Balkan Tragedy: A Re-enactment of the 1971 Genocide in Bangladesh

Re: The 2 Bengali Khans posts and my final wrapup

Mr. M.N Khan and Mr. KOKhan have articulated a very appetizing view of history. Even I’m tempted to take a bite out of it. Smells good, bet it tastes even better. So, the freedom loving Bengalis of 1971 were actually fighting for democracy, and the demand for independence just sort of ‘happened’ along the way. The reason seems to be a disgust with military dictatorship from the Western Wing of the country onto the East. What the.Khans are in effect saying, is that if the dictatorship of Pakistan were led by East Pakistanis for long periods after independence, there would have been no call for independence/secession, just democracy and a bill of rights! How interesting. I suppose if the coin were flipped, you imagine that West Pakistanis would have supported independence from the East Wing of the country on this basis.

Bhutto’s statements are well documented, that is why I don’t view him as being guiltless in this saga. His ambition at the expense of the country is also well known.

Firstly I am no supporter at large of military rule; I don’t condone the Zia regime, the Ayub Khan regime, nor will I embrace the likes of Iskandar Mirza etc., in short the lot of them. Nor am I a fan of Gohar Ayub. These people plundered the country to line their own pockets at the expense of both East and West.

I have never generally been of the view that military rule was ever a positive good in itself, but unfortunately, the type of people who become involved in politics in the Subcontinent are also generally either rogues, scoundrels, bank defaulters, outright criminals or even traitors. I define treason personally as willingness to sell your country down the river for personal gain. In this sense Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen an awful lot of traitors come to power be it through the ballot box or by Coup. Their politics is a sham for the illiterate masses while they enrich their personal bank accounts. G-D alone knows if this is the curse of the British inherited parliamentary system. Couldn’t the sub-continent, if it had to be colonized have been colonized by the Americans! At least they might have left us with a better idea of what a written constitution should incorporate, and a system of Constitutional checks and balances far better than the crude improvisations of modified parliamentarianism tried thus far. Of course we’d be playing baseball, not cricket. Hmmm, would I trade that for a government for the people, by the people and of the people?

I think that while you’ll find that West Pakistanis would be willing to support peaceful protests in favor of democracy quite willingly, Mujib was interested in absolute power. That is one very believable version of the truth that can be and has been borne out by the facts. (Especially the period of his rule 1972-75).

President Yahya was I believe sincere about handing over power, but not as I have repeatedly stated at the cost of the breakup of the country, which it seemed Mujib was inclined to do. In a peculiar situation like that of United Pakistan, with each wing 1000 miles apart obviously some compromises had to be made to keep the country together. Mujib’s attitude hardened considerably by March 1971. Bhutto was threatening

not to attend the Convening of the National Assembly, and keep the rest of the elected representatives of the Western Wing from doing so as well. In this situation, obviously the country would have been divided, with only half represented. The other half, Mujib, who had an absolute majority in the Assembly could have done whatever he wished even if the Western Wing’s elected Representatives attended, and framed the constitution as he saw fit. All he really had to do was demonstrate a willingness to negotiate flexibly, but no, Mr.Mujib was bent on confrontation. Now the army was I agree stuck with its anti-democratic reputation and open to suspicion, but given the fact that the election of 1970 had indeed materialized, I think Mujib and Bengalis actions were mean spirited. And what they did was not confined to, ‘a student protest’, which is the impression your account attempts to convey. This was much more than that. It reached a point, where it became treason to United Pakistan in the name of ‘democracy’. How come there was no reaction in the West to the suspension of the Assembly, no protests, no public outcry? Do you think West Pakistanis loved democracy any less than you did? Me personally, I know exactly what virtues democracy has brought to the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh, so when it comes to making my choice I choose to stand for a United Country, even if that means choosing un-elected scoundrels over elected ones . Since, both Army Generals and Politicians are proven crooks. Now it’s a fine line in the circumstances, but with the progressive radicalization of the movement, which became a mass movement, coercion and intimidation became the norm, as did violence and murder. The people being attacked however, were not the representatives of ‘the Colonial Power,’ but ordinary non-Bengalis and those who did not support the Awami’s League’s Secret agenda to break up the country, which its rank and file supported. Perhaps you hoped for a better tomorrow. I don’t think Mujib gave it to you, if you drop the rhetoric of the sacred cow; ‘Banga Bandhu’, and look at reality. Wanton destruction of property and mob violence is not my idea of the struggle for democracy. I realize that revolution can be bloody. I ask you, do you justify it in terms of what it cost? I realize also that the fact of ‘independence’ to you today is probably worth those sacrifices. While the argument that you were against the continued military rule by Yahya Khan, and the West Pakistani clique of generals is plausible, and even receives sympathetic ears from many, I frankly think you people didn’t care whether it led to the breakup of the country or not. In fact you cheerfully welcomed it, with rivers of the blood of Non-Bengalis, which Bengalis bathed in. You also wanted a separate nation well before March 1971, democracy or no democracy, and were willing to seek Indian help to do it, which also amounts to treason in the eyes of ALL Pakistanis, in 1971 or 1999.

So pardon me for my lack of willingness to ‘right’ any historical ‘wrongs’ Bengalis may have suffered as a consequence of the Pakistan army’s actions. I said it before and I’ll say it again; Mujib Ur Rehman was both ‘a liberator’, and ‘a traitor.’ The Pakistan army was commanded by ‘animals’ and, ‘heroic defenders of the motherland.’ What was done leaves both sides morally culpable. If you want to start talking about ‘justice’, I too will start by not only putting all Bengali national ‘heroes’ on trial, but the entire nation of Bengalis for Treason. Let sleeping dogs lie. This is my sincere advice to all Bengalis. Justice is not available to either of us for historical ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs.’ Only fools dream of getting ‘justice’ under these circumstances. Take it from me. And that really is, ‘the way it was’. Jamal Hasan’s account shall remain just that, one account as will almost all other accounts that attempt to aspire to universalism. It shall never define any Universal historical truth much as the professor? would like it to. It is Uni-dimensional at best.

Sincerely,

Omar Mirza

Mr. M.N Khan has articulated a very appetizing view of history. Even I’m tempted to take a bite out of it. Smells good, bet it tastes even better. So, the freedom loving Bengalis of 1971 were actually fighting for democracy, and the demand for independence just sort of ‘happened’ along the way. The reason seems to

be a disgust with military dictatorship from the Western Wing of the country onto the East. What Mr.Khan is in effect saying, is that if the dictatorship of Pakistan were led by East Pakistanis for long periods after independence, there would have been no call for independence/secession, just democracy and a bill of rights! How interesting. I suppose if the coin were flipped, you imagine that West Pakistanis would have supported independence from the East Wing of the country on this basis.

Bhutto’s statements are well documented, that is why I don’t view him as being guiltless in this saga. His ambition at the expense of the country is also well known.

Firstly I am no supporter at large of military rule; I don’t condone the Zia regime, the Ayub Khan regime, nor will I embrace the likes of Iskandar Mirza etc., in short the lot of them. Nor am I a fan of Gohar Ayub. These people plundered the country to line their own pockets at the expense of both East and West.

