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

I agree with your analysis Rishi; the cause should be considered. I also think that you`re a lot closer to what I was trying to say about Shoah and yes, our Bangladeshi friends do not seem to grasp that distinction between the Shaoh and the events of 1971, but my point was what is there to be gained by comparing different examples of genocide? Why can not we just let the infamy of one genocide stand on its own? Does comparing it to another makes it any worse?

Re: Khokan #203

Sir, you seem to be twisting my words! I never denied the existence of Shoah nor minimized its severity. I think that Rishi understood quite clearly what I meant and he said it better than I could. What I was attempting to suggest was that the acts of the Pakistani Army, against the people of Bangladesh, were awful in themselves and they do not need to be vaildated by being compared to another genocide.

For what ever reasons which only you can understand best, you seem to be suggesting that I am fudging history by denying the crimes of Hilter and Yahya Khan. I have done neither. To deny Shoah is to live in a fool`s paradise and as far as the Bangladeshi crimes are concerned, I have, on the record in this forum, stated that I would like to see the truth emerge and that Pakistani actions, in 1971, were wrong and that we Pakistanis owe the people of Bangladesh an explanation and an apology for our actions. That in itself should imply, to you, that I realize that injustice was done in 1971 and amends should be made to ask forgiveness from the victims. As a Pakistani I am not particularly proud of what happened and even though I was just a child, I still bear guilt associated with those dark days.

To be perfectly honest with you, sir, your comments dismayed me greatly. Yes, my standards of defining a genocidal crime is perhaps more stringent and requires a higher burden of evidence. In the posts so far, there has been enough evidence presented to allege war crimes were indeed committed. I am not denying that crimes were committed as you seem to suggest and i fail you just where or how you could transmutate my post to suggest that inference.

As I have said on many occassions in these InterActs, this is a highly emotional topic and it needs to be discussed with a level headed maturity. You are more than welcome to vilfy my character if that pleases you, but the question still remains; how does that help your cause? Personal vilification will not help you or your cause and it will only engender bitterness and hostility for you personally. Please bear in mind that on this issue I am on your side of the fence! Furthermore, because I am on your side does not suggest that I have given up my rights to question and have an independent opinion, from yours, on this topic. As a personal habit, I do not and I have never followed the party line unquestioningly.

I have no personal animinity towards you and either do I condsider your post # 203 to be truly indicative of you. That post was more an emotional knee jerk reaction and than an intellectual argument to my post. My last and final comment to you, sir, would that there are many Pakistanis who support you and it would do your cause and you ill good to vilfy their characters and twist their words, because though they agree you with, they do not see eye to eye with you on all aspects of this issue. Personally I have no grievence against you and I would suggest, most humbly and respectfully, not emotionalize this issue and demonize those who seem to agree with you, but not a 100 percent of the time and not on all aspects of this issue. It is unbecoming you as a decent human being and it is unbecoming the cause which you care about.

To FerozK (post #228):

To FerozK (post #228):

reply to post #218 by OMAR1974:

OMAR1974 wrote: ``You people want to fulfill some notion of justice? I’ll give you an idea of what justice is. Justice is the discretion of the powerful and the mighty. Nothing more. Take my word for it. What kind of justice do you think you’ll get? Putting old men on trial for what? As for name calling, ‘war criminal’ is name calling too.``

RESPONSE: Nazis continue to be put on trial even 44 years after the end of WWII. The current crop of defendants are all ``old men.`` Nevertheless, they are being dragged to court. Why should it be any different for an old war criminal in Pakistan?

Mr. O.Mirza claims to have had some legal training. To be fair, he has admitted that he still hasn`t cleared the Bar Exam. And understandably so. Anyone who claims, ``Justice is the discretion of the powerful and the mighty. Nothing more. Take my word for it.`` is singularly lacking in probity and in the legal training that is necessary to function as a lawyer in a democracy like America.

To FerozK (post 228):

I am not sure why my post got truncated.

It has happened to me before. Here I try again:

I apologize if I have indeed misunderstood FerozK`s post. I have no problem with it as long as he acknowledges the enormity of the crimes of Hitler and Yahya Khan. I don`t think these were merely two more human tragedies in a series of human tragedies. Pointing that out in no way diminishes any other tragedy. Any such claim is specious, at best.

