan to decide whether to postpone parliamentary elections planned for Jan. 8, Ganguly believes they will need to be deferred because of the assassination and the fear that surrounds it.

Over the years, Canada has provided substantial aid to Pakistan through the Canadian International Development Agency, as well as maintaining a full embassy. However, with Canada’s involvement in neighbouring Afghanistan, peace becomes an even greater priority.

"The stability of Pakistan has a lot to do with the well-being of our troops on the ground in Afghanistan," Tepper said.

Ganguly added, "As a member of the British Commonwealth, Canada can exert a certain amount of authority and it should do so. Canada has cleaner hands, quite frankly, than do some other countries."

Ganguly also sees China as having a significant role in supporting stability in the region.

"China can talk privately to the Pakistani military because they are one of the principal sources of the supply of weaponry to Pakistan."

Politicians will avoid comment: expert

However, as far as neighbouring India is concerned, both experts agree the country must handle the current events with kid gloves.

Ganguly feels that country must treat the current crisis as a tragedy, with the hopes there will be a return to stability, but definitely as an internal matter. Politicians there, he said, are extremely cautious and will avoid public comment. "If they get involved, it will add another layer of anger and resentment."

Tepper said, "The short-term goals of military balance and keeping Pakistan off base that India has pursued for some time may now be shown to be counterproductive for the period ahead. The necessity of a stable and prosperous Pakistan should now be higher on everyone’s agenda. India has a role to play as the dominant power in the region in promoting the stability and prosperity of all the neighbouring states in South Asia.

"One hopes that a tragedy of this magnitude will have a transformative effect, however, the past does not lead to optimism in that regard. Everyone is locked into longstanding positions, [including] the West and the neighbouring states. The idea that Pakistan may be going through a fundamental crisis involving its very existence and its future as a state does not seem to have altered the policies of those engaged with Pakistan."

Ganguly said: "What will happen depends very much on the next few days and weeks, and how the global community and the great powers respond."

While Bhutto’s possible election victory might have heralded a new era for Pakistan, it’s difficult to say whether her election would have made a permanent change to the turmoil and long-standing political schisms in the country.

Perhaps, sadly and ironically, her death may have a more productive impact on the political future of her beloved Pakistan than her election victory might have.