I have never generally been of the view that military rule was ever a positive good in itself, but unfortunately, the type of people who become involved in politics in the Subcontinent are also generally either rogues, scoundrels, bank defaulters, outright criminals or even traitors. I define treason personally as willingness to sell your country down the river for personal gain. In this sense Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen an awful lot of traitors come to power be it through the ballot box or by Coup. Their politics is a sham for the illiterate masses while they enrich their personal bank accounts. G-D alone knows if this is the curse of the British inherited parliamentary system. Couldn’t the sub-continent, if it had to be colonized have been colonized by the Americans! At least they might have left us with a better idea of what a written constitution should incorporate, and a system of Constitutional checks and balances far better than the crude improvisations of modified parliamentarianism tried thus far. Of course we’d be playing baseball, not cricket. Hmmm, would I trade that for a government for the people, by the people and of the people?

I think that while you’ll find that West Pakistanis would be willing to support peaceful protests in favor of democracy quite willingly, Mujib was interested in absolute power. That is one very believable version of the truth that can be and has been borne out by the facts. (Especially the period of his rule 1972-75).

President Yahya was I believe sincere about handing over power, but not as I have repeatedly stated at the cost of the breakup of the country, which it seemed Mujib was inclined to do. In a peculiar situation like that of United Pakistan, with each wing 1000 miles apart obviously some compromises had to be made to keep the country together. Mujib’s attitude hardened considerably by March 1971. Bhutto was threatening

not to attend the Convening of the National Assembly, and keep the rest of the elected representatives of the Western Wing from doing so as well. In this situation, obviously the country would have been divided,with only half represented. The other half, Mujib, who had an absolute majority in the Assembly could have done whatever he wished even if the Western Wing’s elected Representatives attended, and framed the constitution as he saw fit. All he really had to do was demonstrate a willingness to negotiate flexibly, but no, Mr.Mujib was bent on confrontation. Now the army was I agree stuck with its anti-democratic reputation and open to suspicion, but given the fact that the election of 1970 had indeed materialized, I think Mujib and Bengalis actions were mean spirited. And what they did was not confined to, ‘a student protest’, which is the impression your account attempts ton convey. This was much more than that. It reached a point, where it became treason to United Pakistan in the name of ‘democracy’. How come there was no reaction in the West to the suspension of the Assembly, no protests, no public outcry? Do you think West Pakistanis loved democracy any less than you did? Me personally, I know exactly what virtues democracy has brought to the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh, so when it comes to making my choice I choose to stand for a United Country, even if that means choosing un-elected scoundrels over elected ones . Since, both Army Generals and Politicians are proven crooks. Now it’s a fine line in the circumstances, but with the progressive radicalization of the movement, which became a mass movement, coercion and intimidation became the norm, as did violence and murder. The people being attacked however, were not the representatives of ‘the Colonial Power,’ but ordinary non-Bengalis and those who did not support the Awami’s League’s Secret agenda to break up the country, which its rank and file supported. Perhaps you hoped for a better tomorrow. I don’t think Mujib gave it to you, if you drop the rhetoric of the sacred cow; ‘Banga Bandhu’, and look at reality. Wanton destruction of property and mob violence is not my idea of the struggle for democracy. I realize that revolution can be bloody. I ask you, do you justify it in terms of what it cost? I realize also that the fact of ‘independence’ to you today is probably worth those sacrifices. While the argument that you were against the continued military rule by Yahya Khan, and the West Pakistani clique of generals is plausible, and even receives sympathetic ears from many, I frankly think you people didn’t care whether it led to the breakup of the country or not. In fact you cheerfully welcomed it, with rivers of the blood of Non-Bengalis, which Bengalis bathed in. You also wanted a separate nation well before March 1971, democracy or no democracy, an were willing to seek Indian help to do it, which also amounts to treason in the eyes of ALL Pakistanis, in 1971 or 1999.

So pardon me for my lack of willingness to ‘right’ any historical ‘wrongs’ Bengalis may have suffered as a consequence of the Pakistan army’s actions. I said it before and I’ll say it again; Mujib Ur Rehman was both ‘a liberator’, and ‘a traitor.’ The Pakistan army was commanded by ‘animals’ and, ‘heroic defenders of the motherland.’ What was done leaves both sides morally culpable. If you want to start talking about ‘justice’, I too will start by not only putting all Bengali national ‘heroes’ on trial, but the entire nation of Bengalis for Treason. Let sleeping dogs lie. This is my sincere advice to all Bengalis. Justice is not available to either of us for historical ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs.’ Only fools dream of getting ‘justice’ under these circumstances. Take it from me. And that really is, ‘the way it was’. Jamal Hasan’s account shall remain just that, one account as will almost all other accounts that attempt universalism. It shall never define any Universal historical truth much as the professor? would like it to. It is Uni-dimensional at best.

Sincerely,

Omar Mirza

Re: The 2 Bengali Khans posts and my final wrapup

Mr. M.N Khan and Mr. KOKhan have articulated a very appetizing view of history. Even I’m tempted to take a bite out of it. Smells good, bet it tastes even better. So, the freedom loving Bengalis of 1971 were actually fighting for democracy, and the demand for independence just sort of ‘happened’ along the way. The reason seems to be a disgust with military dictatorship from the Western Wing of the country onto the East. What the.Khans are in effect saying, is that if the dictatorship of Pakistan were led by East Pakistanis for long periods after independence, there would have been no call for independence/secession, just democracy and a bill of rights! How interesting. I suppose if the coin were flipped, you imagine that West Pakistanis would have supported independence from the East Wing of the country on this basis.

Bhutto’s statements are well documented, that is why I don’t view him as being guiltless in this saga. His ambition at the expense of the country is also well known.

Firstly I am no supporter at large of military rule; I don’t condone the Zia regime, the Ayub Khan regime, nor will I embrace the likes of Iskandar Mirza etc., in short the lot of them. Nor am I a fan of Gohar Ayub. These people plundered the country to line their own pockets at the expense of both East and West.

I have never generally been of the view that military rule was ever a positive good in itself, but unfortunately, the type of people who become involved in politics in the Subcontinent are also generally either rogues, scoundrels, bank defaulters, outright criminals or even traitors. I define treason personally as willingness to sell your country down the river for personal gain. In this sense Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen an awful lot of traitors come to power be it through the ballot box or by Coup. Their politics is a sham for the illiterate masses while they enrich their personal bank accounts. G-D alone knows if this is the curse of the British inherited parliamentary system. Couldn’t the sub-continent, if it had to be colonized have been colonized by the Americans! At least they might have left us with a better idea of what a written constitution should incorporate, and a system of Constitutional checks and balances far better than the crude improvisations of modified parliamentarianism tried thus far. Of course we’d be playing baseball, not cricket. Hmmm, would I trade that for a government for the people, by the people and of the people?

I think that while you’ll find that West Pakistanis would be willing to support peaceful protests in favor of democracy quite willingly, Mujib was interested in absolute power. That is one very believable version of the truth that can be and has been borne out by the facts. (Especially the period of his rule 1972-75).