It had seemed to me that FerozK was indirectly questioning the comparison of the Kosovo tragedy with the Bangladesh tragedy by author Jamal Hasan. I didn`t think that was fair. Mr. Jamal Hasan very clearly laid out the criterion for his
comparison. Mr. Hasan had merely pointed out that the scale of killing was different. No where did Mr. Jamal Hasan ``diminish`` the sufferings of Kosovars. I strongly felt that FerozK`s comment was unwarranted. Mr. Jamal Hasan wrote nothin to
deserve it.

Reply to Rishi (post 226)

Rishi`s example of Muslim mobs in Lahore is not quite an example of the type of mass murder and rapes that was carried out by the soldiers of the Pakistan army in the full knowledge of its Generals, Brigadiers, Colonels and Lt. Colonels. The genocide in Bangladesh, like the one in Hitler`s Germany, was an institutionalized crime carried out under the orders of the senior-most officials of the state against innocent men, women and children.

Veteran journalist, Z.A.Suleri, was reminded of the ``banality of crimes`` in mid-June of 1971 when he was shocked to hear Pak Army Officers nonchalantly joking of the rapes in East Pakistan as a service to the nation to improve the genes of Bengalis!

The systematic atrocities in Bangladesh and Nazi Germany are often a class apart from the ones committed by a faceless lynch mob. The latter happens not necessarily because of the people in
power or the laws of the land but in spite of them.

Rishi also stated, ``Again, at the risk of repeating myself, the burden of proof has to be
provided by the Bangladeshis. So if they accuse the colonel of war crimes they need to provide concrete evidence . And till now, this has not come out. So atleast in my view, there seems no evidence of war crimes on the colonel`s part based on these discussions.``

I am not sure what Rishi is trying to say.Whether the Lt. Colonel is actually a war criminal or not can only be decided in a court of law. But very specific allegations have been made against the Lt. Colonel (murder of Mr. Samsuddin, the project engineer of Wapda, and the loot and destruction of a shop owned by a Bengali in the cantonment area by soldiers under his command.) Furthermore, posts have reported the atrocities by soldiers in areas under his command in places like Comilla and Chittagong. I think enough has been said to convince readers that author Jamal Hasan had cause to allege that the Lt. Colonel fits the profile of a war criminal.

Dr. Tanveer Saleh has posted information that points to the murderer of Mr. Samsuddin. But the Lt. Colonel need not personally pull the trigger to be culpable for the crimes. General Pinochet is not in trouble because he personally killed anyone.

The systematic rape and murder of Bengalis has been well documented. These were committed under the illegal orders of the hiighest ranking military officers of the land. Lt. Colonel would be culpable if he failed to resist the illegal orders from above or turned a blind eye to the crimes being committed by the soldiers under his command.

For example, it would be quite relevant to find out if the Lt. Colonel ever took action against any of the soldiers who had looted and destroyed the shop owned by a retired Bengali subedar in the cantonment area. The Lt. Colonel has clearly admitted in his book that he was aware of the crime at the time it happened or soon after. But there is nothing in the book to suggest that he took any action against any of the soldiers for the crime.

Attention Mr. KoKhan

I think that you should have read my remarks in CONTEXT, when i say you people should, `forget about it`, i meant only that the emotional drama and outpourings of this dispute will solve nothing for you, nor will the conviction of anyone

even if it were to happen say for example to Niazi or Tikka Khan. You will not get anything out of it. I did not mean to imply that we will forget Jamal Hasan and Chowk!

During the course of this debate i have felt the pain and suffering, and personal anguish of Bengalis come out. I do not wish to belittle the tragedy of 1971 but i still don`t think that Brig. Z.A Khan is a person who fits the profile of a war criminal, that is to say, a Pakistani version of Arkan.