President Yahya was I believe sincere about handing over power, but not as I have repeatedly stated at the cost of the breakup of the country, which it seemed Mujib was inclined to do. In a peculiar situation like that of United Pakistan, with each wing 1000 miles apart obviously some compromises had to be made to keep the country together. Mujib’s attitude hardened considerably by March 1971. Bhutto was threatening

not to attend the Convening of the National Assembly, and keep the rest of the elected representatives of the Western Wing from doing so as well. In this situation, obviously the country would have been divided, with only half represented. The other half, Mujib, who had an absolute majority in the Assembly could have done whatever he wished even if the Western Wing’s elected Representatives attended, and framed the constitution as he saw fit. All he really had to do was demonstrate a willingness to negotiate flexibly, but no, Mr.Mujib was bent on confrontation. Now the army was I agree stuck with its anti-democratic reputation and open to suspicion, but given the fact that the election of 1970 had indeed materialized, I think Mujib and Bengalis actions were mean spirited. And what they did was not confined to, ‘a student protest’, which is the impression your account attempts to convey. This was much more than that. It reached a point, where it became treason to United Pakistan in the name of ‘democracy’. How come there was no reaction in the West to the suspension of the Assembly, no protests, no public outcry? Do you think West Pakistanis loved democracy any less than you did? Me personally, I know exactly what virtues democracy has brought to the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh, so when it comes to making my choice I choose to stand for a United Country, even if that means choosing un-elected scoundrels over elected ones . Since, both Army Generals and Politicians are proven crooks. Now it’s a fine line in the circumstances, but with the progressive radicalization of the movement, which became a mass movement, coercion and intimidation became the norm, as did violence and murder. The people being attacked however, were not the representatives of ‘the Colonial Power,’ but ordinary non-Bengalis and those who did not support the Awami’s League’s Secret agenda to break up the country, which its rank and file supported. Perhaps you hoped for a better tomorrow. I don’t think Mujib gave it to you, if you drop the rhetoric of the sacred cow; ‘Banga Bandhu’, and look at reality. Wanton destruction of property and mob violence is not my idea of the struggle for democracy. I realize that revolution can be bloody. I ask you, do you justify it in terms of what it cost? I realize also that the fact of ‘independence’ to you today is probably worth those sacrifices. While the argument that you were against the continued military rule by Yahya Khan, and the West Pakistani clique of generals is plausible, and even receives sympathetic ears from many, I frankly think you people didn’t care whether it led to the breakup of the country or not. In fact you cheerfully welcomed it, with rivers of the blood of Non-Bengalis, which Bengalis bathed in. You also wanted a separate nation well before March 1971, democracy or no democracy, and were willing to seek Indian help to do it, which also amounts to treason in the eyes of ALL Pakistanis, in 1971 or 1999.

So pardon me for my lack of willingness to ‘right’ any historical ‘wrongs’ Bengalis may have suffered as a consequence of the Pakistan army’s actions. I said it before and I’ll say it again; Mujib Ur Rehman was both ‘a liberator’, and ‘a traitor.’ The Pakistan army was commanded by ‘animals’ and, ‘heroic defenders of the motherland.’ What was done leaves both sides morally culpable. If you want to start talking about ‘justice’, I too will start by not only putting all Bengali national ‘heroes’ on trial, but the entire nation of Bengalis for Treason. Let sleeping dogs lie. This is my sincere advice to all Bengalis. Justice is not available to either of us for historical ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs.’ Only fools dream of getting ‘justice’ under these circumstances. Take it from me. And that really is, ‘the way it was’. Jamal Hasan’s account shall remain just that, one account as will almost all other accounts that attempt to aspire to universalism. It shall never define any Universal historical truth much as the professor? would like it to. It is Uni-dimensional at best.

Sincerely,

Omar Mirza

Mr. M.N Khan has articulated a very appetizing view of history. Even I’m tempted to take a bite out of it. Smells good, bet it tastes even better. So, the freedom loving Bengalis of 1971 were actually fighting for democracy, and the demand for independence just sort of ‘happened’ along the way. The reason seems to

be a disgust with military dictatorship from the Western Wing of the country onto the East. What Mr.Khan is in effect saying, is that if the dictatorship of Pakistan were led by East Pakistanis for long periods after independence, there would have been no call for independence/secession, just democracy and a bill of rights! How interesting. I suppose if the coin were flipped, you imagine that West Pakistanis would have supported independence from the East Wing of the country on this basis.

Bhutto’s statements are well documented, that is why I don’t view him as being guiltless in this saga. His ambition at the expense of the country is also well known.

Firstly I am no supporter at large of military rule; I don’t condone the Zia regime, the Ayub Khan regime, nor will I embrace the likes of Iskandar Mirza etc., in short the lot of them. Nor am I a fan of Gohar Ayub. These people plundered the country to line their own pockets at the expense of both East and West.

I have never generally been of the view that military rule was ever a positive good in itself, but unfortunately, the type of people who become involved in politics in the Subcontinent are also generally either rogues, scoundrels, bank defaulters, outright criminals or even traitors. I define treason personally as willingness to sell your country down the river for personal gain. In this sense Pakistan and Bangladesh have seen an awful lot of traitors come to power be it through the ballot box or by Coup. Their politics is a sham for the illiterate masses while they enrich their personal bank accounts. G-D alone knows if this is the curse of the British inherited parliamentary system. Couldn’t the sub-continent, if it had to be colonized have been colonized by the Americans! At least they might have left us with a better idea of what a written constitution should incorporate, and a system of Constitutional checks and balances far better than the crude improvisations of modified parliamentarianism tried thus far. Of course we’d be playing baseball, not cricket. Hmmm, would I trade that for a government for the people, by the people and of the people?

I think that while you’ll find that West Pakistanis would be willing to support peaceful protests in favor of democracy quite willingly, Mujib was interested in absolute power. That is one very believable version of the truth that can be and has been borne out by the facts. (Especially the period of his rule 1972-75).

President Yahya was I believe sincere about handing over power, but not as I have repeatedly stated at the cost of the breakup of the country, which it seemed Mujib was inclined to do. In a peculiar situation like that of United Pakistan, with each wing 1000 miles apart obviously some compromises had to be made to keep the country together. Mujib’s attitude hardened considerably by March 1971. Bhutto was threatening

not to attend the Convening of the National Assembly, and keep the rest of the elected representatives of the Western Wing from doing so as well. In this situation, obviously the country would have been divided,with only half represented. The other half, Mujib, who had an absolute majority in the Assembly could have done whatever he wished even if the Western Wing’s elected Representatives attended, and framed the constitution as he saw fit. All he really had to do was demonstrate a willingness to negotiate flexibly, but no, Mr.Mujib was bent on confrontation. Now the army was I agree stuck with its anti-democratic reputation and open to suspicion, but given the fact that the election of 1970 had indeed materialized, I think Mujib and Bengalis actions were mean spirited. And what they did was not confined to, ‘a student protest’, which is the impression your account attempts ton convey. This was much more than that. It reached a point, where it became treason to United Pakistan in the name of ‘democracy’. How come there was no reaction in the West to the suspension of the Assembly, no protests, no public outcry? Do you think West Pakistanis loved democracy any less than you did? Me personally, I know exactly what virtues democracy has brought to the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh, so when it comes to making my choice I choose to stand for a United Country, even if that means choosing un-elected scoundrels over elected ones . Since, both Army Generals and Politicians are proven crooks. Now it’s a fine line in the circumstances, but with the progressive radicalization of the movement, which became a mass movement, coercion and intimidation became the norm, as did violence and murder. The people being attacked however, were not the representatives of ‘the Colonial Power,’ but ordinary non-Bengalis and those who did not support the Awami’s League’s Secret agenda to break up the country, which its rank and file supported. Perhaps you hoped for a better tomorrow. I don’t think Mujib gave it to you, if you drop the rhetoric of the sacred cow; ‘Banga Bandhu’, and look at reality. Wanton destruction of property and mob violence is not my idea of the struggle for democracy. I realize that revolution can be bloody. I ask you, do you justify it in terms of what it cost? I realize also that the fact of ‘independence’ to you today is probably worth those sacrifices. While the argument that you were against the continued military rule by Yahya Khan, and the West Pakistani clique of generals is plausible, and even receives sympathetic ears from many, I frankly think you people didn’t care whether it led to the breakup of the country or not. In fact you cheerfully welcomed it, with rivers of the blood of Non-Bengalis, which Bengalis bathed in. You also wanted a separate nation well before March 1971, democracy or no democracy, an were willing to seek Indian help to do it, which also amounts to treason in the eyes of ALL Pakistanis, in 1971 or 1999.

So pardon me for my lack of willingness to ‘right’ any historical ‘wrongs’ Bengalis may have suffered as a consequence of the Pakistan army’s actions. I said it before and I’ll say it again; Mujib Ur Rehman was both ‘a liberator’, and ‘a traitor.’ The Pakistan army was commanded by ‘animals’ and, ‘heroic defenders of the motherland.’ What was done leaves both sides morally culpable. If you want to start talking about ‘justice’, I too will start by not only putting all Bengali national ‘heroes’ on trial, but the entire nation of Bengalis for Treason. Let sleeping dogs lie. This is my sincere advice to all Bengalis. Justice is not available to either of us for historical ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs.’ Only fools dream of getting ‘justice’ under these circumstances. Take it from me. And that really is, ‘the way it was’. Jamal Hasan’s account shall remain just that, one account as will almost all other accounts that attempt universalism. It shall never define any Universal historical truth much as the professor? would like it to. It is Uni-dimensional at best.

Sincerely,

Omar Mirza

PPP UPDATE SPECIAL

Change venue, Ms Bhutto

Benazir may not come back

By Dawn Staff Correspondent

LONDON, May 1: The Independent newspaper said on Saturday that former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was likely to live in self- exile instead of returning to Pakistan where she feared her arrest.

``When the sentence was passed, Bhutto was staying with a sister in London, and it was airily predicted that she would return to Pakistan within a couple of days,`` the paper said. ``But Bibi, as she is known, has proved more cautious: had she gone back she would have been arrested.``

After her disqualification, Ms Bhutto had said that she would return to Pakistan. However, later she said she had been stopped by her party from returning.

Letter to the editor Dawn

I HASTEN to advise Ms Bhutto to change location of her launching pad from Dubai to London for attacking Pakistan government. Arab states do not show tolerance for democracy and its pseudo leaders. All the hi-tech electronic gadgets fitted in her Dubai villa to launch offensive against Pakistan will go waste after the UAE government prohibited her the use of its soil.

She must now change the venue to London, the traditional land of intrigues against Pakistan. Altaf Bhai, too, resides there in self-exile. Ms Bhutto`s cronies have made huge fortunes and can easily travel to London. Land of strawberries will receive her with open arms as it did Altaf Bhai. How long will Ms Bhutto stay a few steps ahead of the law is another matter.

Moreover, she has most of her investments in Switzerland, where she stands indicted, and in London. In any case, there is no need for her to return as the country she left behind is on the verge of default. There is nothing left. She may come back to be in business again when the economy picks up.

Uncle Khar, the old lion of Punjab, has already unleashed himself to fill the gap of her absence. Uncle is most deadly when he wakes up from deep slumber. He is likely to take on the Sharif brothers head-on even though his bark is always louder than his bite.

A.P. SANGDIL

Oslo, Norway

NO WAR CRIMES AND WAR CRMINALS SHOULD GO UNPUNISHED: LET’S DEMAND FOR SPEEDY TRIAL OF PAKISTANI WAR CRIMINALS: My Response #5

M.Waheeduzzaman

The most unrepentant Pakistani champions of the 1971 War Crimes have started pointing out their accusing fingers to the Bangladeshi victims of 1971 genocide for the heinous crimes and carnage which the Pakistani soldiers had perpetrated in the then East Pakistan. The spreading of innuendoes, distortions and accusations by some motivated Pakistanis against the victims and survivors of Pakistan’s genocide in Bangladesh adequately demonstrates that Pakistan is not yet ready to shave off their tarnished and contaminated baggage. They have serious difficulty in dealing with truths of their tarnished past.

Although there may be a dwarfed or timid segment of decent, conscientious and peace loving people still living in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the relentless efforts of the Pakistani war criminals and their imbecile defenders have thus far made it abundantly clear that the mainstream Pakistanis are continuing to take pride in their national heritage of genocide and ethnic cleansing. With some rare exceptions, there is hardly any genuine expression of repentance or remorse among most Pakistanis for the ghastly crimes which Pakistan’s brute military forces had committed twenty eight years ago in Bangladesh.

Some one suggested in this thread that it was the fault of Bangladesh Government for not prosecuting the depraved Pakistani War Criminals. Nothing could be farther from truth. The pressure which was exerted on a newly emerged Bangladesh nation by the middle-eastern allies of the then freshly defeated Islamic Republic of Pakistan thwarted Bangladesh’s move even to try only 195 of the War Criminals of Pakistan. This was the minimum demand for justice from Bangabandhu’s Government in the initial years after independence. The pressure from U.S. Government on Bangladesh had kept Bangladesh from the United Nations. The master politician Z.A. Bhutto’s Government had also played China card on Bangladesh. Since the POWs were held by Indian Government, the geo-political realities and interests of India were also dominant factors pertaining to the trial of Pakistani War Criminals. Above all, the stranded Bangladeshi people were taken as hostages in Pakistan for safe repatriation of Pakistani Prisoners Of Wars (POWs) including 195 certified War Criminals. In spite of such triangular pressure, Bangabandhu kept on demanding trial for at least 195 hard core war criminals. As those who pretend to be friends of Bangalees and then apportion blame to the Government of Bangladesh not for prosecuting Pakistani War Criminals, for God’s sake, please verify some information and objective realities of that time before you dish out unsubstantiated accusations on the victims of 1971 genocide.



It is an established fact that ven the certified Pakistani War Criminals who could avert trials for their war crimes only due to overwhelming pressure on Bangladesh from outside, at the behest of Middle Eastern Muslim nations and the United States of America, have started bragging about their “heroic” performance in a genocide and ethnic cleansing against Bangalees in 1971. These despicable characters and their cohorts have conveniently deleted from their selective memory lanes that approximately ninety thousand Pakistani prisoners of war (POWs) were at the custody and mercy of Indian Government after their ignominious surrender to the joint command of Bangladesh’s Freedom Fighters and Indian Army on December 16, 1971. There were reports that while in Indian captivity many of those Pakistani tormentors of Bangalees used to weep like widows and cry like children for avoiding possible trials through war crime tribunals.