You may want your pound of flesh, but you`re not going to get if from Z.A Khan in a war crimes

trial. The others, against whom prima facie evidence may, only may, indeed exist, that is an open question. But i think you are mistaken about the question of how the people of Pakistan view their army as a whole today. Yes, one version which you presented certainly (and I agree with you here if we look only superficially at the conflict) finds the generals at fault for non-restoration of democracy. But to say that as a whole they were only interested in power and pelf is a simplistic rendition of history best left for you to incorporate into the Metric Exams of Bengali students. Why then did the army, Yahya Khan, allow free elections in 1970? I think these simple characters painted of good and evil men need to be set aside, as I had stated earlier, if we are ever to really gain a true and complete understanding of what happened and the reasons for it. I recognize it may be well nigh impossible

given the emotions attached to interpreting this particular piece of history, which Bengalis view as one of oppression from 1947 on, conveniently forgetting that 2 Pakistani Prime Ministers were Bengalis among other things. My point, and i`ve stated this clearly enough, is that the straight historical linear progression of events leading to `liberation` is really just too neat and simplistic. East Pakistan was not ruled by force from 1947-71, anymore than West pakistan was. And when the army ruled, there was no widespread resistence. Don`t try to make this out solely as an issue of `the people` Vs. `the army,` there would have been no grounds for secession if it were that simple. Bengali officers were moving up in the ranks of the Pakistan army, given time they would have ruled ALL Pakistan if Martial law was imposed if its the Bengali share of the national pie that concerns you. Frankly, considering Bangladesh`s dictatorial history AFTER 1971, and `Mukti rule`, you don`t really have a SEPERATE cause for complaint from W.Pakis. Things continued in Bangladesh as they had been when it was known as East Pakistan. Nothing much changed politically, the masses continued to be oppressed, but were now fed the self serving fodder of Bengali nationalism (by Bengali army officers who didn`t want to wait for promotions to get to the top of the Pak Army hierarchy, so they decided they needed their own hierarchy and thus began the struggle for power which led to the dismemberment of Pakistan, the old saying `a house divided against itself cannot stand` applies, Bengali offiers were simply greedy for power and pelf that they saw W.Pakistani officers enjoying by virtue of seniority- this is based on your interpretation of the motives of the Pakistan army) the class struggle for the masses continued, but they were temporaily waylaid by cheap nationalist slogans after `liberation` was proclaimed. This does not provide adequate grounds for the breakup of the state which you view as `inevitable` as does Jama Hasan. History is never that clear cut. Details that don`t support a particular intended point of view/conclusion, that confuse, or that cannot be explained clearly in the context of the particular fairly tale`s construction (national myth making) which are being built up in the thesis become more difficult to explain and are hence ignored. National myth making incorporates these simplified historical versions of `truth` and is used to create a unity via a common identity for the nation. Every nation in the world does it, just like the Serbs claim they were universally oppressed by the Turks for 500 years, the Bengalis now find it convenient to claim they were oppressed universally since 1947!

Not entirely true whatsoever. In the case of the Turks, there was a general tolerance of the Christian people, which will never find its way into Serbian national myth making, why? Because its inconvenient to do anything but DEMONIZE the enemy. Pakistan and India have done the same thing with Kashmir. Bangladesh has done the same thing with Mujib, and the events leading upto and including 1971. Everything is black and white. Simple to understand for the masses. That is the core of nationalism. Being an ardent student of both history and political sciene i understand this very clearly.

Therefore I say Bangladeshis were not victims, but PARTISANS in a conflict. PARTISANS who wish to impose a Victor`s peace want history to record their judgement against a defeated foe. The Nuremberg trials are a classic example. I think its safe to say that THE GERMAN PEOPLE SUPPORTED THE WAR. And, it is equally safe to say that THE PAKISTANI PEOPLE SUPPORTED ALL ACTIONS TAKEN TO SUPPRESS THE INSURRECTION in EAST PAKISTAN IN 1971 by their valient army against who intended to divvy the nation, place themselves atop the new hierarchy of power and enjoy the spoils. The Pak army represented THE WILL OF THE NATION. Pakistanis and Germans viewpoints today

are less relevant than they were at the time the events occured. Therefore these `Show trials` you propose are meaningless. True, you may feel some moral triumph. I cannot deny that, but essentially

the army represented the will of the people, there is no other explanation why after 28 years Mujib is still reviled as a `ghaddar` in Pakistan

today by the people at large. But, again, Pakistan is also just as guilty of national myth making, and painting things in black and white. As an objective historian i see it clearly enough. I also know it starts at an early school going age.

This is my objective view of the situation. I need also remind you again, that NO ONE IN THE PAKISTAN ARMY HAS EVER BEEN CHARGED WITH COMMITTING A `WAR CRIME` IN 1971. Now, its possible that IF that were to happen, history would be reevaluated by certain segments of society in Pakistan, who may well be unaware, but frankly, after examing the numbers of casualties claimed by Bengalis, i think Indian and Bengali propaganda has prevailed.

3 million dead, 10 million refugess

-I addressed this earlier, no one managed to explain how each (on average) of the 90,000 Pakistani troops managed to kill 33 Bengalis each, or displace 99. I find the figures are highly suspect. The real numbers were buried under an emotional wave of Bengali sentiments, and calculated Indian deceit, fed to visting dignitaries and foreign journalists in an uneending stream, leading to the creation of the national myth which you now so ardently believe in. And most Pakistanis when confronted by a detailed analysis of media behavior during the crisis and other accounts that exist would find that is in fact the `version` of the truth they find most plausible. But don`t worry, this discussion has not been entirely futile, it will be debated further in various drawing rooms in Pakistan and 1971 will be rehashed. No one is really happy about how things turned out. Doesn`t however translate into a willingness to hang everyone involved, or turn them over for so called `war crimes`(trials), over a dead issue. Nor does any particular Pakistani government on the horizon wish to offend the army, or reexamine what is for most people in Pakistan, like yourself in Bangladesh in terms of historical interpretation; a settled question. There are few in Pakistan who would support your cause openly without finding themselves taking an unexpected swim in the Arabian sea, with bricks tied to their feet if it ever came to that, which it won`t.:) That at least is my suspicion and personal opinion.

Begging to differ with the luminous lights of Mr. FerozK, I strongly feel that mere unsubstantiated accounts and information posted anonymously on the internet does NOT constitute grounds for calling someone a `war criminal`, for if that were the standard of judical scrutiny, i could call an awful lot of people an awful lot of things without any factual basis, after doing exactly the same thing.

As for KoKhan`s comments on what i said regarding justice, my comments apply to these politically motivated accusations like, `war criminal` (not the ordinary course of justice, for let us be clear, war crimes are an extraordinary thing to be accused of, not your every day criminal stands accused of this), rooted in Bengali nationalism and shared national myth-identity creation.



Now just who is a war criminal? Frankly I think its clear to any sane human being that the conduct described below fits both the definition of simple treason and common murder.

Excerpt from ‘The Way it Was’

Amongst the cantonments of East Pakistan the largest number of East Pakistani troops were located in Chittagong. Apparently Brigadier Mazumdar as the senior Bengali officer in East Pakistan was to command the Bengali forces in East

Pakistan but when he was called away to Dacca Major Zia ur Rehman, later President of Bangladesh, assumed the command of the Bengali troops. On the night 25/26 March, he woke up his commanding officer Lieutenant Colonel Janjua, took him to the offices of 8 East Bengal in his night clothes, made him sit in the commanding officer’s chair and made the colonel’s batman shoot him dead. From this moment there was no turning back for Major Zia ur Rehman

I cannot but say with distinct amusement that NOW, after all this has gone on for so long, that Herr Diogenes has discovered TRUTH! LoL

I have been following this tangled thread with interest for the last few days, an interesting collection of contrasting views, opinions, emotions and facts.

Despite being a Pakistani I do realize that many innocent people died in 1971 in East Pakistan and, I don`t know if this helps, but I apologize for deaths caused by my country. I am not here to debate this issue.

Another major issue under discussion is that of Brig. Z.A. Khan. Here`s what strikes me as odd. The list of names mentioned in Mr. Jamal Hasans article contained 4 generals of the time and one colonel. The generals I assume get named because they were the top ranking officers involved, but the inclusion of the colonel`s (Z.A. Khan) name implies that he was in some way more responsible than the brigadiers or other colonels in East Pakistan at the time. I haven`t seen, in this discussion thread or anywhere else, any evidence of that. It seems to me that the only reason the ``infamous colonel`` is included in the list is because he was the one who arrested Mujib.

I feel that the above mentioned action alone does not make someone a war criminal and that the inclusion of his name in the list is not justified.

I wonder if I too will now be labeled a ``defender of the Brigadier``, if I am, I won`t mind.