The Government of Pakistan under the flamboyant leadership of Z.A. Bhutto had secured their release from Indian custody by holding thousands of stranded expatriate Bangladeshis as hostages in Pakistan in spite of the fact that they were far away from the killing fields of Bangladesh. What was then the crimes of those stranded Bangalees? Their only crime was that they were Bangalees stranded in Pakistan. Given the fact that Z.A. Bhutto lacked any rudiment of conscience, he did not hesitate to use those defenseless stranded Bangladeshis as hostages for the purpose of obtaining the release of all Pakistani POWs from India.



It is unfortunate that the hard core Pakistani War Criminals could not be tried in the courts of law by Bangladesh for their war crimes in 1971 due to the so-called Simla Agreement, a treaty between India and Pakistan, and other insurmountable vicissitudes of international politics. As I already noted, Pakistan Government had played all cards at a time: oil rich Muslim countries, the United States and India. Obviously, neither India nor Bangladesh could remain immune from such pressure.

Despite the fact that no War Crime Trials could take place for the purpose of prosecuting the perpetrators of genocide in Bangladesh, they have NOT yet been exonerated by the survivors of 1971 genocide. Justice was denied then to the helpless victims and survivors of Pakistan’s genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh. And justice is once again delayed now. Notwithstanding the relentless vilification of the Bangalee victims of 1971 genocide, those who were responsible for masterminding and committing the ghastly war crimes in Bangladesh will always continue to remain War Criminals in the eyes of all patriotic Bangladeshis.

The latest hate campaign through various Internet outlets and publications against the Bangladeshi victims and survivors of 1971 Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing by the arrogant and shameless defenders of Pakistani War Criminals can hardly change their heritage of genocide. Neither threats of law suit nor tons of arrogance can blot the tradition of genocide and ethnic cleansing from Pakistan’s tarnished history. No amount of fraudulent claims or selective memories of “valor” and “heroism” in a genocide will delete the depraved character of Pakistani war criminals. No amount of tinkering of facts here and there or demonstration of sky high arrogance or false pride can change the basic fact that the despicable names of those nefarious Pakistani War Criminals will live on in infamy through the ages.



Like its predecessor regimes, the present Government of the Peoples` Republic of Pakistan under Nawaz Sharif is the inheritor and protector of Pakistani heritage of blood bath and false pride. Jallad General Yahya Khan, dirty and power hungry politician Z.A. Bhutto, butcher-in chief Gen. Tikka Khan, man-eating tiger Gen. Niazi, notorious planner and executor of genocide in Bangladesh Rao Forman Ali Khan, habitual hater of Bangalee race Gen. Pirzada and national traitor Gen. Hamid [the list of principal war criminals is not intended to be exhaustve but suggestive] have bequeathed the heritage of genocide, ethnic cleansing, rapes, carnage, torture, horror, burning and looting to their inheritors of today`s Pakistan. Given the fact that Pakistan had committed genocide in Bangladesh, it is a shame to humanity to acknowledge Pakistan as part of the civilized world community.

Since the brute Pakistani soldiers had raped more than a quarter of a million Bangalee women and deliberately exterminated and tormented millions of Bangalees in 1971, it is obscene to endorse Pakistan`s fraudulent claim to be a Muslim or Islamic state. The truth of the matter is that the state Pakistan is a symbol of shame and embarrassment to Islam. Doubtless, the horrific genocide which was systematically perpetrated by murderous Pakistani military forces in Bangladesh over a period of nine months in 1971 is the SCARLET LETTER for Pakistan.

The memories of those heinous crimes will follow the Pakistani war criminals to their graves. Even the certified war criminals have conceded that memories of 1971 still haunt Pakistan. For example, the former commander of genocide in eastern part of the then Pakistan Lt. Gen. A.A.K. Niazi had prefaced his book (The Betrayal of East Pakistan)with the following words: “The memories of the separation of East Pakistan still haunt us, as it left the nation divided and its pride shattered.”

If Pakistan as a nation-state had any sediment of decency or an iota of self-respect, that nation would have tendered an unconditional apology to Bangladesh for their atrocities long time back. There is hardly any wonder why in the eyes of mainstream Pakistanis our relentless quest for freedom and independence was nothing but “Indian aggression” on East Pakistan! In the jaundiced eyes of many Pakistanis, our Mukti Juddhas or freedom fighters were Hindu “miscreants” and killers of non-Bengalis! One Pakistani war criminal (Rao Forman Ali Khan) has mentioned in his book that Tajuddin Ahmed, the uncompromising Prime Minister of Bangladesh Government-in-exile was son of a Hindu Brahmin, and he was converted to Islam when he was 8 years old! These are the books which are full of unsubstantiated stories, absurdities and falsehoods having neither relevance to the truths nor credibility in the academic world.

Even after almost three decades of the emergence of Bangladesh as a sovereign nation-state, Pakistani contempt for our struggle for independence has not diminished. Our independence on December 16, 1971 is still perceived by most Pakistanis as “separation” of East Pakistan or “break up” of Pakistan. For examples: A.A.K. Niazi, one of the chief executors of 1971 genocide, titled his book as The Betrayal of East Pakistan (Oxford University Press, 1998). Rao Forman Ali Khan , who is credited for masterminding the genocide of Bangalees of the then East Pakistan, titled his book How Pakistan Got Divided? (Lahore: Jang Publishers, 1992).

For most Pakistanis, the break up of Pakistan in 1971 was the result of “Hindu perfidy” and “Bengali treachery.” Same kind of debased “conspiracy theories” and falsehoods about the emergence of Bangladesh have been carefully crafted in the text books of Pakistan from primary school to college. The official stand of Pakistan Governments has also consistently condoned the 1971genocide even though it was perpetrated by their barbarian hordes. In fact, all Pakistani regimes from Z.A. Bhutto through Nawaz Sharif have continued to squarely blame Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman for the 1971 genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh.

It is apparent that Pakistan as a nation is inherently incapable of asking for Bangalees’ forgiveness for the atrocities and horrific crimes which their soldiers and leaders had committed in Bangladesh. It takes moral courage and a great deal of humility to ask for forgiveness. It seems that the mainstream Pakistani society lacks that kind of moral courage and conscience.

Instead of begging pardons from Bangladesh, many defenders of Pakistani War Criminals have demonstrated audacity of blaming the Bangalee victims of 1971 genocide. For many years even the Governments of Pakistan did not have the minimum decency to tell the truth to Pakistanis about the nature of Pakistan’s heinous crimes against the citizens of the then Eastern province of Pakistan. As of this day, no Pakistan regime did take any meaningful step to implement the findings of Justice Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report (HRC) [even though the intent of this Commission was not to investigate War Crimes in Bangladesh. Rather, the terms of reference of the HRC were to identify the causes for the Military Defeat in East Pakistan]. In other words, no one in Pakistan was held accountable or answerable to even internally constituted investigative bodies for the carnage and atrocities in Bangladesh which were committed by Pakistani military forces.

In view of such circumstance, it is fair to recommend that the Government of Bangladesh should demand for the speedy trial of Pakistan’s War Criminals in the International Tribunals for War Crimes. Instead of asking for Pakistan’s apology, the victims and survivors of 1971 genocide and ethnic cleansing should demand justice.

With the deepest personal regards, Sincerely,

M. Waheeduzzaman (Manik)

POETIC RESPONSE TO WAR CRIMINALS

OF PAKISTAN AND GENOCIDE:MY RESPONSE#4

By M. Waheeduzzaman

Given the fact that 1971 Genocide has thus far been profusely reflected in Bengali literature, it is fair to cite some of the war poems of leading poets of Bangladesh. The intent of this post is to start with Shamsur Rahman`s response to 1971 genocide, the leading living poet in today`s Bengali literature.