My request to CHOWK is to keep this article alive
for a much longer period of time and to once again
bring it back upto the middle/top of the page.
And this is not because it has broken the all
time interactivity record of ``Sex Everywhere`` but
that CHOWK and Jamal Hasan have made history
here by awakening a dark chapter of our past.
After 28 years, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are
actually talking about this man made disaster.
It is painful and embarrassing at times but
we have to do this.
No malice is intended towards any party or people.
Some Pakistanis still happen to love Bangladesh and its people and would like to make amends for
the past. And some Bangladeshis would like old wounds to heal and deserve an explanation.

Ras

Ras commented:

CHOWK and Jamal Hasan have made history.

Response: Amused. I don`t know about that. But i will say its interesting to find so many care about the issues involved. However, aside from incorrectly including Brig. Z.A Khan`s name, there is virtually nothing in this article i, or any well read person has not read before.

As for the bihari issue, frankly considering the number of Bangladeshis that have managed to come to Pakistan over the years since 1971 (many illegally), i think if the Biharis were willing to come, there was always a way. They could have gotten themselves smuggled across the borders of India and Pakistan into Pakistan long ago like many Bengalis did. In 27 years they could even have walked across India into Pakistan. Its ridiculous for them to be sitting there. What do they think they are waiting for? for godot to come? Industrious people don`t sit around and wait for things to happen (like Pie to fall from the sky), they make them happen. Where there is a will there is a way. No excuses. The govt of Pakistan has behaved miserably towards them, but self-help and the fact some? have families in Pakistan should be enough if they wanted to leave their present squalid conditions.

Re: CONFUSION OVER THE AUTHOR OF #233

First I thought this was a reposting of a cutoff FerozK post, then I realized that someone on Chowk Staff decided to enter the debate w/o bothering to sign their name. Personally, I think this is somewhat unfair because it created some confusion for me. But life isin`t about being `fair`. I learned lo live with that long ago. So should the `adults.`

My remarks directed at Ferozk posted earlier are hence actually directed to the Chowk Staff. No reply is necessary, but I just don`t want to create further confusion.

The following is an excerpt from the book, ‘The East Pakistan Tragedy,’ by L.Rushbrook Williams

published in N.Y by Drake Publishers Inc.

The widespread and inhuman massacres of men, women and children by Awami League Militants during their brief reign of terror in March and April 1971, although factually reported by several foreign correspondents, aroused comparatively little attention in the world. Yet this was true genocide in the worst sense of the word. Some of the victims were West Pakistanis, many of whom had been settled for years; the majority were Bihari Muslims, who had come to East Pakistan at the time of partition, and had lived there for more than two decades, peaceably and trustingly. Ironically enough, some of those who were brutally murdered were Bengali by race, who had come from such places as Rangoon, Bombay and Calcutta to live in a Muslim majority land. In the eyes of their murders their offense was threefold; they did not support an independent ‘Bangla Desh’ even though many of them had voted for the maximum local autonomy for East Pakistan which was the main platform of the Awami League’s election programme; they did not speak the local patois of Bengali; above all, their industry and hard work had made them relatively prosperous --- the fact that this prosperity was shared by the locality in which they lived and that they gave employment to many was overlooked. The total butcher’s bill for these few terrible weeks will never be known; but from the mass graves which the Army found when at last it was able to fan out from its stations and restore order, the numbers murdered cannot be less than 120,000 and may be far higher, as many corpses were just thrown into the rivers and carried away. It was these mass killingss, raher than the actions of the Army, which set in motion the exodus across the Indian border, although no doubt some of the refugees, particularly the committed ‘Bangla Desh’ partisans, feared lest they might be denounced for their crimes to the authorities when order was restored. Many consciences, too, must have been uneasy about the looting,

arson, and terrorism which, even if they had taken no part in them, they had done little or nothing to stop.

There is some evidence, too, of the deliberate spread of false rumors about the fearful vengeance which the Army was about to exact when it arrived. The joint effect of all this was to set in motion a wave of mass-panic which carried millions of frightened people across the Indian border. Yet the world had been made to believe that it was the Army, not the Bengali mobs, that was guilty of genocide.

From the Inside Jacket of the book, ‘The East Pakistan Tragedy’ by L.Rushbrook Williams.

Few writers are more qualified to discuss the complex situation that ripped Pakistan apart than L.Rushbrook Williams. Professor Williams has spent most of his adult life studying and teaching Indian and Pakistan history, and has lived in these countries for long periods of time. While Professor of Modern Indian History at Allahabad University, he built up a school of Mughal studies, among young, Indian scholars. He was invited by the Indian government to help prepare Indian constitutional reforms. During his years in India, he formed close friendships with such leaders of the Indian nationalist movement as Jawaharlal Nehru, and his father Motilar, Tej Bahadur Sapru, Madan Mohan Malviyd, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and many other important figures, in Indian politica life. Subsequently he became director of the government of India Department of Public Relations.

Professor Williams has distinguished himself as a journalist as well as a historian and diplomat, and is the Asian Specialist on the editorial staff of the Times ... ; it [this book] traces President Yahya Khan’s determined efforts to hand over power to democratic institutions; the progress made, the difficulties encountered; and it describes in detail the tragic intransigence of the Awami League and the anarchy and suffering which resulted therefrom.

Excerpt from `The East Pakistan Tragedy` by L.Rushbrook Williams

On March 1, Awami League militants looted and burned many shops and houses and raided the Narayanganj Rifle club for arms. Almost all the students of Dacca University, except committed militants, had gone to their homes. Iqbal Hall and Jagannath Hall were used as centers from which armed gangs dispersed to collect arms, vehicles and money. On March 2, 2 firearms shops were looted and the arms were taken to an arsenal which was being started in Jagannath Hall. Practice firing in the University grounds was heard all day. On the previous night there had been looting and arson; encouraged by the fact

That the troops were confined to the barracks by the orders of the Governor, mobs armed with firearms, staves and iron bars raided business premises in Jinnah Avenue and Baitul Mukarram. The Shalimar Hotel and the Gulistan Cinema were set on fire .... On March 3, mob violence spread to other parts of Dacca, particularly Islampur, Patnakhali Bazar and Nawabpur. Shops, private houses belonging to non-supporters

of the Awami League and business premises were looted and set on fire. In the disturbances 5 people were killed, 62 wounded ... Violent intimidation continued against all those who were not active supporters of the Awami League; radio and T.V stations in Dacca were compelled to play the new national anthem of ‘Bangla Desh.’ More raiding of arms shops and more looting took place ... On the night of March 5-6, militant students tried to set fire to the British Council premsis, but troops arrived to drive them off.

Whenever the troops went into action, a minimum of force was used; they did not interfere with peaceful processions or political meetings, but only with mobs engaged in looting and arson.

...[Mujib] seized upon the firing of the Army on looters and rioters in Dacca to hail those who fell as martyrs; and on March 7 he announced plans for setting up a parallel government of his own… In the days that followed, the Awami League and their supporters, reinforced by lawless elements which, in Pakistan as elsewhere, are always ready to take advantage of any disturbance of the peace, ranged unchecked through the streets of Dacca, terrorising possible opponents and molesting the persons and properties of non-Bengalis ... Nor were these things confined to Dacca; in many places in East Pakistan frightful atrocities were inflicted by Awami League ruffians upon non-Bengalis and upon all who were not open supporters of Sheikh Mujib Ur Rehman. There seems to have been little trace of religious intolerance about the killings, beatings, and burnings; the criterion was political and Muslims suffered as much as Hindus. But no doubt the occasion was seized to pay off old scores and gratify private greed and enmity.

Another Exerpt from `The East Pakistan Tragedy` by Professor L.Rushbrook Williams as he shatters Bengali Mythology about the events of 1971

Jagannath Hall of Dacca University had been turned into an arsenal and strong-point, manned by members of the Student?s branch of the Awami League. When troops approached it, they were received by heavy mortar and small arms fire, which was returned, as a result of which some of the militant students and one or two members of the staff who happened to be in the building became casualties? But all the other two dozen or so Halls of Residence along with the magnificent buildings of Dacca University itself, remained completely undamaged, as my wife and I saw for ourselves when we visited the University in early July. [The City is described as being completely

normal].