Let me conclude this commentary with the English translation of poet Shamsur Rahman’s “Abhishap Dichchi``--- I CURESE YOU. (For non-Bengali readers, let me add a few more lines. The literal meanig of the word ``Abhishap`` is CURSE and ``Dichchi`` connotes Giving or Offering. In this sense, it could be literally translated into ``I am Giving or Offering you Curse.`` The poet is symbolically cursing the perpetrators of henious crimes against Bangalees during 1971 genocide. There is no doubt in poet`s mind that the two-legged perpetrators of the genocide came from Pakistan):

I CURSE YOU

Poet Shamsur Rahman

``As I stand today in this blood-bathed dusk

I curse you,

You who have filled our breasts with the sad terrors of night,

You who have filled our brains with the dark despairs of death,

With the corpses of our loved ones, bloodied and burning.

I curse you,

You who have committed genocide

In our villages, on our hills, in our streams, in our fields, in our granges.

I curse you,

You who are animals more vicious than bloodthirsty wolf,

No, I do not believe that

Justice will be served

By lining you up against a wall

Before a firing squad and letting loose a hail of bullets;

No, for you who made murder a festive occasion,

You who spread death like some deadly gas

In our fields and markets, in our parks, and campuses,

For you that death is too quick, too easy

I curse you,

You who have compelled me to wade through the blood

Of my parents, to walk over their dead bodies;

You who have covered the earth

And waters of my land with the bodies of my people

And made of my land their graves,

I curse you.``

[English version of this poem is taken from the back cover of a book titled GENOCIDE 1971: An Account of the Killers and Collaborators, --Translator Niaz Zaman. This translation of ``ABHISHAP DICHCHI`` was done by Professor Niaz Zaman of Dhaka University].

I thank very for reading this war poem.

Respectfully submitted,

M. Waheeduzzaman

THE ACCUSED WAR CRIMINALS ARE SYMBOLS AND PILLARS OF DISGRACE TO THEIR NNATION: MY COMMENTAR #3

By M. Waheeduzzaman

Although there may be a dwarfed or timid segment of decent, conscientious and peace loving people still living in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the relentless efforts of the Pakistani war criminals and their imbecile defenders have thus far made it abundantly clear that the mainstream Pakistanis are continuing to take pride in their national heritage of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

With some rare exceptions, there is hardly any genuine expression of repentance or remorse among most Pakistanis for the ghastly crimes which Pakistan’s brute military forces had committed twenty eight years ago in Bangladesh. Even the certified Pakistani War Criminals who could avert trials for their war crimes only due to overwhelming pressure on Bangladesh from outside, at the behest of Middle Eastern Muslim nations and the United States of America, have started bragging about their “heroic” performance in a genocide and ethnic cleansing against Bangalees in 1971.

These despicable characters and their cohorts have conveniently deleted from their selective memory lanes that approximately ninety thousand Pakistani prisoners of war (POWs) were at the custody and mercy of Indian Government after their ignominious surrender to the joint command of Bangladesh’s Freedom Fighters and Indian Army on December 16, 1971. There were reports that while in Indian captivity many of those Pakistani tormentors of Bangalees used to weep like widows and cry like children for avoiding possible trials through war crime tribunals.

The Government of Pakistan under the flamboyant leadership of Z.A. Bhutto had secured the release Pakistani POWS from Indian custody by holding thousands of stranded expatriate Bangladeshis as hostages in Pakistan in spite of the fact that they were far away from the killing fields of Bangladesh. What was then the crimes of those stranded Bangalees? Their only crime was that they were Bangalees stranded in Pakistan. Given the fact that Z.A. Bhutto lacked any rudiment of conscience, he did not hesitate to use those defenseless stranded Bangladeshis as hostages for the purpose of obtaining the release of all Pakistani POWs from India.



It is unfortunate that even the hard core Pakistani War Criminals (approximately 195) could not be tried in the courts of law by Bangladesh for their war crimes in 1971 due to the so-called Simla Agreement, a treaty of convenience between India and Pakistan, and other insurmountable vicissitudes of international politics.

The defenders of the accused war criminals should deal with the actual fact: War Crime Trials could NOT take place for the purpose of prosecuting the perpetrators of genocide in Bangladesh. Yes, those WAR CRIMINALS have not been found GUILTY by or in a cour of law. Yes, it is true. So what? Those war criminals have not been found INNOCENT either by or in a cour of law. Therefore, Scarlett Letters for the accused Pakistani War Criminals will symbolize as pillars of SHAME and DISGRACE for today`s Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

The most important fact is that those accued War Criminals of Pakistan have not yet been exonerated by the survivors of 1971 genocide. Justice was denied then to the helpless victims and survivors of Pakistan’s genocide and ethnic cleansing in Bangladesh. And justice is once again delayed now.



Notwithstanding the relentless vilification of the Bangalee victims of 1971 genocide, those who were responsible for masterminding and committing the ghastly war crimes in Bangladesh will always continue to remain War Criminals in the eyes of all patriotic Bangladeshis.

The latest vilification the Bangladeshi victims and survivors of 1971 Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing by the arrogant and shameless defenders of Pakistani War Criminals can hardly change their heritage of genocide. Neither threats of law suit nor tons of arrogance can blot the tradition of genocide and ethnic cleansing from Pakistan’s tarnished history.

No amount of fraudulent claims or selective memories of “valor” and “heroism” in a genocide will delete the depraved character of Pakistani war criminals. No amount of name-calling and rumbling on the Internet can change or remove those scarlett letters from the chests of the accused Pakistani War Criminals. No amount of tinkering of facts here and there or demonstration of sky high arrogance or false pride can change the basic fact that the despicable names of those nefarious accused or alleged Pakistani War Criminals will live on in infamy through the ages. Why?

Thank you very much.

Respectfully submitted to the readers:

Sincerely,

M.Waheeduzzaman (Manik)

One wouldn`t find me agreeing with Mr Omar Mirza too often, but he is right on target on Mujibur Rehman. Sheikh Mujibur Rehman, inspite of what his worshippers call him, is no ``Bangabandhu``. He was a bloodthristy tyrant who exploited the deep felt yearning for freedom in Bengal and went on to create a one-party totalitarian regime patrolled by a Gestapo-type ``Rakhibahini``. Everytime others call him ``bangabandhu``(friend of Bengal) I cannot, as a Bengali, but hang my head in shame. Bengal has a lot of genuine heores, including H.S. Suhrawardy, AK Fazlul Haq, and Gen. Zia-ur-Rehman. Mujib is not one of them. Thank God for the patriotic Bangladesh Army, he would have sold the country to India in a heartbeat. He and his kind just didn`t understand that we had not kicked the finest army of the world out just to welcome the nastiest in.

URGENT



A REQUEST TO CHOWK STAFF



It has been obseved that Mr. Omar Mirza`s postings are repeated lately. The posting numbers [265,262,260] and [264,261,259] can be verified. The numbers in the brackets are identical.

For the sake of fairness and decency I request the Chowk Staff to kindly withdraw the additional four postings from the ever busy poster. Let us have a fair game.