Moreover, there were no signs of any recent patching or repairs ... Sheikh Mujib ur Rehman was arrested at 1:30 am, on the morning of March 26th, but a number of his lieutenants, either more wary than he, or less confident than he, fled from Dacca to those parts of East Pakistan which were under Awami League control. They set on foot the most extraordinary stories. It was said that most of Dacca had been razed to the ground; that the army had mown down peaceful citizens with tanks; that a systematic campaign had been conducted to liquidate the entire intelligentsia of Dacca-writers, artists, professors, University students-the lot. All these stories found their way to the news editors of All India Radio, and were then broadcast, not only to India, but to the world outside. Some at least of these monstrous fabrications were picked up by the BBC, and were thus given even wider currency. In some known instances, an All India Radio Bulletin, picked up by the BBC, was later given a spurious authenticity by being ascribed to the BBC itself, and was again issued to Indian listeners. Most regrettably, these false rumors were not authoritatively contradicted until a later date, by which time they had been accepted by many countries of the Western world as entirely authentic. Worse still, they were swallowed in toto by many members of the East Pakistan community in Britain? By the time that the truth about Dacca became known abroad, supporters of ?Bangla Desh? were no longer receptive to it. Even the signed statement of more than 50 professors, artists,

newspaper editors, poets, and other intellectuals, to the effect that they were quite well, thank you, and that reports of their death had been much exaggerated, (as Mark Twain once remarked in similar circumstances) fell on deaf ears. No: Dacca had been destroyed, its intellectuals massacred, the Army had slaughtered innocent civilians in thousands and no one was going to persuade them otherwise. They were

confirmed in their attitude by the stream of lying reports about the ?freedom fighters,? successes when confronted by the Pakistan army.

...more information came in about the frightful atrocities committed by the Awami League hooligans upon innocent persons? no pen could do justice to their ghastly nature as shown by photographs taken ...

...Rooms splashed high with blood and carpeted with corpses; pariah dogs and crows feeding on the dead; men, women and even small children hurriedly shoveled into mass graves; bloodstained dolls and toys pathetically testifying to the fate of their baby owners-these were some of the sights which the army met when at length they overcame the obstacles of blocked roads, blown up bridges, and water transport destroyed. Of the mutineers of the East Bengal Regiment and the East Bengal Rifles, it was said they killed most of their victims cleanly; but the bestial fury of the mobs, turning upon non-Bengalis suspected of being but luke warm supporters of the League knew no restraint.

Of these massacres certain things need to be noted. First, the beginnings of them date from early March although the full fury of those who perpetrated them was not unleashed until ?D-Day? in the early hours of March 26th. Next, the evidence for them does not rest upon official records alone. In the beginning of April, a T.V team which had come to Jessore under Awami League auspices when the town was still in Rebel hands, filmed a typical example of the cold-blooded killings of Bihars, West Pakistanis, and other non-Bengali citizens. [Foreign businessmen] ? had frightful tales to tell of the massacres of their factory hands, of the burnings of property, and of mob fury?. many of them said frankly only the arrival of troops

saved their lives.

It is this Campaign of genocide perpetrated by the Awamin League mobs, and not, as the time table of events shows, the action of the Army, which set in motion the flood of refugees seeking food, safety and shelter across the Indian border. A highly disciplined force like the Pakistan army rarely gets out of hand,

even when confronted by evidence of murder, rape, and mutilation perpetrated on innocent civilians. Such occasional acts of personal vengeance as occurred were ... dealt with the full severity of military law. Even so, the wildest stories of indiscriminate killing by the Army were carefully propagated by the supporters of ?Bangla Desh? and conveyed to the outside world by every medium of mass communication. They served to augment the fears of ordinary folk, and to swell the tide of fleeing refugees.

... the Pakistan government was reluctant to make known to the outside world the terrible story of what had happened during the Awami League?s Reign of terror ... the government was afraid that if the full story of the terror were published there might be massive reprisals against Bengali residents in the West. Strict censorship avoided this danger but it also left Pakistan vulnerable to the accusations, carefully propagated by her enemies, that the atrocities occuring in East Pakistan were the work of the Army and not the Awami League mob .... The policy of releasing information only gradually about the East Pakistan massacres achieved the desired ends; there were no reprisals against people of Bengali race living in West Pakistan. But the price paid in damage to Pakistan?s ?image? abroad was heavy.