Mohamamd Nawaz Khan

Re: Ferozk #266

You seemed to be very intelligent person. You already analyzed Khokan`s reasonings in regard to non-trial of 195 war prisoners.

I am going back again. Primarily Bhutto had the trump card - the stranded Bengalis in Pakistan. When Mujib came from London he clearly told the newsmen (depicted in a documentary called ``Mukteerr Gan`` available at Muktodhara, N.Y)

that he would try the war criminals. Mujib unfortunately had to give in to the blackmail of Bhutto. After 1975 basically a series of pro-Yahya

(or pro Punjabi coterie) was in power. Ziaur Rahman being a freedom fighter showed the worst type of Ghaddari to the nation.

You, probably talked a dozen times about Shoa. The Jewish people live in your described ``Past`` so that NEVER AGAIN such holocaust occurs. In Bangladesh since 1975 there was an orchestrated policy by a few successive government to forget the PAST. But the realtives of millions of martyrs and rape victims can hardly forget the past tragedy. I want to remind Ferozk that many Bengalis in general did not live in the

past which they ought to do. Also, an important aspect like war crime trial can not be ahnded on a silver platter.

Now regarding ``Grass root movement``. During Khaleda Zia`s (another treacherous lady)

time, Shaheed Janani Jahanara Imam launched a grass root movement. That was called Committee for annihilation of killers and collaborators of 1971. They staged a people`s tribunal, in a symbolic way to try Golam Azam, a notorious war criminal. That movement is still very much existent. The so-called pro-1971 governement of Sheikh Hasina once gave blessing to the movement. She was an opposition leader then. Now she is more successful in trying her father`s killers. Ultimately we come back to square one - that is only people`s movement would be the final arena where the war criminals may have to face the reality. The recent Pinochet affair boosted up morale of many. Pinochet was alleged to be involved in killing a few thousand Chileans not yesterday, almost two decades ago.

mnk

To FerozK (Reply to post # 266):

I thank FerozK for understanding why war crime trials had not taken place in spite of the fact that the 195 of the criminals were held as POWs. And, yes, Bangladesh governement can depend only on itself for the initiatives to bring the criminals to justice.

However, war crime trials aren`t the only unfinished busines from 1971.

We would have liked Pakistan to take steps like:

(1) Arrange for the speedy repatriation of the stranded Pakistanis aka ``Biharis.``

(2) Make public the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report.

(3) Take steps against those that were found responsible for the 1971 tragedy.

(4) Agree to an equitable division of the assets between Pakistan and Bangladesh.

(5) Compensate for the exploitation between 1947-1971.

(6) Offer reparations for the crimes of 1971.

(7) Try the criminals like Tikka Khan, Rao Farman Ali, Gul Hasan Khan etc.in a court of law for their crimes against humanity.

Let me assure FerozK that the lack of results have not been for lack of trying. Both Pakistanis and Bengalis, for example, have been asking for the repatriation of the quarter million ``Biharis`` for quarter of a century. But Pakistan`s ruling elite has remained unmoved and no one has yet been able to force the issue.

The same is true for war crime trials. As recently as late 1998, Nawaz Sharif had publicly promised in Dhaka that he`ll see to it that the criminals are finally brought to justice. But the promise was forgotten the moment Nawaz Sharif was back in Islamabad.

The recent plight of General Pinochet is at once an indicator of the difficulty as well as of the possibility of prosecuting the criminals.

However, FerozK`s observation is well taken. Many of those war criminals are old enough like General Pinochet to need medical attention abroad and all of them are wealthy enough to afford it. If Bangladeshi groups are vigilant enough, they will indeed be able to do a General Pinochet on them.

While Bangladeshis would indeed have to take the initiative, I do hope that fair minded Pakistanis like FerozK would be decent enough to offer them help as and when needed. After all, it is to the interest of the common man in Pakistan to see that the war crimianls do not escape justice. The Bengalis are no longer in Pakistan to be kicked around. So, next time, it will be the turn of the Sindhis and Balochs, the Shias and the Christians, the Ahmadiyyas and the Zikris to be victimized. Pakistan needs to set up a precedent that will discourage the ruling elite from doing a 1971 on the ordinary citizens of Pakistan.

As for Mr. Omar Mirza, I do hope that he is foolish enough to drag Mr. Jamal Hasan/Chowk to court. It will provide the perfect public forum to revisit the heinous crimes of 1971.

Finally, I would like to point out that there can be no statute of limitation on crimes against humanity. The criminals of 1971 might indeed be old men by now, but they still risk the fate of General Pinochet if they are rash enough or imprudent enough to leave the safety of Pakistan. I doubt very much that Brigadier Z.A.Khan will ever dare to take Jamal Hasan/ Chowk to court in USA in spite of the quarter million dollars that his nephew, O Mirza, is waiving in front of his eyes.

I am not sure why my posts are getting truncated. I`ll try one more time:

Reply to OMAR1974`s Reply # 256:

Mr. Omar Mirza has conjured up the image of a certain Mr. M.N.Khan. Since O Mirza is a self-proclaimed history buff, he ought to have recognized that he might as well look for such a figure during the 2nd world war among the resistance fighters in France or Holland or among the Jews that fought in the the anti-Nazi uprising in the Warsaw ghettos. Whether Mr. O Mirza likes it or not, resistance fighters or the heroic Jews of Warsaw have never been thought of as war criminals by the world at large. And for good reasons.

The war criminals of the Nazi era were more like Lt. Colonel Z.A.Khan who openly expressed racial contempt for the population they were trying to suppress and who taught their daughters and nephews that ``French are descendants of Mir Jafar,`` ``No Russian is to be trusted,`` and ``Jews are ghaddars.`` It is this racist mindset that was responsible for the holocaust in Europe as well as the holocaust in Bangladesh.

Yes, enough has been said on Chowk to show that Mr. Jamal Hasan had enough cause to allege that Lt. Colonel Z.A.Khan fits the profile of a war criminal. But like any other accused, Z.A.Khan should be allowed his day in court. And he deserves to be acquitted in a criminal case if the case against him cannot be proven beyond reasonable doubt (ala OJ Simpson). However, in a civil case, preponderance of evidence would be sufficient to convict Z.A.Khan.

The question is, ``Will the Lt. Colonel have the courage to face his accusers in a Court of Law?`` I doubt it. The Pakistani army officers in East Pakistan proved themselves brave only as long as they were fighting (an euphemism for slaughtering) unarmed civilians. Once they encountered regular troops, it didn`t take them long to waive the white flag. Lt. Colonel Z.A.Khan is unlikely to be any braver than his comrades-in-crime. He will be brave only from behind the skirts of his daughter/nephew. It is most unlikely that he has the stomach to confront his accusers in a court of law.

If Mr. O Mirza wants to know the truth, he should cross examine his uncle. Find out if he confesses to the murder of any project engineer of WAPDA. Mr. O Mirza should try to find out what the infamous Brigadier remembers about Mr. Samsuddin and Mr. Saleh. O Mirza should ask his uncle why the soldiers under him thought it fit to turn in the loot (tons of milk packets among other things) to their commanding officer. Doesn`t it suggest that the soldiers had embarked on a crime spree on the orders, or at least the tacit approval, of their commanding officer?

And if Mr. O Mirza truly feels that Mr. Jamal Hasan has no cause to accuse Lt. Colonel of fitting the profile of a war criminal, then he can always do what he had threatened to do - drag Jamal Hasan and Chowk to a court of law with a quarter million dollar law suit, especially since neither Jamal Hasan nor Chowk has bothered to retract the accusation and issue an apology. Mr. Jamal Hasan and Chowk has thrown down the gauntlet. The ball is now in Brigadier Z.A.Khan`s court. Let`s see if the Brigadier bothers to return it either by himself or through his proxies like Mr. O Mirza and Ms Muneezae Alam Khan.

The unsung heroes of 1971: The humane Pathan and Baloch soldiers

Dr. Saleh Tanveer`s narration gave an interesting account. It was about the rescuing of a Bengali civilian from the Pak army firing squad by a Pathan jawan.

We know of too many such accounts. Unfortunately those accounts do not give the names and ranks of the rescuing soldiers and officers. Why only Pathans and Balochs were sympathetic to Bengalis? I do not have the answer. But I think we should acknowledge the tremendous courage and heroism of the unsung heroes who somehow were put on the wrong side of the fence.

Also, I wonder if some of those humane Baloch and Pathan soldiers/officers were with the Serb army today, quite a few Kosovar lives would have been spared. What do you think?

Mohammad Nawaz Khan

This debate has been an emotional roller coaster ride for me personally, for those who have added their personal knowledge in an effort to correct my views of history, your efforts have not gone either unheeded or wasted. At heart I’m not such an ideologue. I have managed to capture an understanding of an emotional historical drama through which I never lived. Some of your pertinent questions will indeed be posed to

‘the brigadier,’ in person when I see him. I really honestly can say with a clear conscience on my part that I don’t think he is guilty of killing anyone or ordering anyone killed who was entirely innocent, and without innocent blood on his hands. I shall not be replying to any more posts on Chowk ever again. I will certainly do you the courtesy of reading your replies. I think I have given everyone here quite a bit to think about. I regret any particular insult from me during the course of this to any party. Sometimes I suppose I felt it necessary to jerk them through cyberspace into getting what I was trying to convey across. The language became somewhat brutal. I have tried to represent a variety of views and have come to conclusions different from some of my preconceptions about all this.

Omar Mirza

While I think I have said all there is to be said, I will leave a final rebuttal for (ATTENTION) JAMAL HASAN by addressing quotes from his article. And for anyone else who still cares to propagate one sided views in the foolish hope that anyone of us will be left with either eyes or teeth. P.S: FerozK, you`re the one who is so against ‘comparing genocides’ or setting thresholds for them, now is the time to open your mouth and repeat those views.

Allow me to observe first that he, Jamal, has trivialized the brutal incidents of violence and killings against both non-Bengali property and people which occurred not only in a systematic manner in the period March 1-26, but also continued through much of April and later on as well in fact they increased in tempo and intensity to a fever pitch of blood-sucking Bengali genocidal mania. I can post a detailed chronological list if you like.

Jamal says:

The Pakistani army systematically and ruthlessly eliminated Bengalis from ``Bihari`` majority enclaves like the one in Syedpur.

Response: You wanna know why, you one sided ass? Because Bengalis were the ones doing all the killings just a few days prior to that. If I had been there I would have insisted on no less. Who needs genocidal neighbors, you twisted man?

Jamal says:

Such state sponsored ethnic cleansing in East Pakistan was immoral in 1971. And it is just as immoral in Bosnia-Herzegovina today.

Response: Accepted in full. But lets not forget the Awami League was practically running a state out of Mujib’s house by early March. So Bengalis are equally vulnerable to prosecution on this count. I can prove this. It is also equally immoral to have killed Non-Bengalis prior to March 25th 1971, as it was to kill them after March 25th, 1971.

Jamal says:

There can be no crime worse than a deliberate attempt at ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the established government.

Response: Frankly, while I agree with you in principle, in fact I can do 2 things;

1) Demonstrate that the Awami League controlled East Pakistani mob violence from early March 1971 from Mujib’s house, which functioned as a de facto (in fact the real center of civil power) government headquarters of the self declared Bengali parallel government.

2) I have News for you, in the end, when you lose your loved ones, it doesn’t matter whether it was to a bloodthirsty mob or soldiers in Uniform. It comes down to the same thing. Your losses are not so ‘special’ Jamal.

Jamal says:

Perpetrators of such a heinous crime must be brought to justice at all costs.

Response: Absolutely Jamal, I’m with you all the way. And if that happens, I have stated exactly the level of reciprocity I shall expect in all fairness too, in my previous post. You cannot deny me my justice and have yours! That would not be just at all!

Jamal now quotes Robin Cook:

In a careful and sweeping warning to the Yugoslav commanders, British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook declared recently: ``Anyone who carried out atrocities against the civilian population, anyone who gives orders for them to carry it out, or is complicity in those orders being given, and anyone who fails to prevent such orders or to prevent those orders being carried out - anyone in those categories is liable to face indictment before the international war crimes tribunal``.

Then, Jamal proceeds to list ‘War Criminals’

Active members of the Pakistani military junta of 1971 like General A.M. Yahya Khan (posthumously), General Abdul Hamid Khan, Lt. General Gul Hassan Khan, Lt. General Tikka Khan, Lt. General A.O. Mitha, Lt. General A.A.K. Niazi, Major General Rao Farman Ali Khan, Major General Khadim Hussain Raja and Brigadier Z.A. Khan fit the profiles of war criminals. They should be brought to trial. We will not be forgiven by future generations if we fail to have them tried for their heinous crimes.

Response: Quite frankly Jamal, I have a list too, that perfectly fits Robin Cook’s criterion to a T. Bengali Political leaders who incited mob violence and genocidal killing, Active members of the Mukti Bahini, East Pakistan Rifles, and Bengali-Pakistan Army personnel, to say nothing of those who merely constituted ‘faceless Bengali mobs,’ whom I want dragged from the serenity of their old age and self delusions of `freedom fighting` in the last good old days of that legal, internationally recognized entity, known as United Pakistan, your illusions as to ‘Occupied Bangla Desh’ to the contrary notwithstanding. (I truly wonder what The Hague Tribunal would make of their `freedom fighting` days, especially since these very people constituted the government of Bangladesh). Mujib Ur Rehman (posthumously), Major Zia Ur Rehman, Khalid Musharraf and a very large number of others including persons still alive and living in the safety and comfort of Bangladesh today. They should be brought to trial. We will not forgiven by future generations if we fail to have them tried for their heinous crimes.

Now I tell you if any Bengali cares to state that these people do not ‘fit the profiles of war criminals,’ let him sue me as well. I can prove it in a court of law anywhere in the world if you like, on the bare facts I have put forth in my combined posts. Open invitation to all. To apply the rationale of a number of Bengalis logic to Z.A Khan, I too have clearly demonstrable prima facie proof of their guilt. The proof is in the pudding gentlemen. Those who live in glass houses Jamal like yourself and your countrymen, should be VERY CAREFUL not to throw stones.

OMAR MIRZA

(Ignore the 2 previous posted versions of this definitive rebuttal)

It has been to my privilige gentleman, those of you who have followed my posts throughout this debate. I am personaly both gratified and honored, no matter whether we differ in our views.